[lit-ideas] Re: Steyn vs Simon
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 23:39:54 -0800
From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
The possibility
that people moving to red states are moving in search of economic
opportunity and taking their nasty blue state values with them and the
possibility of kids raised by conservative parents rebelling in a
classic Oedipal rebellion, producing a generation gap, are left out of
Steyn's equations.
Who would move to a Red state? Nobody does that. In fact, it's the other way around:
creative, educated, intelligent people flee the red states. This includes the gays. That's
why it's so utterly boring in those states. They are called "flyover" states for a good
reason.
Red states lose population. People move to Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and the Bay Area.
Bright lights, big city. They go for jobs, education, opportunity, culture, and so on. Kids
flee their conservative, oppressive, stulifying parents. A few months ago, the Christians
were in an uproar over a study which shows that only 6% of Christian kids grow up to be
Christians.
Red states may have higher breeding numbers, but the fact remains that red states are
economically dependant on Blue states. That's right: red states lose money. They must be
subsidized. For all their talk of conservative work-ethic values, they can't cover their own
costs. To put it in terms Lawrence understands: red states are welfare slackers. Once again:
those who hate socialism are also utterly dependant on socialist services.
The USA will not become more conservative. Quite the contrary. The GOP recognized this
twenty years ago. Urban people tend to be moderate or progressive. They interact with other
people, they are educated, etc. The more educated and developed a country becomes, the more
progressive it becomes. The GOP's long-term strategy is to survive at all.
The only reason red states matter is due to the US Constitution: micro-states such as Idaho,
Wyoming, and North Dakota have the same number of senators as California and New York.
Politically, they have the same power. But economically and socially, they don't even exist.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
