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.
To each their own. I have been to California many times. I like to visit, but would never live there, especially in a big city. Same reason I would never live in NYC, Chicago, Atlanta or any other big city. I like fresh air and good neighbors. I like that I don't need to lock my doors at night or even when I go away for a few days.
I like to visit NYC too, but would never live there. I see all the houses with bars on their windows. To me that is a little like living in a prison.
To each their own taste.
Fresh air can be found everywhere in this country and so can good neighbors....all major cities have neighborhoods where locking ones doors isn't necessary for short periods of time. The North Side of Chicago is probably safer than where you live.
How well would a human body do with no head or heart? Non sequitur....
How well will the body do without water?
Sounds to me California was given some secret help.......most of us know the state is in trouble.
A water shortage isn't the only crisis facing the Golden State.
"California is a cautionary tale for taxpayers in the rest of the country," Stephen Frank, publisher of California Political News and Views,
"The people of California are being burdened by an unsustainable, unfunded liability – a $1 trillion dollar government pension system. At the end of the day under California law, the taxpayers will subsidize the shortfall in the budget."
"Besides this debt, California has a debt of $340 billion–and that debt stands to be increased by some of the proposals within the state’s 2016 ballot measures. California is in economic collapse: while tax revenue increases, the policies to kill off the state are in place and beginning to take effect," Frank says.
And what created the trouble?
"This problem was caused by politics and politicians," Frank argues. "It will be solved by the right kind of politicians, those that are fiscally responsible."
Why is there any surprise that the very left leaning California is prosperous?
Look at any metric that has to do with material well being, such as life expectancy, poverty rate, obesity rate or higher education rate. You will find that the states where those are the best are almost all "blue" states. You will also find that all states on the bottom with regard to those statistics are "red".
(If there is any doubt, look at Wikipedia that has lists by state).
I'm a middle to the right of the road individual. And I really don't understand why California is prospering. Especially with all the left's imposed taxes and regulations. I just don't get it. Though I must admit I have to give credit where credit is due.
Congratulations California!!!
Why is there any surprise that the very left leaning California is prosperous?
Look at any metric that has to do with material well being, such as life expectancy, poverty rate, obesity rate or higher education rate. You will find that the states where those are the best are almost all "blue" states. You will also find that all states on the bottom with regard to those statistics are "red".
(If there is any doubt, look at Wikipedia that has lists by state).
I looked at list by average income. I think these states are able to have higher income because they all have major cities (which is where most of the population is, and cities have jobs that pay better). And ALASKA was number 2 just saying...
Let's also not forget Califonia has 3 major cities, without thinking too hard isn't that more than most states have? They were blessed to have a huge agricultural business. The music/movie business is there, and that produced tons of wealth, and wealthy people. It has the 2nd largest metro area. It receives tons of tourism for its natural beauty and cities. It has a booming technology scene (San Fransisco and San Jose), that creates tons of wealth. It's also what the 2nd or 3rd largest state by land? It just seems that everything that could go right coincidentally went right for Califnia. And California is great but it isn't as great as your initial post makes it out to be. HUGELY expensive and TONS of homeless/poverty (and I have to chuckle about why your great liberal mayor and governors were unable to fix that if they are so great).
Why is there any surprise that the very left leaning California is prosperous?
Look at any metric that has to do with material well being, such as life expectancy, poverty rate, obesity rate or higher education rate. You will find that the states where those are the best are almost all "blue" states. You will also find that all states on the bottom with regard to those statistics are "red".
You don't know what you're talking about. Utah is one of the most conservative states in the country, and leads the nation in almost every metric. The Mormons are one of the most-successful groups in the United States, and they are all a bunch of preppers, and other right-wing radicals.
You are making a lot of assumptions about things you don't know anything about.
First thing, there is no such thing as a red state or a blue state. In the supposed red state of Texas, almost 44% of the people voted for Barack Obama. In Georgia it was about 47%. Arizona 45%.
Something like 96% of black people voted for Obama in 2008. And the states with the most black people, are in the south. Almost every major city in the country voted for Obama. It is the countryside which mainly votes Republican. And that applies to California, and every other supposed "blue-state". The major farming areas in California, all vote Republican. Upstate New York is Republican. Rural Minnesota is Republican.
Furthermore, you are looking at the wrong statistics.
Material well-being just means "How rich people are". A more-appropriate statistic would be "subjective well-being", or "happiness". Material well-being is not only a useless statistic, but a focus on it tends to be counterproductive.
Things like life-expectancy, poverty rate, and obesity rate, are significantly affected by things like "ethnic-composition". Basically, black people and Mexicans tend to have higher rates than white people, regardless of what state they live in. If black people were better-off in California than in Georgia, there wouldn't be any black people in Georgia.
As for education-rate, what you are really talking about is "formal-schooling" through an accredited institution.
Liberals have a tendency to focus on this number in an attempt to disparage right-wingers as ignorant, stupid, etc. But lets understand, education is not intelligence. Education is not knowledge. The vast-majority of things you know about this world, didn't come from a school. They came from your own experiences, your friends and family, or your occupation, or from reading books, articles, websites, etc.
Learn to think for yourself. Learn what actually matters. Don't parrot BS liberal talking points.
Texas is the 12th largest economy in the world (ahead of South Korea and Australia), and it only has two thirds the population of California.
So what the OP is really seeing is a whole lot of not very well off people in CA on avg. Which may make for a more volumetric economy but not a prosperous one per capita.
No matter the cost of living in Texas, North Dakota, or Tennessee you still wake up every morning in Texas, North Dakota, or Tennessee.
That's why.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going over to Malibu today. 5-mile hike in the mountains then a beach sunset.
Yes. Tennessee sucks. Best if people stayed away.
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.