▲ 104 ▼ Where Gen Z Is Movin To And Which States They're Leaving (lemmy.zip) submitted 1 month ago by Boolean@lemmy.zip to c/map_enthusiasts@sopuli.xyz 77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 9 points 1 month ago (5 children) Another population heatmap. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 3 points 1 month ago (4 children) 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 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) So why not show it that way as a percent instead of absolute numbers? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Wait, were you saying that the current map is just a population heatmap, or that the proposed per-capita one would be that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Skua@kbin.earth 3 points 1 month ago (4 children) 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 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) So why not show it that way as a percent instead of absolute numbers? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Wait, were you saying that the current map is just a population heatmap, or that the proposed per-capita one would be that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) So why not show it that way as a percent instead of absolute numbers? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Wait, were you saying that the current map is just a population heatmap, or that the proposed per-capita one would be that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Skua@kbin.earth 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Wait, were you saying that the current map is just a population heatmap, or that the proposed per-capita one would be that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago 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 permalink fedilink source parent
