05-20-2016, 05:04 PM
(05-19-2016, 10:01 PM)Bronco80 Wrote:(05-19-2016, 10:51 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Again, it's on statistics -- bulk statistics.
Do I see flaws? Sure. Hartford and New Haven are dumps, which may be even more relevant than the large number of people who live in Connecticut and commute to NYC. Mississippi is a great state to live if one is in a family that owns a big family farm (does that not apply anywhere?), and Connecticut is a horrible place to live if one is undereducated and has bad habits (smoking, obesity, pathological drinking).
This study can offer conclusions and debunk the significance of some decisions that people make based upon perceptions. So if one has a teaching credential earned at Southern Illinois University, and one has the choice between teaching in Winona, Minnesota and Hattiesburg, Mississippi, then should the brutal Minnesota winters make the choice? Certainly not. If I go on the average credit rating of people in the states, I would recognize that Minnesota voters are much more likely to vote positively on millages to support schools and are more likely to have the means of paying taxes (including those that go through the conduit known as landlords).
What you're doing is OK. I just remember this thread on T4T degenerating multiple times into shaming the states aimed at particular people on the board. I know I felt it at times, and I'm sure Danilynn would agree. Hopefully this thread doesn't take that downward path again over here.
It's about states, not particular people. I always thought that was clear. If anything, things were not as clear-cut on all the measures as I would have thought.