3 ms·

I don't understand the framing of the article when they say > The number of people leaving California typically tracks with the amount entering the state. But

I don't understand the framing of the article when they say > The number of people leaving California typically tracks with the amount entering the state. But the findings show that wasn’t the case in the fourth quarter of 2020, when 267,000 people left the state and only 128,000 entered. So that's 130k people leaving for one year (not a quarter like the way it's phrased, I've looked up the statistics and 130k a year makes more sense). And the negative growth of the state's population began before the pandemic. I'm failing to see how losing 0.3% of your population is not the beginning of an exodus? https://www.macrotrends.net/states/california/population https://www.macrotrends.net/states/california/population

seanmcdirmid 6y ago
> I'm failing to see how losing 0.3% of your population is not the beginning of an exodus? It could be the beginning of an exodus, but it is not strong evidence that an exodus will follow. If done for affordability reasons, it reduces demand a bit to create a new equilibrium with supply. Anyways, I’m not clear why anyone with a background in tech would be confident that a 0.3% drop was evidence that a huge drop was just right around the corner.
- TeeMassive 6y ago
  You would not be wrong if that was the first year. But it follows a multiple years long trend. The only reason the population of California kept increasing was because births were offsetting the net lost of migration until 2018.