Wednesday, December 12, 2018
The Louisiana Paradox
I stumbled across this video while doing some research and found it fascinating. My own commentary follows:
As readers of this blog know, I'm very wary of "pro-business" states that gut unions, strip away environmental regulations, and provide few social services to the most needy. It's a program that is always promoted as creating "prosperity," but outside of Texas it does not seem very effective over time. The states that consistently thrive economically-- California, New York, New Jersey, etc.-- mostly take the opposite approach. Meanwhile, Louisiana, Mississippi, Kansas, and the like lead the nation in, well, a lack of prosperity.
One would think that eventually the majority of the citizens in those states would realize that this just isn't working for them and vote for something else, but that doesn't happen. Why?
As readers of this blog know, I'm very wary of "pro-business" states that gut unions, strip away environmental regulations, and provide few social services to the most needy. It's a program that is always promoted as creating "prosperity," but outside of Texas it does not seem very effective over time. The states that consistently thrive economically-- California, New York, New Jersey, etc.-- mostly take the opposite approach. Meanwhile, Louisiana, Mississippi, Kansas, and the like lead the nation in, well, a lack of prosperity.
One would think that eventually the majority of the citizens in those states would realize that this just isn't working for them and vote for something else, but that doesn't happen. Why?
Comments:
<< Home
The end of the video suggests that some folks in Louisiana have decided to vote for something else ("the tide has begun to turn..."), but the economic picture in Louisiana is obviously more complex than its industrial property taxes. Viewed through the lens of how "pro-business" the state is, for example, the pro-business people rank Louisiana near the middle (link is to 2018 ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index, something of a guide--from a right-wing think tank point of view--for how business-friendly a state is).
In any case, I'm not sure the comparison you are making between less "pro-business" states (CA, NY, and NY), on the one hand, and more "pro-business" states (LA, MS, and KS), on the other, is exactly apples to apples. First of all, it's not obvious that MA, MS, and KS are actually "pro-business," at least to the same degree as a state like Texas. Second, it's likewise not obvious that CA, NY, and NJ lead the nation in "prosperity." While all featuring in the top ten of gross state product, they also feature in the bottom ten of state fiscal rankings (thanks to massive debt and unfunded liabilities).
Intriguingly, TX and CA, which lead the nation in economic productivity, do very poorly in some "prosperity" rankings. They are ranked 46 and 50, respectively, for quality of life. TX is 47 and CA is 46 for opportunity.
In any case, I'm not sure the comparison you are making between less "pro-business" states (CA, NY, and NY), on the one hand, and more "pro-business" states (LA, MS, and KS), on the other, is exactly apples to apples. First of all, it's not obvious that MA, MS, and KS are actually "pro-business," at least to the same degree as a state like Texas. Second, it's likewise not obvious that CA, NY, and NJ lead the nation in "prosperity." While all featuring in the top ten of gross state product, they also feature in the bottom ten of state fiscal rankings (thanks to massive debt and unfunded liabilities).
Intriguingly, TX and CA, which lead the nation in economic productivity, do very poorly in some "prosperity" rankings. They are ranked 46 and 50, respectively, for quality of life. TX is 47 and CA is 46 for opportunity.
Interesting! And I don't doubt that the policies promoted as pro-business may not be considered quite so pro-business by experts. On the TX and CA quality of life index, I do wonder about that (even though Minnesota was #2 overall). I mean... drinking water? Is that really a primary determinate of quality of life? The drinking water was terrible in Waco, but that did not affect my overall "quality of life" very much!
There's lots of room for doubt in these kinds of rankings (particularly those from US News--which I don't have to tell you). You can measure GDP fairly objectively. But "quality of life"? The rankings are in the eye or the input-picker. Although, to be fair, the drinking water in Lubbock may be bad enough to legitimately impact quality of life...
Post a Comment
<< Home
