8 ms·

I first heard of this phenomenon the other day from a coworker that lives south of Atlanta, near the major movie/tv production area. People, from what are typic

I first heard of this phenomenon the other day from a coworker that lives south of Atlanta, near the major movie/tv production area. People, from what are typically blue areas, are moving in and radically changing the political landscape according to him. He wasn’t necessarily against liberal ideas but his complaint was that they seem to vote for taxes just for the hell of it because every tax proposed is still significantly less than where they came from. Either way, interesting times.

jorblumesea 7y ago
But that's not what the data shows. People from blue states are moving to blue cities in red states. Left leaning people are moving to similarly left leaning areas. Austin, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Atlanta, when was the last time these were Republican bastions? Look at the areas experiencing huge population growth. Texas might be red but the populations centers haven't been for years.
- bronco21016 7y ago
  I think in the particular case of my co-worker the blue is spilling into the traditionally red rural areas. The population centers inevitably must expand to handle the migration.
  - megablast 7y ago
    So blue cities are expanding, as cities have always done?
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      Almost all big cities are blue. The biggest red city is Mesa Arizona.
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  This is a good point, but it would be intellectually disingenuous not to acknowledge that they've been drawn by the policy of the red states, specifically by housing policy that's made housing costs more reasonable than the blue states. Not that I'm a big fan of sprawl, but it's undeniable that blue state housing policy that strictly limits both sprawl AND density has been an utter disaster for cost of living anywhere where the economy is good.
  - RangerScience 7y ago
    The sprawl has massive hidden costs; it's a similar situation to stadiums. The city centers end up paying for it, but not reaping the benefits in tax bases / revenue. The housing costs - while they do have a lot do with policies that prevent massive new construction - also have a lot do with a lot of people moving and wanting to move to these places. So, question for you: What about the blue state policies is that results in their economies being good, so that these problems exist in the first place?
  - JamesBarney 7y ago
    It was my understanding that most restrictive housing policy is implemented at a city and not state level.
axaxs 7y ago
This is a real problem, and a real concern IMO. People move from their home cities and states to nice areas with low tax, then continue voting for the same policies and ideologies that led to their home becoming awful in the first place. I live in a rather conservative area that sees an influx of New Yorkers every single year. They all seem to complain about two things: the high taxes they left, and Republicans. I'd laugh if it weren't so mindnumbingly sad. Reminds me of the saying, something like "if it smells like sh*t everywhere you go, maybe it's time to check your own shoes."
- didibus 7y ago
  The issue is the lack of dimensionality on your axis. If the political spectrum recognized more dimensions, you would find it that high tax vs republican is only one small dimension, thus not necessarily a contradiction.
- mint2 7y ago
  You seem to have a lot of judging and questionable assumptions in your post.
  - roenxi 7y ago
    There is a very pronounced trend of people migrating away from states that are controlled by Democrats for reasons that are potentially ideologically driven policy failures. This raises a a very real and material question for the new host community - do the migrants understand why the situation became so intolerable that they felt they should move? Migrants bring new ideas so a certain amount of discomfort and change is expected. But judgements and assumptions need to be discussed to work out if there is any merit to them. There is a risk there that shouldn't be glibly ignored. So I suppose I'd call on you to flesh that out with some alternatives that fit the facts or some challenges to the assumptions rather than just calling a spade a spade. We all know it is a spade. If the spade is inappropriate suggest a better tool instead.
    - tjr225 7y ago
      Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each other than some might think. Moreover, it seems like you're attempting to paint the picture that a typically Democratic State is somehow worse off than a conservative one. I'm positive that a person born in Washington or California almost always has a better statistical and economic outcome than someone born in the Deep South, for example. So, it seems if I were correct(and I'm almost certain I am), the spade is doing something right.

jorblumesea 7y ago

But that's not what the data shows. People from blue states are moving to blue cities in red states. Left leaning people are moving to similarly left leaning areas. Austin, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Atlanta, when was the last time these were Republican bastions? Look at the areas experiencing huge population growth. Texas might be red but the populations centers haven't been for years.

bronco21016 7y ago
I think in the particular case of my co-worker the blue is spilling into the traditionally red rural areas. The population centers inevitably must expand to handle the migration.
- megablast 7y ago
  So blue cities are expanding, as cities have always done?
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    Almost all big cities are blue. The biggest red city is Mesa Arizona.
TulliusCicero 7y ago
This is a good point, but it would be intellectually disingenuous not to acknowledge that they've been drawn by the policy of the red states, specifically by housing policy that's made housing costs more reasonable than the blue states. Not that I'm a big fan of sprawl, but it's undeniable that blue state housing policy that strictly limits both sprawl AND density has been an utter disaster for cost of living anywhere where the economy is good.
- RangerScience 7y ago
  The sprawl has massive hidden costs; it's a similar situation to stadiums. The city centers end up paying for it, but not reaping the benefits in tax bases / revenue. The housing costs - while they do have a lot do with policies that prevent massive new construction - also have a lot do with a lot of people moving and wanting to move to these places. So, question for you: What about the blue state policies is that results in their economies being good, so that these problems exist in the first place?
- JamesBarney 7y ago
  It was my understanding that most restrictive housing policy is implemented at a city and not state level.

axaxs 7y ago

This is a real problem, and a real concern IMO. People move from their home cities and states to nice areas with low tax, then continue voting for the same policies and ideologies that led to their home becoming awful in the first place. I live in a rather conservative area that sees an influx of New Yorkers every single year. They all seem to complain about two things: the high taxes they left, and Republicans. I'd laugh if it weren't so mindnumbingly sad. Reminds me of the saying, something like "if it smells like sh*t everywhere you go, maybe it's time to check your own shoes."

didibus 7y ago
The issue is the lack of dimensionality on your axis. If the political spectrum recognized more dimensions, you would find it that high tax vs republican is only one small dimension, thus not necessarily a contradiction.
mint2 7y ago
You seem to have a lot of judging and questionable assumptions in your post.
- roenxi 7y ago
  There is a very pronounced trend of people migrating away from states that are controlled by Democrats for reasons that are potentially ideologically driven policy failures. This raises a a very real and material question for the new host community - do the migrants understand why the situation became so intolerable that they felt they should move? Migrants bring new ideas so a certain amount of discomfort and change is expected. But judgements and assumptions need to be discussed to work out if there is any merit to them. There is a risk there that shouldn't be glibly ignored. So I suppose I'd call on you to flesh that out with some alternatives that fit the facts or some challenges to the assumptions rather than just calling a spade a spade. We all know it is a spade. If the spade is inappropriate suggest a better tool instead.
  - tjr225 7y ago
    Statistically, people are moving from rural areas and to urban areas. Rural areas tend to be conservative and economically depressed. Urban areas tend to have high paying jobs and be liberal or progressive. Aside from a few state/city couplings(Omaha, NE comes to mind) a US "State" is a poor indicator of differentiated policy or ideology. People in Atlanta or Miami or LA or Seattle have a lot more in common with each other than some might think. Moreover, it seems like you're attempting to paint the picture that a typically Democratic State is somehow worse off than a conservative one. I'm positive that a person born in Washington or California almost always has a better statistical and economic outcome than someone born in the Deep South, for example. So, it seems if I were correct(and I'm almost certain I am), the spade is doing something right.