Maggie's Farm

CT should have branded itself as the lower tax alternative between Boston and New York. But it assumed that its postwar wealth, being the state with the highest per capita income, meant that the CT economy was the golden goose that would give tax money in perpetuity.

I used to say that the CT economy was based on fear. Its three main anchors were: NY suburb, insurance, and defense contractors. Fear of crime drove people out of NYC. Insurance and defense- need I say more?

As a native of the poorer, more rural and also Boston oriented eastern part, I never had much fondness for the NY suburb part of CT. Note that Lowell Weicker was from Greenwich, and the current governor is from Stamford. I didn't know that Weicker left the state after his term as governor.

The rural area I grew up in was a childhood paradise, with abundant woods for exploration and a swimming hole visible from the kitchen window. Which reminds me of one definition of living in the country: you know you are in the country when you can pee in your own back yard without anyone seeing. The urban-suburban place I live in now is meh compared to what I grew up in.

But as I left CT years ago, what it does with its economy is no direct concern of mine.

That is a sad picture. Similar in many respects to Detroit.

Your comparison is spot-on. For decades, CT has been the state with the highest per capita income. In 1960, the richest per capita city in America, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, was Detroit. That should be a warning to CT. Poor public policy can lead to ruination, even with the highest per capita income.