Spending my first 10 days in Indiana, I am already surprised at how many things are different than California. In California, there are calorie counts of everything you order on a restaurant, but I am now guessing in Indiana (having being used to CA). There are many different designs of license plates in IN, but CA’s are 99% of white background with red cursive “California” writing. With the pocket book, taxes are simply cheaper in Indiana: ~7% vs. ~9% in CA. Living in a college town, I don’t necessarily think of IN as a “red state“, but I do know that I’m no longer living in a state which thinks lowly of Republicans.
With that being said, a The Thicket article, Polar Opposite States, pointed out that even with CA’s great diversity and status of being in the top 10 of world economies (if it was considered a nation in its own regard), it could learn a little from its “redder” states. Financially, its economy could be more stabilized if it adopted policies that were more long-term in nature. However, that would mean voters who thought more of the future than just the present. I don’t think that’s possible for CA because its population is always so much on-the-go (as I have observed), while North Dakota (as shown in the article) and Indiana (where I currently reside) residents seem less rushed and more living-in-the-moment which results to them seeming more hospitable, and therefore more ponderous of their decisions and the impact on their lives.
Although this post is more philosophical than my usual, I think it gives a different insight into how a population can define its living standards by the politicians they vote into office and the actions they take for their constituents.