Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Facts are never meaningless. You aren't following the bouncing ball. California is headed downhill. Connecticut in many ways is following it downhill.
Taxes are high, people are leaving, massive obligations and an increased population of low skilled illegals.
It is estimated that there are 100,000 illegals in this State, costing taxpayers a billon dollars a year, and Democrats support that. Actually, they encourage illegals to come here with their Sanctuary polices.
" some people" are those that research and analyze statistics and trends and offer reports based on those efforts.
So if you want the demographics of CT to be comprised of more illegals, higher taxes , a rising level of poverty and a drop off in available workers due to population decline, keep heading down the road paved by Democrats .
So you go towards California as an example but exclude places like Kansas and Oklahoma on the other end of the spectrum.
I guess facts are only good if they agree with your agenda.
I didn't exclude them , as they weren't pertinent to my analogy. My analogy was that Democrats creating circumstances in California are similar to Democrats creating circumstances in CT. The demographics of CT are starting to head in the same direction as California.
If I would have used Kansas and Oklahoma in my analogy I would have used the available facts to form an opinion.
The gap has nothing to do with it. You said its the poor people in the urban cities that swing the election. How do they swing the election when they vote democratic every year? They aren't swinging back and forth based on candidates as people in upper income levels may. If what you say is true CT would have never had any Republican leadership, which just isn't true.
Do you understand how the wealthiest states would have the largest wealth gap?
The level of wealth of the upper incomes can go ad infinitum, thus the wealthiest states will continue to grow.
However, the poorest of people can only be so poor. The poorest people in one state are barely any different that the poorest people in another state. There is only so poor you can get and you can't get any lower. Our poor are not getting poorer, its our wealthy are just getting wealthier that drives the gap.
Ok, but when you fail to give a course to follow instead of following CA, me reading your post would have to think you mean to go in the opposite direction. This would lead me to think you'd prefer a situation in Kansas or Oklahoma.
The gap has nothing to do with it. You said its the poor people in the urban cities that swing the election. How do they swing the election when they vote democratic every year? They aren't swinging back and forth based on candidates as people in upper income levels may. If what you say is true CT would have never had any Republican leadership, which just isn't true.
Do you understand how the wealthiest states would have the largest wealth gap?
The level of wealth of the upper incomes can go ad infinitum, thus the wealthiest states will continue to grow.
However, the poorest of people can only be so poor. The poorest people in one state are barely any different that the poorest people in another state. There is only so poor you can get and you can't get any lower. Our poor are not getting poorer, its our wealthy are just getting wealthier that drives the gap.
The swing voters that turn this state blue are people like me (Educated, suburban and middle class). I have voted republican, but not in quite a few years. My dh did say recently he liked John Kasich. The Republican platform doesn’t include a plan to combat my top issue, which is climate change. The standard bearer openly denies it.
There are republicans who exclusively vote republican for gun rights or to prohibit abortion. It’s why states with a lot of poverty in the south overwhelmingly vote republican. Republicans have more single issue voters than democrats (taxes, guns, abortion).
Ok, but when you fail to give a course to follow instead of following CA, me reading your post would have to think you mean to go in the opposite direction. This would lead me to think you'd prefer a situation in Kansas or Oklahoma.
The course to follow is the demographics in CT starting to resemble those of California . Despite all of that, , the change in demographics here in CT will not be enough for me to consider leaving.
There are many different parts of California, and indeed, some want it to split into more than one state. There are many parts of CT. I am fortunate to live in an area of CT that in my view, has a tremendous quality of life compared to other areas of this state and the nation.
Ok, but when you fail to give a course to follow instead of following CA, me reading your post would have to think you mean to go in the opposite direction. This would lead me to think you'd prefer a situation in Kansas or Oklahoma.
Chicago and CA will always have money coming it, because of their high ranking colleges, sports teams, museums, tourists destination, Hollywood for CA and talk shows for Chicago. A lot of wealthy people in both. These places have spending issues, not income.
Connecticut with a 57 percent move out rate*, made the list of the top states people are leaving for the third consecutive year. It's the seventh year in a row that Connecticut has registered as having a "high outbound" or "medium outbound" rate. 2010 was the last year that the study found Connecticut to have a balanced inbound/outbound rate.
Every time I see the "people are leaving in droves" line I have been looking up income information for about 6 to 7 years. Well guess what. I got a surprise this year as I always think "this is the year we go down the toilet" because of everything I see on here.
As of 2017 CT is now #1 per capita income. Here are two different sources for this info.
Connecticut Residents No. 1 In Income
US: Connecticut Residents No. 1 In Income As State Lags - Hartford Courant
"Mar 22, 2018 - With an average annual per-capita income of more than $70,000, Connecticut residents boasted the highest personal income in the U.S. last year"
*Where is the info on this. Is it baby boomers retiring and moving out? People have been retiring down south for decades now and the baby boomers are probably making the move out rate high.
The course to follow is the demographics in CT starting to resemble those of California . Despite all of that, , the change in demographics here in CT will not be enough for me to consider leaving.
There are many different parts of California, and indeed, some want it to split into more than one state. There are many parts of CT. I am fortunate to live in an area of CT that in my view, has a tremendous quality of life compared to other areas of this state and the nation.
I see what your saying now. Yes demographics may be following that of CA, that (demographic) course can't necessarily be changed as easily.
What can be changed faster is the course government can take. That's what my comment was geared toward when you mentioned high taxes and pension obligations. Whereas the governance philosophies of CT and CA are more aligned as opposed to what places like Kansas and Oklahoma are currently doing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
