Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joshua Born's avatar

How much of the difference in population growth has been driven by inter-state migration and how much has been driven by different realized fertility?

You keyed on one subtext for the "blue" states' increasing preference for permissive immigration policy: countering the population stagnation. Another is that team "blue" overtly caters to the college-educated, affluent, professional-managerial class, which appears to be increasingly invested in an economy of house cleaners, food delivery people, childcare workers, et al, which in turn only works if there is cheap labor around.

Tortoise's avatar

Hmm. My head went immediately to the environmental aspects of life in Florida or Texas or California. Each state has, notably, had its recent share of 'natural disasters' -- flooding, hurricanes, wildfires and arson fires that exploded. Texas had its debacles with energy / electricity grid and massive increases to people's bills. What are the bigger impacts of the population growth in these states...? Also thinking about Census tract level growth, like in urban, sub-urban, and ex-urban areas, such as Phoenix, Tucson, the Research Triangle, Atlanta, etc.

No posts

Ready for more?