The Degeneration and Decay of Prog/Socialist Cities Large changes in a society often happen very quickly through a series of (in the present) seemingly innocuous events. Take the fleeing residents from all the major liberal bastions, for instance. A short-sighted person (read: Liberals/Progs) might attribute the population decline to COVID-19 and the related fallout. Of course, they are putting the cart before the horse here – COVID-19 was merely a catalyst by which Prog policies fall apart in their main regions of control. The decline was long overdue. In this post I’ll explain how dirty these Progs truly are, and why they can’t/won’t take responsibility for their poor, out-of-touch-with-reality policies. I’ll use the old Capitalist-Socialist dichotomy to illustrate although the failures of Progs could be reframed in other ways. The fundamentals of capitalism are not new …only the complexities upon which modern societies continually build themselves are. What I mean is that there’s really little net difference between Mercantilism, Capitalism as we know it over the last few centuries, and Romans exchanging goods for coin or other mediums of exchange. The common theme is the following: People act out of self-interest (or local group interest more aptly – they care about their immediate people they know) and that exchange of self-interest has and always will produce better net results than some central planning authority. The reason for this could be explained as: The economic interactions amongst individuals are extremely complicated, and so are the commingling/reinforcing effects of those interactions. No central planning authority can possibly have anywhere near the knowledge needed to replicate, much less improve upon those countless individual interactions that characterize a market economy But modern progs are another breed – a breed so out of touch with humanity in the past that they have the luxury of making up nonsense policies in economic governance, and claiming farcically that such a new system could possibly beat an old system that has essentially been in place for millennia. You could further argue that such a long-standing system based out of self-interest was formed by nature itself and is thus, overall, maximally beneficial. Not a hard argument to make considering the similarities between capitalist-style economies and nature (hint: Progs are typically marginalized in such societies, or just gone because farcical ideas don’t work in practice as we’ve seen repeatedly in experiments with socialism/communism. And back then, if you failed – you were out). Think of the Perpetual University crowd – aka those who never left the nest The quality of an economic actor’s outcome typically correlates with the quality of applied knowledge by that actor. Take that liberal bastion – the University – for instance. Adult children (professors and the like) essentially spend their entire lives within a highly structured, coddling environment. No wonder they come up with silly ideas like feminism/socialism/Critical Race Theory – they aren’t bound by the laws of the material world! Because espousing such ideals doesn’t have any consequences if they don’t work out for the actor. And so they’re not discouraged from coming up with such ideas, and so those ideas abound where they otherwise wouldn’t. The Prog represents the debasement of Mankind If you follow the following corollary: ‘A harder and more strenuous life makes for a better quality man and thus better outcomes’ …then you should recognize how fortunate we are in the modern era. And also that those Grand New Ideas which spawned from the easiness of life in the present have no validity by default – i.e. Prog ideology (particularly the manifestations over the past decade) stems from weak/lazy/hedonistic/low people – Progs themselves. Sadly, those Romans trading in coin knew much more than they’re given credit for – and these degenerate Progs we (atm) have to call fellow citizens know much less. Disclaimer: In before the ‘there are different shades of Socialism’ meme which was debunked in prior threads – not because the statement isn’t true, but because it’s not helpful. You can indeed measure approximate freedom of markets in a country and you can indeed distinguish between favoring More Capitalism and More Socialism accordingly. What important is to focus on the degeneracy of the individual on the Left in the modern era – and to eschew any nonsense that they espouse. Since it’s likely they’re out of touch…
You are confused. Luckily, I'm here to help. The most glaring mistake you make is assigning the "progressive cities" label to cities that have seen white flight, largely for racial reasons. https://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc32a.pdf The end result of white flight being, the erosion of the tax base leading to compromised services, lack of cultural outlets, declining property values, an increase in poverty among the residents left behind, and the minority population (who tend to be more progressive in their politics) left holding the bag. In short, you put the cart before the horse. Understand?
Then how do you explain California? in spite of having the highest taxes, we are the poverty capitol of the US. Property values are extremely high and the gap between the rich and poor is huge. Progressive ideology has its own perti dish and results speak for themselves.
Unless you actually prove cause and effect you are left with correlation without causation. Understand?
Of course I do. California is where Democrats enjoy a super majority. We are talking about direct results from actual taxes collected. In spite of having abundant resources, CA is the poverty capitol of the US. Schools rank with the lowest, roads are crumbling, cities were on the brink of insolvency before Covid, the gap between the rich and poor is huge, and the middle class is tiny. You can't use the correlation argument when they are already getting the money.
He has no choice. Answering the question at face value would require admitting being wrong about progressive power being better for society.
Generally, the reasons are too convoluted to prove cause and effect. Progressive cities tend to have high taxes and the citizens are getting little in return for those high taxes. They are seeing filthy streets and high crime. The advantage is primarily that they do not have to commute a long distance and being close to attractions not normally available in the suburbs. . After a period of time, they decide they would rather commute or move their business elsewhere because they decide it is simply not worth it because the downside outweighs the upside.
