To sum up
It’s a new year and a new decade, but California still faces a mix of contradictions.
California has always been a basket of contradictions, and as we begin a new year and a new decade, they seem destined to become even more confusing.
When it closed in 2020, we learned from the state Department of Finance that California, whose population grew in the largest part of the country thanks to waves of national and international migration, is now barely growing. In the twelve months ending July 1, California had only 141,300 residents, half the number in recent years, a quarter of what it was during the population boom of the 1980s and the lowest rate never registered.
Migration from other countries has slowed down and we are losing more people to other states than we are gaining. Meanwhile, the birth rate of the state decreases and its mortality increases.
In a way, slower growth is good news, because California has historically struggled to provide public and private services and facilities that require rapid population growth. It alleviates, albeit slightly, the chronic housing shortage in California.
However, near-zero growth also has a disadvantage. It means that what has traditionally been a relatively young population is now thickening. This creates demands for age-specific services, especially health care, and reduces the supply of working-age adults for the state’s economy.
Unemployment has fallen to record lows, which is, of course, good news. But the inability of employers to find enough skilled and formable workers is already deteriorating economic growth.
The main factor in both the outflow of Californians to other states and the worsening labor shortage is the aforementioned housing shortage, which shows no signs of improving. California is building just half of the housing units the state says we need each year, so even with slower population growth, the demand / supply gap will continue to widen.
It is also the main factor in which California has by far the highest level of poverty in the country, as measured by the Census Bureau when the costs of living and the largest population of homeless people are taken into account. This situation seems to get worse every hour and is now cited by Californians in recent polls as our main problem.
There we are now, and there is every reason to expect these conflicting trends to become stronger over the next year, despite promises from politicians, particularly Governor Gavin Newsom, that they could alleviate the anxieties.
Newsom, et al, appear to be affected by what has been called “Trump’s disorder syndrome.” They are so concerned with strengthening California as a bastion of anti-Donald Trump sentiment that they neglect very real issues that have absolutely nothing to do with the warlike president and his policies.
Trump seems to love taking California and citing it as an example of what the rest of the country shouldn’t emulate. State politicians cannot resist their backs.
This trend will be especially evident during this year’s presidential election. This is because California politicians, who were ignored in previous election cycles, have shifted state presidential primaries from June to March, thus forcing, or so it is hoped, Democratic candidates to lend us more attention.
It’s working, a little bit. We see some candidates occasionally make personal appearances to denounce Trump and serve some California issues, not just to raise campaign money. The richest, like Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer, really spend money on advertising.
However, this wave of political activity will end in a few months and the mix of difficult issues in California will still be there waiting for attention.