"High levels of GDP per capita do not necessarily mean high levels of household disposable income or even measure of material well-being."
True that. Let's flip your proposition and see if it holds water in reverse- lower per capita doesn't mean poorer people... only, wait- yes, yes, yes it does. That's why people leave Mississippi for any of the other states, but mostly states with better jobs, the top of the per capita list.
Are there poor people in New York, Taxachuessets, er, I mean 'Massachusetts, Washington State and even DC? Feckin A there are, but there's more people earning more money in well paying jobs in those states than in Mississippi, West Virginia, Arkansas and Alabama.
The list is dynamic, a point related to your assertion- California ain't the Garda Da Vida that drew the poor from the dust bowl, who made it the BOOMING economy it was from the War until the late 20th century. But it's easier to drop from the top than it is to climb from the bottom.
And some of that is tax driving big economies down, but it was also education and infrastructiure (taxes) that kept those states at the top. Compare the workforce education stats of the top 10 states to the bottom 10... only don't- it's sad how poorly educated some Americans are. Mostly 'red' states.
|
