But I suppose things like this can make legislators think crazy thoughts:
"...Iowa had a net loss of nearly 12,000 college-educated adults ages 25 to 39 between 1995 and 2000 -- a rate of departure second only to North Dakota."Think about that — that means more youngsters fleeing Iowa than, e.g., Oklahoma, or Kansas, or Alabama — but it's not that bad here! Really!Yes, it's pretty flat, and air is sometimes redolent of cow, and Des Moines isn't exactly a metropolis, but the cost of living is low and it's safe and the schools are very good here. Iowa's a good state, a nice state, but all you young whippersnappers treat her like she's dirt beneath your shoes!
Cash flow to stem Iowa brain drain?
Rene Sanchez, Star Tribune
February 6, 2005
"Iowa's legislature has begun debating an extraordinary bill to exempt anyone under 30 from paying state income tax. No other state with the same affliction -- an exodus of residents commonly called "brain drain" -- has taken such a step."
I speculate that this has to do with the state's purple-osity. Iowa is kinda like the Neutral Planet, no? Though it went for Bush last fall, it's essentially a liberal state, in that earnest, Minnesota sort of way. Yet it doesn't offer, as you say, the seductive blue essential of a real flesh-pot. (Like Bablylonian Minneapolis!) On the other hand, for all its low crime and plethora of churches, it lacks that ineffable red vibe that keeps the red-hearted in Oklahoma and Alabama.
Posted by: Moira on February 8, 2005 08:48 AM
P.S. I think it's more pig than cow.
Posted by: Moira on February 8, 2005 08:52 AM
When I went to Australia, I went on a work-sponsored visa and so had no problems, but you could also go in on an unsponsored visa and try your luck getting a job. You had to accumulate 100 points, which were awarded on the basis of 1) English proficiency, 2) useful skills, 3) age.
You got fewer points for greater age, of course, which meant that a physics PhD who was a native speaker of English couldn't get in the door after the age of 35. (And this was assuming that you got full points for the PhD, which realistically you should not.)
I'd move to Iowa like a shot if it was farther south. Let's see the legislature address that.
Posted by: Angie Schultz on February 8, 2005 09:55 AM
Make Iowa more attractive? They could get rid of some of those pigs. Everyone knows they're an abomination, and they smell terrible.
Can't help you with the pols. Idiots. If they had any sense they'd do the opposite: create tax incentives for older, more experienced workers. Instead they want to cut taxes only for people in the lowest-earning period of their careers. Maybe the legislative aides who actually wrote this are under 30. Or they were scared the State would "lose" too much revenue if they gave a break to higher-earners. Whatever. This scheme achieves the kind of missing-the-big-picture lameness that experienced politicians are so rightly known for.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 8, 2005 11:28 PM
"...get rid of some of those pigs. Everyone knows they're an abomination, and they smell terrible."True, all true. But have you ever eaten a genuine Iowa pork chop? (Insert Homer-Simpsonesque drooling sound here)
Posted by: David Fleck on February 9, 2005 06:09 AM
I'm not sure I would call Iowa a liberal state, although I admit that I do not have an explanation for Iowa's presidential choices since 1988.
Pulling down my handy Almanac of American Politics, I learn that Republicans have a small edge in registration (31.8% to 29.2%), that they control both houses of the state legislature, and that Iowa has the kind of demographics that should make it a Republican state in most presidential elections.
So why hasn't it been recently, except for 2004 (barely)? I honestly am not sure -- and I have given some thought to the question.
I have two speculations, and they are no more than speculations. Iowa may be more of a peace state than, to take the obvious example, West Virginia. With Republicans identified with war, that may have hurt them in Iowa. My second speculation is that Iowa Democrats may have had a better "ground game" than Iowa Republicans, may have been a little better at getting their voters to the polls.
I'd be interested, by the way, in hearing from anyone who can confirm or reject those speculations. Or provide an alternative explanation.
Posted by: Jim Miller on February 9, 2005 09:57 AM
The fact that Iowans have elected and reelected Tom Harkin -- one of the most far-left members of Congress, and routinely opposed to international assertions of American power -- appears to support the "peace state" hypothesis.
Posted by: Jonathan on February 9, 2005 10:34 AM
- I learn that Republicans have a small edge in registration (31.8% to 29.2%), that they control both houses of the state legislature -Not so much anymore. The current legislature comprises a House with a slight Republican majority (51 - 49) and a Senate split right down the middle (25 - 25). So the state is about as purple as they come.
Posted by: David Fleck on February 9, 2005 01:15 PM
Angie - maybe they'll introduce a "promote global warming" bill in the next legislative session?
Posted by: Moira on February 9, 2005 02:34 PM
A lot of famous people come from Iowa..
the more famous they are, the earlier they come.
Posted by: John J. Coupal on February 9, 2005 05:09 PM