Continued domestic out-migration from high-tax states? Certainly from California, where Gov. Jerry Brown wants to raise taxes even higher. With foreign immigration down, California is likely to grow more slowly than the nation, for the first time in history, and could even start losing population.
Fortunately, governors of some other high-tax states are itching to cut taxes. The shale oil and natural gas boom has job-seekers streaming to hitherto unlikely spots like North Dakota and northeast Ohio. Great Plains cities like Omaha and Des Moines are looking pretty healthy, too.
It's not clear whether Atlanta and its smaller kin -- Charlotte, Raleigh, Nashville, Jacksonville -- will resume their robust growth. They've suffered high unemployment lately.
But Texas has been doing very well. If you draw a triangle whose points are Houston, Dallas and San Antonio, enclosing Austin, you've just drawn a map of the economic and jobs engine of North America.
Texas prospers not just because of oil and gas, but thanks to a diversified and sophisticated economy. It has attracted large numbers of both immigrants and domestic migrants for a quarter century. One in 12 Americans lives there.
Barone thinks we are at a "demographic inflection point". He sees immigration and the move from high-tax states to low-tax states as the two major forces that have shaped the last economic epoch (~40 years). What's next?
Barone's theory about tax-driven migration creates, in my estimation, a blind spot. His model cannot account for Pittsburgh's boom. Nor can he make sense of spiraling real estate prices in super expensive Park Slope. Why are so many people moving to high-tax locales? In terms of migration, I think we are having a Berlin Wall moment. The world we thought we knew so well has dramatically changed. We need to be searching for new paradigms.