view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I happen to agree with the deciding points but the title should clearly be "Worst States To Live & Work In according to Democrats. All 10 Are Republican States".
Oh bless your heart you never learned to read.
Reading the article makes it blatantly obvious that it's judged heavily based on metrics that are designed to favor things the democrats want
…like Voting Rights, Crime Rate and Child Care…?
“Life, Health and Inclusion” takes up 14% of the total points.
Lol crying about nonsense voting rights and demanding government child care are massive democrat talking points. What rock have you been under?
So do Republicans not want good Child Care or equal Voting Rights?
As it has already been said in this thread, which metrics would put these states at the top when even statistics published from Fox have the top 10 with 3 states from CNBC’s Top 10 and only 1 from the Bottom 10?
I'm not exactly a big fan of Republicans, but I don't want the government wasting a dime of my money on child care, and I don't give a singular fuck about voting rights.
Unfortunately, I'm a human and not a database scraper bot. I have exactly zero clue what numbers would put this specific combination of states at the top, and I really don't care to spend the time crunching those numbers.
…how can one not care about voting rights? Do you want other people to decide for you?
And even then, the biggest factors are Percentage of qualified workers, Infrastructure and Stability of the Economy. I don’t really see those as loaded metrics.
Because I don't consider democracy to be worthwhile in and of itself. It's just a system. Sometimes it's good at achieving goals, sometimes it isn't. When it isn't, other options should be pursued.
According to their own methodology, it just looks like cherry picked data to favor economic hubs. Why does an influx of skilled workers mean somewhere is better to live? All I see is an excuse to heavily disadvantage rural communities that, reasonably, aren't seeing a massive influx of people looking for desk jobs. So elaborate, why does more skilled workers mean somewhere is better to live?
This one is also just favoring major commerce hubs, and they basically say it outright. "We measure the vitality of each state’s transportation system by the value and volume of goods shipped by air, waterways, roads and rail" ... "We consider access to markets by measuring the population within 500 miles of each state".
In addition, they include availability of air travel, which also just favors major commerce hubs.
Once again, just a bunch of metrics heavily slanted towards major urban area, as shown by metrics such as major corporations headquartered in state and gdp/job growth.
All these things are extremely loaded metrics to favor specific lifestyles and types of development that tend to be more popular among democrats. Which is fine, everyone has different tastes, I just hate how this shit pretends like it's anything except a subjective list of preferred things.