Terrific, balanced comment, though

4. He wants you to die.

Your comment is exactly why they say this type of thing and why it always works for them: they spit out a curt catchphrase/gotcha/“just asking questions” and to even begin to address the absurdity of it you need a bulleted list of all the ways it’s wrong. By then, even the non-red pilled person has moved on and lost interest before reading a rebuttal, but they remember the original talking point. It’s worked far too well for far too long.

So I will concede that he doesn't give half a shit about 4, and thinks that people who have less rights in interior states shouldn't have those rights anywhere. Furthermore I think he wants to separate the victims of his beliefs from ordinary working class people. Easier to hate a caricature of someone when they aren't your neighbor.

But I'll add 2 more:

6. The cost of living is going up in many previously cheap places now too. Some it's not, my first apartment is apparently cheaper now than when I lived there, but it's not a place many people are going to want to live. The nearest cities which are historically budget friendly cities on the other hand are no longer budget friendly. And no the places that are cheap aren't scenic bumfuck nowhere, it's small towns that aren't pretty and don't have much to do, even outdoors stuff.

7. Cheaper places are increasingly non functional in basic governance and public services. Public transit? Yeah good fucking luck even in the cities people think should be fine. When you get to really small bumfuck nowhere you better hope you don't need medicine fast, Benny boy helped ensure that the hospitals in those places shut down by fighting against Medicare and Medicaid. The water? Contaminated. What are you getting for your taxes? A bad school, a censored library, asshole cops who are bored when you're coming home from the city, and not much else.

Alternatively high cost of living areas are starting to engage in urbanist policies which will reduce the cost of living. Sure you won't have a big yard in the city for cheap, but a reasonable sized apartment at a decent price or a reasonable priced house in the suburbs are possible.

6. It doesn't scale. Where the problematic economic demographic is 50%+ percent of the pop and 70% live in cities no substantial portion effected could go live in all the Guthries in the nation. People are concentrated for reasons as old as civilization.
7. It often wouldn't help. Outside of shelter and taxes most goods don't vary much or all by market and wages do.

One could find yourself spending an overlarge portion of your money on rent in an urban market move for cheaper rent and find the difference in wages makes up the difference in rent and now you need to afford everything else on less total wages.

8. Cheaper markets have worse services and safety nets. Those who already rely on good medial benefits in urban centers in blue states would find little savings in moving into the boondocks in their own states and would lose more in health care alone than they gain in rent moving to bumfuck

Also business removing remote work so people who went to live in cheaper places move back or at least closer to the city.

Counter to your point, i did leave my home city that was too expensive for me to live in. I did nearly become homeless before landing a job but once i landed a job i was able to afford a small house in a few years, a nearly impossible goal for me in my home town.

I did have the benefit of my work skills are fairly universal and I could find some kind of employment nearly anywhere. If its an attainable goal to move, even if risky id say more often than not its worthwhile. It would be wise to do extensive research into average living costs and employment opportunities before moving.

The right answer is to deconstruct the argument logically and educate, of course. But I think it has to be added that the hypocrisy is intentional and is not stupidity and to understand the argument behind the facade you have to understand us politics. Which is all about manipulating the voter turnout. Imigrants will, once naturalized, vote against republicans, so they are oppressed. Same with women, high education, and so on. These are all just traits that let you select people who'd vote against you.

For example abortion, women who would consider aborition will statistically vote against republicans, so republicans rally around that and demonize abortion to make the women move away or stay away. Or as you mentioned transgender people, yes they can't move to republican states, that's the point!

It's always about supressing the people who statistically vote against you. In this case poor people vote against you, so you argue that poor people should leave the state or the country to dillute or strategically shift the voting opposition.

This is a huge wall of text when all you need to say is that Ben Shapiro is a right wing grifter and nothing he says should be taken seriously.

Alternative explanation: the "here" at the end is a misspeak and shouldn't be there. He's advocating killing poor and homeless people which is in line with current republican policy.