Not familiar with the author's agenda, but:<p>1) is this just showing retirement patterns? (I.e make lots of money in a state with higher income /cost of living then move somewhere cheaper/warmer once you stop making money? The reverse probably doesn't happen?)<p>2) Is this just mapping relative state incomes? I think people moving between states randomly would produce this pattern given income differences.<p>I'm also not sure what the point is from a policy perspective. Even if the pattern is true doesn't necessarily mean that states should change their policies.
I'm unsure of what this is measuring. Is it wealth? Is it income?<p>Also, it's unclear it measures what it seeks to measure. Imagine a (poor) rural area and a (rich) urban area. Let's assume there's 0 net migration, but 100 people move in each direction every year. This looks like a migration of wealth given the methodology shown, but it's actually noise.<p>Thus the point the author seems to be driving "look how bad California is at having pro-wealth policies" may be flawed. Any wealthy area is going to look redder than any poor area (unless there's also a net migration of people too).<p>Reading the rest of the site it's clear he's just trying to push an agenda, though. He's not asking critical questions, just using words like "unimpeachable".
I can't stand sites like these. A clear agenda, but rather than come out Nd say it, wrap it up in a collection of misleading graphs and stats.<p>The clear agenda is to push for cutting taxes no matter what. But it takes a relatively intelligent person a few mins to investigate the site to show that it's roughly nothing more than listing high income state in red and low income in green.<p>If CA is twice as wealthy as AL, and two families swap states, then you'll have net money flowing out.<p>And it's not accidental the coloring of red and green to implicitly associate one with good and bad. It of course flipped to support his agenda.<p>He should instead reverse the colors and ask the question, "Which state is growing / producing the most wealthy people? And sharing that wealth throughout the country?"<p>It's of course, CA/NY/DC/MA/... All those places he wants to try to paint poorly.
I mean, all this is a fancy way of saying "I made a map where high income tax counties and states are red and low income tax states and counties are green."