re: The United States of America, ranked from best to worst

Minnesota is overrated but it does have solid metrics.

Texas is obviously underrated. States like Iowa have decent metrics but are extremely overrated because there is apparently no way to measure "having shite to do and reasons not to kill yourself."

I think these rankings really undersell growth and opportunity, which is why Texas and Tennessee and others aren't getting their due.

Iowa has just as much to do as any other flyover state

quote:

---

Iowa has just as much to do as any other flyover state

---

Define flyover state.

Iowa has less to do than almost all of those

It has zero topography and lacks any destination cities or towns.

Louisiana #50 and Alabama at #49?

It's Liberals trying to make us feel inferior and shameful. You know what? I couldn't care less. We still have it better than 99.5% of the world, including Europe. The average Alabamian earns more than the average European.
Plus, I'd much rather live with people with whom I share the similar values and beliefs.

Laissez bon temps rouler, and Roll Tide!

quote:

---

I'm not saying demographics are not a factor. But they are a secondary factor compared to state government and economic interests.

---

You're missing one key component: the natural environment and proximity to desirable cities. One thing I compel anyone who's not reading this to do, is to look at the ranking map and then rank who has the most desirable state to live in regarding real and percieved natural attractions (including climate), as well as the same on its proximity to large, desirable cities and then compare the two.

When a company looks at an area in which to move their operations to, don't think for a second that they don't ask questions about its attractiveness for future employees and its inherent, built in attractions, aka its outdoors and terrain (which are free and cost the company nothing); as well as its proximity to city living amenities. People wanna move where they feel they can have a fulfilling, active life- even if their feelings are based on bullchit and conjecture.

A company wants the brightest and the best, and the brightest and the best want a mix of proximity to active outdoor lifestyles (the best and brightest of the white people love them some mountains, for example), and they also want some proximity to the cities that offer food and culture.

You named Texas, Florida, Kentucky and Tennessee. Texas has a little of everything regarding its terrain and multiple urban and culturally rich areas. Florida has the ocean- 'nuff said. (One thing regarding pollution and water quality- which is a big factor in their grading of the states- is that Florida is a peninsula surrounded by unusable water for drinking; therefore that water is all but untested for it- and also, no runoff from it. Reason stands to suggest that they and many others in a similar position get a leg up on a lot of us that are landlocked by states that are running their water and pollutants off into our boundaries. They don't have to depend as much on surrounding states and how those states treat and manage water that, inevitably, affects bordering and adjacent states, and, therefore, their published water quality & test results. Alternatively, regarding runoff, Louisiana IS at the arse end of the country's biggest watershed.)

Kentucky has proximity to lots of Midwestern and NE cities, and I personally think Kentucky is gorgeous. They've got horse barns that look like Billy Graham's homestead, plus white people love them some horses and barns.

Tennessee has the Appalachian mountains and contains cities that constantly rank in the upper echelons of "BeSt PlAcEs To LiVe" lists. (Again: white people and mountains.) I love Tennessee and mountains (and lots of other white people stuff...particularly because I'm white).

A company will look at these things: Florida's inherent advantage of water quality PLUS its same ocean AND it's awesome beaches, means that it's incredibly attractive for prospective companies looking to setup shop. Other states and their proximity to real and perceived urban amenities and fabulous outdoor opportunities means that it's clear that the old real estate adage rings true: location, location, location.

I personally don't think a government body or employee has a damned thing to do with economic prosperity other than making the tax/legal environment favorable. Hell, regardless of what the lying arse media and politicians say, the facts are that New York had to basically run Amazon out of town: if they'd of just put it in Amazon's butt with even a little bit of generic lube, then they'd of set up shop AND swallowed. It has to do with the location- both real and percieved, IMO.

Comparing both maps, another case could be made that systemic racism is real: everywhere there's a high % of minorities and poor people, there's poverty and poor rankings. It seems that racism and classism could be correlated with these low white people % areas, but, contrary to what the whites who live in their white utopias think, we ain't all down here warring with each other- far from it. So it ain't our rAcIsT arses that are to blame.

Southern whites are the blackest white people there are, and we don't even have to try to be. The south is a horrible place to live if you're a racist.

Even a dog doesn't chit where he lies down, and so it'd be insanity for the white people in the states where systemic racism could be a reason for its lack of progress to be the ones doing it; thereby holding them and their future family generations hostage to economic growth. We whites ain't owning plantations anymore; we all po' down chea. (Well, I'm not- not anymore- but I was, and I'll make every effort not to be poor again.)

So if it IS a little bit of systemic racism and classism going on, who's responsible? A strong case is/has been made that the south is still reeling from the Reconstruction era, and the reality is that a Mississippian just wants to see himself and his fellow Mississippian do well, regardless of color. Nobody sets out in life to be last place. So where could it be coming from? Or is it even coming from anywhere?

All of this is conjecture, of course, but one thing is not: A state's political affiliation has no bearing of its status on this list- assuming this list is the "be-all-end-all" of lists (which it is not, obviously).

The poster you replied too, along with the OP'ers map is one reason among many why I went into surveying and GIS: a map is as strong and perplexing of a document as any other. A good map will guide you to the treasure, but bad maps like, say, on a Garmin GPS, can lead you and your car into a body of water because it said that was where you needed to go.

My SECRant for the night is over, I just found the correlation between the two maps + your compelling comment too much to pass up on without throwing in my one cent's worth.

Goodnight to the one guy in 2027 who's read this far after a Google search. Godspeed to you, young man, godspeed.

quote:

---

If you could fix only one of these, education, to at least a ranking of 25th in the country, you’d fix every other category in short order. I’m convinced of that.

---

The problem with public education is when it becomes systemically bad in an area it makes it VERY hard to recover. People with the financial means send their kids to private school, the ones that are involved but don't have the money can guide their kids to getting private school scholarships or help them get into magnet schools, etc. Once this happens these parents have no significant vested interest in the quality of the public schools (outside of those with kids in magnet schools and then only the particular school). These make up the bulk of parents that would and could impact the quality of the public schools. If the public schools are excellent most every parent will send their kids there unless they specifically want a parochial education or fancy sending their kids to a school like Phillips, Harvard-Westlake or Choate.

If the schools are bad then the parents that can choose other options and have very little interest in increasing the quality of their local public schools. The wheel just keeps turning. While I am not remotely suggesting it the best and quickest way to improve the quality of public schools would be to abolish all the private schools, short of that is takes some other extreme paradigm shift that very rarely occurs, though you see it in very small niches.

I agree with the list for the most part but....

quote:

---

Natural Environment- 50

---

quote:

---

Florida #13.

---

We got the crazies but at least we aint at the bottom like bama and loseana

IN all seriousness Louisiana is where i grew up and went to college. I actually had planned on staying but lets just say the jobs available and the pay that went along with them could not compete with other states. I left 15 years ago and with each passing year the desire to return gets lower especially when you go back to visit. I still have friends and family there but when i go back and the same bridges/roads/schools are in need of upgrades /repairs from when i was a kid then i know i have made the right decision by leaving the state. Really i dont know what will ever move La. from the bottom 5 especially with all the backwoods politicians louisiana always have in place. Good luck louisiana