I cant tell which number is for WVa. I’m actually in Ohio and I still monitor the Ohio sub and people seem to be moving here a LOT, so that number tracks.
Almost all of that make sense except South Carolina. There’s nothing in South Carolina.
that’s not true. there’s that law that makes playing cards in a pub illegal
So that implies the existence of at least one deck of cards and at least one pub in South Carolina?
I ask, as a genuinely curious North Carolinian.
I’m drunk enough to relay this joke: Why are there so many New Yorkers in North Carolina and so many black people in South Carolina? Because South Carolina won the coin toss.
If we’re looking solely at cost of living, North Dakota compared to South Dakota also doesn’t make much sense.
Cost of living could be $5/year, if you can’t expect to be paid $3/year you’d be a nasal fucking retard for moving there. Again, what’s in North Dakota?
The Irish were fleeing starvation and death during the potato famine, not even THEY moved to North Dakota or South Carolina. What’s there?
California is so expensive… I get it. You get what you pay for sometimes, though.
If Gen Z has 50 million people, then this map shows that they are not moving.
23K is only 0.046% of 50 million.
All together, only half of a single percent have moved, according to this graph.
Seems like everybody’s staying put, and this map means nothing.
Important rule when looking at such maps, always ask yourself what the map is not showing
Well, these are net changes. If some amount of people moves from New York to California and the same amount moves the other direction, it doesn’t show up.
Which means the map means even more nothing.
True. Which begs the question, what is this map for?
I always assume some political angle on posts like these.
I know I am assuming malice when incompetence may be the better answer, but my uninformed speculation leads me to think the mismanaged numbers are trying to send a message.
Well, the map says it’s from realtor.com so the purpose might just be to try to understand and anticipate market trends. It might have relevance to an investor even if it doesn’t tell us much about society or Gen Z. I could see someone spreading it to make it look like people find conservative areas more appealing, but I wouldn’t accuse OP of that without more basis.
All the older gens been moving to Missouri. It’s fucked the people from the state. It was a lower wage state with more affordable housing because of it. People from places like California sell off their crazy expensive house, but a home in Missouri, and have a big retirement and a spare six figures. Now people from Missouri can’t afford homes or afford to retire. So many “landlords” are also originally from out of state. They moved here and bought a few extra townhouses so they don’t have to work. I was lucky enough to get a house before things got crazy expensive. What I paid $130k for 15 years ago is now $300k at a much higher interest rate. No one from around here can afford that.
If you add all the positive changes, you get 179k. This is 23.9% of GenZ according to the map, so the map claims there are 749k GenZ in total (of which 23.9% moved).
I’m not sure how they are calculating under 1 million GenZ in 2024. Anyway, the map is still bad for not doing population density per state.
Remember that the numbers on the states are net numbers. If Texas has 500,000 Gen Z emigrants and 511,000 Gen Z immigrants, that only shows up as 11,000 here while still meaning a vastly higher proportion of Gen Z migrating across state lines. If every state paired up with one other one and exchanged 100,000 Gen Z people, you’d have 5,000,000 Gen Z migrants but every state on the map would show zero
Ah right, my bad
Yeah, cost of everything is so expensive in NJ, if you can leave, oughta.
Now as a % to state population for it to be actually relevant
Another population heatmap.
No, it isn’t. Florida and Pennsylvania are some of the most populous states but have pretty small numbers on the map. Washington has a bigger number than Texas despite having a quarter of the population
So why not show it that way as a percent instead of absolute numbers?
Wait, were you saying that the current map is just a population heatmap, or that the proposed per-capita one would be that?
The OP is effectively a heatmap since it isn’t relative to population.
California is the most populous state. Having the largest number of anything isn’t informative.
58,000 people leaving California is insignificant. 58,000 people leaving Wyoming is.
It’s also misleading since it’s net interstate migration. California has (or at least had) an immigration surplus when counting foreign migration.
Oh, and it’s only GenZ. You know, the people most squeezed-out of owning a home that are now having children. Who might be forced to move from a VHCOL area to a LCOL one.
This is a map made by someone with a hateboner for California.
Okay, but while I agree that it’d be good to get the per capita numbers, it’s still definitely not close to a population heatmap. The examples I gave should illustrate that
South Carolina is going to stick out even more with that metric.
Truuuu
The factor is money
In 2024
Economic migration. Young people fleeing high-CoL areas and moving to lower-CoL areas with lots of jobs.
California is just way too expensive!
I feel like expense is only one part of it, because WA is also very expensive to live in and it gained.
This is pointless with a cross generational comparison. And even that would be sus due to other confounding factors, like, the economy.
North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Oklahoma. I have questions.
Fargo is a surprisingly fun town to be in your 20’s. Lots of music and a cool art scene.
I had a blast there in my early 20s. Lots of jobs and reasonable rents. Walkable neighborhoods.
There was a grateful dead cover band that played every Thursday night in this awesome space that used to be a theater. Danced my face off on the regular.
As you can see, the baby Gen Z will leave it’s California nest, and as an adult spread to other nearby states.
Did Georgia really lose exactly 488 Gen Z adults in 2024?
Do they vote? Do they tend to vote left?
There’s a bit of shocked Pikachu going on after their relative swing to Trump in 2024. For a while it looked like they were lost to right-wing influencers and a saturated right-propaganda environment, but there’s still hope. I guess we’ll see in a month.
Yeah, I’m still hopeful especially because midterms tend to draw a different subset of the voter base.
Young voters favored Kamala Harris over Donald Trump in the 2024 election by 4 points: 51% to 47%. That was a much smaller margin than young voters gave President Biden over Trump in 2020 (+25), but still by far the strongest support for Harris of any age group in this election.
It’s a manosphere issue, so while you’re not off, it was 56% of GenZ men getting lost in the right wing incel movement:
Young women preferred Harris to Trump by a 17-point margin: 58% to 41%. But young men preferred Trump by a 14-point margin: 56% to 42%.
(Same source as above)
Mostly that’s the manosphere’s influence unfortunately. Gyms have become a “Third Place” for Gen Z males especially.
This looks like a population density map.
You couldn’t match this to a population density map if you tried. This is all over the place.
