the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Watch "The 10 WORST STATES in AMERICA for 2019" on YouTube

https://youtu.be/HZWYVMzbOsM

Greg - Do you agree with this?

It is the 10 worst if you are a socialist or poor or jobless.
I spent last week in Chandler working with super hi tech companies.
The weather was 72-76 during the polar vortex - 70 at night last Thursday.
360 days of sunshine - well that certainly makes it worse than Chicago.
The factors that rate these states as poor quality don't apply to working - non
alcoholic - Insurance card carrying folks.

The factors that rate these states as poor quality don't apply to working - non alcoholic - Insurance card carrying folks.

I think the fact there are more unemployed, alcoholic, people without insurance per capita in those states. You're absolutely right that people with jobs, who aren't on drugs or alcoholic, and have health insurance are better off wherever they are.

Okay, if we go by the weather, it's better to live in Florida than North Dakota. It all comes down to how one quantifies "worse." It's not that hard to make a list of categories, and ten rank each state.

For ex.,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coz7kgHGLQs

Howdy Steve -
No - I am saying that people with jobs - non alcoholic etc are better off in Arizona or Texas or even Florida than Northern states - not better off wherever.
It's a big omission to leave out traffic congestion or water quality ( Flint Michigan
should be #1 worst state ) as factors in ranking.

Steve -
Just watched your example vid and decided that there is no
way that diverse political outlooks and needs can agree on the best states to live.
Both vids are absolute crap.
Are we going to rate housing on 'affordable' or on rate of value increase.
We are blowing everyone away here in Austin with approx 8%/annum increase but that doesn't make it affordable. Austin is one of the greatest places to live - just ask the 7500
homeless who call it home.
BTW - ANY study that rates Iowa as a great place to live is to be immediately ignored.
have you watched any documentaries about what is happening in No Dakota with shale oil?
Definitely not a great place to live.

It's simply a question of how one decides how one rates things, including quality of life. Water, air, weather, and land quality are perfectly fine categories. So, are gross income, crime rate, tax rates, and unemployment figures. Choose the ones you like, and make your own list.

And, no, Michigan shouldn't be #1 on the list because of Flint water crisis. As you note, there are bigger problems with water in parts of coal country. There's more crime in Florida than in NY, but the weather is better. Anyway, I'm not sure how politics comes into play except maybe that things like unemployment, welfare, drug-addiction, etc, are usually politicized.

I.e., it shouldn't matter who drug addicts are or where they live or what party they belong to, but it does, especially when conclusions don't match expectations.

Crime stats (state rankings) from the FBI.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... lic-safety

States by income:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... _by_income

Unemployment by state
http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and- ... pdate.aspx

Ten cities with the best air quality:
https://www.areavibes.com/library/citie ... r-quality/

However, that doesn't necessarily translate to the entire state. For ex., CA also has some of the worst air quality.
http://creativemethods.com/airquality/m ... states.htm

Water conditions from the USGS (i.e. "science'). Lots of info, but there's a map.
https://water.usgs.gov/owq/

Affordable housing by state:
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... ng?slide=5

My point is only that it is pretty simple to make up a chart that shows the "best" and "worst" states for any set of issues one chooses. It's irrelevant to say that one would rather be in state x rather than state y for whatever reason one wants. That is just a subjective judgment. Sure, some people would rather live in Alaska rather than Hawaii or New York, or Florida rather than Massachusetts for personal or political reasons, or even for taxes. But, the stats are the stats.

So, New Mexico then.

DiaitaDoc wrote:So, New Mexico then.

That'd actually be one of my first choices as well. Santa Fe is great. So, is Taos. I've seen a few jackalopes in my day, and I take green chili.

However, the only sad part is the state of many natives. At least it was really bad when I was there long before the casinos. Last time I was there, though, I didn't see many barrels of "Apache tears."

Steve -
Sorry - being a Freakanomics guy I say the stats are a lie.
If you manipulate the stats then the results are predetermined.
It is just making the stats agree with what you want as a ranking.
The idea is that it is not the mean which determines the outcome.
It is the outlier. So increase in property value cancels everything
for me not "affordable housing".
If you fail to be specific and say FLA has more crime when you
mean rate of crime is greater. Rate of crime is how quickly you will
get murdered not a guarantee of being murdered. New York has MORE
crime.

You're right. New York, specifically, NYC has more crime. I wasn't particularly interested in singling out a specific statistic for any particular state. My point was that you seem to be refuting someone else's opinions and results. I provided several lists that anyone can use to decide where the best state might be for them, according to those parameters.

I live in the highest crime neighborhood in the county with the highest crime, poverty, unemployment, and drug addiction in NYC. Now ask me the last time I've seen a crime being committed . On Youtube, it's listed as one of the places that tourists should avoid. All true. Yet, I could always say "Oh, those stats are wrong. There are beautiful areas and parks, nice architecture, and the people are friendly." That's true too. I can post pictures. It won't stop people saying that it's a shit-hole. But, it doesn't mean that the stats are wrong.

I'm not trying to make them say anything with them. Well, I will say that I prefer living just where I am to living in lots of places with better climates and lower crime rates. Again, if someone has an income, health care, lack of addictions, shelter, one can have a good quality of life almost anywhere. There are people doing so everywhere. The question was the number of people who weren't employed, sheltered, insured, educated, etc.

roger hao wrote:Greg - Do you agree with this?

It is the 10 worst if you are a socialist or poor or jobless.
I spent last week in Chandler working with super hi tech companies.
The weather was 72-76 during the polar vortex - 70 at night last Thursday.
360 days of sunshine - well that certainly makes it worse than Chicago.
The factors that rate these states as poor quality don't apply to working - non
alcoholic - Insurance card carrying folks.

Do I agree?

Yes, I agree with facts.

Do I think they are bad to live in? Not necessarily. For what I paid I could own twice the house on a big piece of land by lake in North Carolina and still put a lot money in the bank. Not bragging I just bought my house during the recession and I was in the right place at the right time.

A lot of people get tired of renting and make the leap to these states and tell their old friends in Cal how good they have it and often complain about the state they came from. Then the people in their new states resent these Californians because they buy up and outbid them on the houses they wanted.

It's complicated and I understand why people leave here due to how expensive it is here but I also think one should know what they're getting in return.

I will not leave Cal except maybe for Hawaii and not because I think Cal is the best but because this is where I am from and I would rather have less money and be happy with where I live than have more money.

For those who do move and live in these states I wish them luck. Having lived abroad I am convinced that being happy with life your starts from the inside no matter where you live but some places make that easier than others, I am sure we agree on that.

I also agree that stats don't tell the whole story.

Steve James wrote:

The factors that rate these states as poor quality don't apply to working - non alcoholic - Insurance card carrying folks.

I think the fact there are more unemployed, alcoholic, people without insurance per capita in those states. You're absolutely right that people with jobs, who aren't on drugs or alcoholic, and have health insurance are better off wherever they are.

Okay, if we go by the weather, it's better to live in Florida than North Dakota. It all comes down to how one quantifies "worse." It's not that hard to make a list of categories, and ten rank each state.

For ex.,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coz7kgHGLQs

Interesting this is the 10 HAPPIEST states and it will probably surprise people that they tend to be the more boring states. I suppose the boring factor makes it more affordable which makes sense to me. If one can get by on a low paying job why wouldn't they be happy? A lot of people who are not happy in California tend to be people who can't afford a nice to live, which leads to other problems like commuting 3 hours a day.


Watch "The 10 HAPPIEST STATES in AMERICA" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/YUmJznEjYzA

DiaitaDoc wrote:So, New Mexico then.

Colorado always ranks high.

you said "high"