| sc94597 said:
There is no reason why any of the blue states in the map above shouldn't be the most equitable (measured by Gini Index or some other indicator), pro-labor states in the U.S, other than the Democratic Parties in those states don't truly want it to be.
Why are Utah and Alaska the most equitable states? And yes, the difference between >.5 and <.41 is very significant. It's not just a matter of urbanization either. Utah has an urban population of 90% and New York one of 87.4%. Also even if we control for these other variables New York state had a Gini Index of .5142 between 2015-2019 and one of .5102 in 2024. A drop of .004 despite the average state's Gini-index dropping by .009 in the same period. One would think a Democratic controlled state, if it were interested in equitable results, and especially when it is starting at a much more unequal level (meaning there are lower hanging fruit) would become more equal more quickly than the nation as a whole. |
Isn't Alaska the place with something that is the closest program to actual Universal Basic Income? Ah, yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund
A 2024 paper in Poverty & Public Policy found that the Alaska Permanent Fund "reduced the number of Alaskans with incomes below the US poverty threshold by 20%–40%" and "reduced poverty rates of rural Indigenous Alaskans from 28% to less than 22%".
That reduction in poverty is what the Gini index reflects. California and New York have a lot of poverty. Which is reflected by their Gini index.
Given that, Alaska is the most socialist of the US states. Leftist not in words but in actual policy. Populist leftist to be precise, not the modern Twitter leftist stuff.
Last edited by the-pi-guy - 20 hours ago
