• Triasha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Income, life expectancy, healthcare access. Union membership. Cali home prices are unaffordable because people want to live there and are willing to pay for it.

    • Krauerking@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      By being richer than most other countries in the world.

      That’s really what it’s about anyways. Identity politics are just icing for wealth generation for the upper class.

      • archomrade [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I mean it guess they’re not banning books or switching to school vouchers but I’m pretty sure low income households are doing just as bad if not worse over there

        Aren’t they, like, tearing down homeless encampments on a monthly basis?

        edit: spelling

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Guess you have been living under a rock. Strong economy AND strong worker protections, lots of unions, high minimum wage, robust anti-discrimination laws, there’s countless things that make life in California better for low income households.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Gee, I can’t imagine what motivation you would have to cherry pick stats to try and make California look bad

              • archomrade [he/him]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Lol, those are bellwether economic statistics for any state, it’s not ‘cherry picking’.

                Capital D democrats love California because it’s a democratic stronghold and a testing ground for all kinds of liberal policy, but it’s also dominated by capital interests. In terms of GDP it represents 1/6th of the entire US economy.

                It’s one of the clearest examples of liberalism’s relationship with capital. Most socialists would not look fondly on California governance.

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Uh huh

                  We both know you hate California because all you ever do is attack Democrats. There are dozens of “bellwether economic indicators” and California is doing excellent on most of them. Of course you’d pick a couple of bad ones because you have an agenda.

                  • archomrade [he/him]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Well I do attack democrats an awful lot, but not because they’re any kind of model of leftist governance

                    Those are the metrics any leftist would be interested in with any highly developed state or economy. How distributed is the wealth? Are low-earners able to afford a comparative standard of living? Do they have economic and employment mobility? ect. They look to answer the question, “to what degree is the working class subject to coercive capitalist conditions?”

                    Other economic metrics are weighted toward assessing the performance of capital, and are far less relevant to the questions leftists care about answering.