The right-wing Oregon Catalyst site quotes a study by the right-wing Americans for Tax Reform organization supposedly proving – surprise, surprise! – that right-wing economic policies promote growth and prosperity.
The ATR compared states that will gain congressional seats through reapportionment as the result of the 2010 census with those that will lose seats and found that the gainers “had significantly lower taxes, less government spending, and were more likely to have ‘Right to Work’ laws in place.”
Eight states will gain congressional seats, with Texas and Florida adding two and Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington adding one each. Eleven will lose seats, including New York and Ohio (two each) and Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey and Pennsylvania (one each).
“The average top personal income tax rate among gainers is 116% lower than among losers,” ATR says. “The total state and local tax burden is nearly one-third lower, as is per capita government spending. In eight of 10 losers, workers can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment.”
As ATR (and Oregon Catalyst) see it, all this “is further proof that fiscally conservative public policy spurs economic growth, creates jobs, and attracts population growth.”
But there’s an old axiom in logic that says correlation does not equal causation. People have many different reasons besides tax rates for choosing to live in one state rather than another. Conservatives look at these numbers through their own ideological prism and see a validation of their economic dogmas; I just see a continuation of the migration away from the Frost Belt toward the Sun Belt that’s been going on for decades.
And I hope nobody at ATR or Oregon Catalyst is going to hold up Florida (11.9% unemployment) and Nevada (14.2%) as shining examples of economic success. As far as that goes, South Carolina (10.7%) and Georgia (9.9%) aren’t much better.
This article appears in Nov 25 – Dec 1, 2010.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
HBM: “I just see a continuation of the migration away from the Frost Belt toward the Sun Belt that's been going on for decades.”
So, HBM, what do all these people do once they have migrated? Does it seem reasonable that people would not be migrating unless there were jobs to migrate to?
Also let’s have a little intellectual honesty here. Your premise that the unemployment rate in these states today, at this point in time, somehow contradicts the effectiveness of years of mostly conservative fiscal policy completely misses the mark.
Check out the populaton trends in Nevada for example and you’ll see that its population gains since the last census were greatest prior to 2008. Same for Florida, look it up. And those huge pre-2008 increases are what’s driving the Congressional seat re-apportionment. Only very recent events may have moderated or reduced the in-migration to these states and those events BTW were national in scope, not a product of state fiscal policies.
You are correct that “people have many different reasons besides tax rates for choosing to live in one state rather than another.” I repeat, people migrate to where the jobs are…Duh. The driven, the ambitious, and those wishing to get ahead seem to be relocating to those states providing the best opportunites while the rest go to California to get a handout.
Those states that offer businesses the best opportunity to be successful will see increased business development, see job creation, see more population and thus see more Congressional seats. I can’t understand what is so difficult about that.
It also seems interesting, at least to me, that the people are migrating from blue states and migrating to red states (excl. Washington). Yet the red states generally remain red for some reason. Perhaps their new citizens realize what happens when the blues control and don’t wish to live through it again…just a thought.
Actually, you are wrong as you ususally are. I moved from a blue to state to this red state and am enjoying the general stupidity. No sales tax and lower property taxes are great, plus no violent crime, or those kind of people who commit them. The pseudointellectuals are such a joke here, but at least they are not shooting at you. I also find it humorous/ironic that in my blue state, we monitored emissions in a yearly car inspection, however in this “enlighten” so-called green stronghold, you do not. Oregon is so hypocritical and the joke of the nation, and I love getting to reap all the benefits without contribution.
Another interesting little factoid is the connection between union dominance in a state and its tax rates. States are more likely to be blue, high tax states when unions are powerful in that state.
Unions try to increase wages. Duh. Unions elect Democrats. Another “duh.” Democrats raise taxes, another no brainer. End result: Workers don’t get to keep the higher wagess they sometimes earn in union states, because the politicians their union elects tax them to death.
One logical option: move to another state, a red one. Maybe even a right to work state with lower taxes.
“Critic”: First off, let me express how thankful I am that I am still able to provide you with a reason for living.
Second, the main point of my post was expressed in the next-to-last paragraph: Correlation does not equal causation. Oregon Catalyst and ATR point to an apparent correlation between population growth in some states and conservative economic policies and then simply assert, without any empirical evidence, that conservative policies CAUSED the population growth. It’s pure conjecture.
Third, your statement that “the driven, the ambitious, and those wishing to get ahead seem to be relocating to those states providing the best opportunities” is true, and it might explain why the blue states (including California) continue to have, almost without exception, higher per capita incomes, higher levels of education, lower levels of illiteracy, lower infant mortality, greater life expectancy, and in general to surpass the red states in every quality-of-life measurement you can think of.
But that’s just conjecture.
@HBM: Given the fact that corruption exists and permeats this society more and more over the past 65+ years, it is a direct result of the dumbing down of the general populace via the failed unionized public school system. That said, what’s wrong with the “Right” bringing parity to a corrupt system of numbers reporting? Do you Marxist/Statist/Collectivists have the edge game on corruption…yes, still.
Bill Sizemore: I don’t think unions are “dominant” in ANY state anymore, unless you’re talking about public employee unions.
“End result: Workers don’t get to keep the higher wages they sometimes earn in union states, because the politicians their union elects tax them to death.”
Bogus.
One small vote for moving to Arizona in 2 years just for the warm weather, not for the rediculously right wing weirdness happening there. There are more foreclosures (one of which we purchased), in Arizona than Oregon.