I live in the Bay Area, and the crunch is far too real. I see it devolving in almost real time into a dystopia where only "techbros" can really thrive as the cost of housing balloons, and people outside of the tech subculture are becoming increasingly angry over it. Given that we are running up on almost seven years since the beginning of Occupy Wall Street, the outrageous cost of living and deep social problems that persist in many of this country's liberal strongholds renders the authority of the Democrats to speak to these values highly suspect. In other words, the Democrats are not making a good case for why the voters should trust them to act in their interests.
As I've said, the Democrats have been successfully baited into the "identity politics" framing, and have in many places abandoned the progressive principles that should form the foundation of their party. Great, you're a member of the Silicon Valley tech elite with your wild glasses and rainbow hair to show the world how "woke" you are. Are you actually doing anything to help anyone, or just virtue-signaling to tell everyone you play for the right team? Furthermore, big-city Democratic political machines exist to perpetuate themselves, not improve the lives of their constituents. They thrive on corrupt power and patronage, just like always.
But that aside, you have to ask yourself, where do the ultra-wealthy live? New York, San Francisco, and other financial and tech hubs. Of course you're going to find income inequality there. That where the people generating the income inequality live.
Then there's Louisiana. Ah, good old Louisiana. You could write stacks of books on the problems in that state, and their "unique" relationship with government.
I would agree that the Dems are pushing back issues that brought the bulk of their base to the table, and this is causing them real problems now. That is why Trump was able to pick up Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; long-time Democrats who didn't think the Democratic Party was doing much for them decided to try their luck with him. As an aside, I predict that these people return to the Democratic fold in the long-term, and the #NeverTrump conservative suburbanites likewise return to the Republican Party once his Presidency is in the rear-view mirror.
I don't know enough about economics to really speak to this, but I am not sure that we can simply make the case that wealth collects somewhere, therefore income inequality. Just glancing at this list of
states ranked by median household income, it strikes me that the three states with the highest incomes are also much less unequal than average. In fact, there are three states that are both in the top 10 for median household income and bottom 5 for inequality (which makes them sound unequal, but these are actually the most equal states).
There is also the Cost of Living factor.
US News and World Report published a ranking of states in affordability. California ranks third to last in cost of living and second to last in housing affordability. Hawaii is worst in both metrics, but it is also excellent on median household income and inequality. I don't have firsthand knowledge of what Hawaii is like, but I can say from having grown up poor in San Francisco that the Bay Area is a
very unforgiving place to be poor, and has been for many years. I'm sure it's not the only such place, but there is a real problem here that politicians aren't addressing for a few different reasons (and we have gone over some of that in this thread already). Regardless of the reasons, this goes back to my original point: Democrats are not making a good case for why working-class voters should support them.
