This article on climate migration has me worried

https://twitter.com/propublica/status/1306254134065205248

It's part 2 of a 3-part series.

Yup. That looks about right from what I'm reading.
It's about 20-30 years away, but we'll start seeing the beginning of it probably sometime in the next 3-7 years, depending on how the global climate system responds.

What I find so interesting about all of this is that many areas that are in good shape climate wise seem to be subsidizing the lifestyles, etc... of the areas that are not in good shape. Yet, if you ask someone from a blue area if they want to stop funneling tax revenue towards red areas via more federalism, state rights, etc... they will likely say no. Furthermore they might even say we need more government support for those areas via more social safety nets, etc...

I don't mean to get political, but if there are no financial consequences for people living in areas that are not sustainable will people actually move? It may seem hypocritical for me to say this since I am in Arizona, a state that will get hit really hard, but I am totally on board with millions of Arizonan's moving to Minnesota, etc..., and I will continue my permaculture dream here of seeing what's possible in increasingly harsh environment. I don't mind the work required. After all, anyone can move to a pristine wilderness with perfect weather and say look how nice my land is. Its a completely different thing to take a degraded property and turn it into paradise while protecting and enhancing the ecosystem.

Interesting topic.

It looks like this is about climate change, which is a topic we keep in the cider press.  Those of you who have earned enough apples are encouraged to start a new thread there.