Medary.com

"Conservative" cities have much lower levels of income inequality than "liberal" "progressive" (actually leftist/socialist) cities:

As an old Democrat, I am sympathetic to the concerns. But it’s dubious the deep blue cities have found a solution. Let’s start with the gap between rich and poor. For the most part the regions and states with the widest gap between the classes are overwhelmingly dominated by modern progressivism.

The capital of blue America, New York City, has easily the worst levels of inequality in the country, with an income distribution that approaches that of South Africa under apartheid, notes demographer Wendell Cox.

But New York is hardly the only progressive stronghold with searing inequality. A recent Brookings report found that of the regions with the greatest income disparity only one, Atlanta, is located in a red-leaning state. These include San Francisco, Miami, Boston, Washington, D.C., New York, Oakland, Chicago and Los Angeles. The lowest degree of inequality was found generally historically more conservative cities like Ft. Worth, Texas; Oklahoma City; Raleigh, N.C.; and Mesa, Ariz. Income inequality has risen most rapidly in the probably the most left-leaning big American city of luxury progressivism, San Francisco, where the wages of the poorest 20% of all households have actually declined amid the dot-com billions.

What Americans today call "liberal" is in fact totally authoritarian. What Americans today call "progressive" is in fact a reversion to medieval feudalism. What Americans today call "conservative" is in fact largely the very liberalism which the "liberal progressives" have completely abandoned.

American "liberal" "progressives" have become the very thing that they claim to oppose: totalitarian busybodies hell-bent on controlling and regulating every second of everyone's lives, from conception to death, and utterly intolerant of anyone or anything which disagrees with their agenda of universal control.