From: Dave Long (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Dec 04 2000 - 10:43:11 PST
> I look at areas (of the US, and of my limited experience
> in southeast asia) where there are vibrant economies, and
> I see higher tax rates and leftward leanings. I look at
> areas where there isn't much going on (and what there is
> tends to be organized or owned by people from the former
> areas), and I see lower tax rates and rightward leanings.
Just thumbed through Robinson's _Land in California_, and
noticed a map showing the original land grants which were
confirmed by the US in 1846.
Now, it makes sense that county sales tax rates and political
leanings (as shown by Digital's election server -- is that
still being run by the current entity?) would be correlated,
and it makes sense that county urbanization also correlates,
but I was surprised to see that most of the bits of CA which
people thought were nice enough to live in in 1846 are the
bits which people feel rich enough to keep nice in 2000.
Does this pattern hold for other states?
(The old ranchos still live on in property lines, as a glance
at a Thomas Guide will confirm. I was checking on stock the
other day a little past Rancho San Julian, and not only is it
still around, but I believe it's still held by de la Guerras)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 04 2000 - 10:48:28 PST