http://ssrc-static.s3.amazonaws.com/...-4.22.2015.pdf
(This time it is on Congressional districts. A hint: California has one of the best districts in which to live and one of the worst, so it isn't only the state that matters.
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY:
Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
Geographies of opportunity is an in-depth look at how residents of America’s 436 congressional districts are faring in three fundamental areas of life: health, access to knowledge, and living standards. While metrics in these three areas do not measure America’s natural bounty, the rich diversity of its population, or the vibrant web of organizations and individuals engaged in making it a better place, they capture outcomes that are essential to well-being and opportunity. This report makes the case that geography- and population-based approaches offer a way to address the multiple and often interlocking disadvantages faced by families who are falling behind. Only by building the capabilities of all residents to seize opportunities and live to their full potential will the United States thrive.
The hallmark of this work is the American Human Development Index, a supplement to Gross Domestic Product and other money metrics that tells the story of how ordinary Americans are faring. The American Human Development Index brings together official government data on health, education, and earnings and allows for well-being rankings not just of congressional districts but also of states, counties, census tracts, women and men, and racial and ethnic groups. The Index can empower communities and organizations with a tool to identify priorities and track progress over time.
ii
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY
Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
• The top ten congressional districts in terms of human development are all in the greater metropolitan areas of Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. These global cities attract skilled workers, world-class employers, diverse immigrants, and substantial investment of private and public resources.
• The bottom ten districts disproportionately comprise struggling rural and urban areas in the South. These lagging areas face interlocking challenges in terms of residential segregation by income and race, poor
health, under-resourced educational infrastructure, and limited job prospects.
• Gaps in human development within states tend to be bigger than the gaps between states. While state
population differences make comparisons difficult, among large states, California is the most unequal; among medium-sized states, Missouri has the largest gap between its highest- and lowest-scoring districts; and for small states, New Mexico contains the biggest disparities.
• In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
ii
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY
| Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
•
The top ten congressional districts in terms of human development are all in the greater metropolitan areas
of Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. These global cities attract skilled workers,
world-class employers, diverse immigrants, and substantial investment of private and public resources.
•
The bottom ten districts disproportionately comprise struggling rural and urban areas in the South. These
lagging areas face interlocking challenges in terms of residential segregation by income and race, poor
health, under-resourced educational infrastructure, and limited job prospects.
•
Gaps in human development within states tend to be bigger than the gaps between states. While state
population differences make comparisons difficult, among large states, California is the most unequal; among
medium-sized states, Missouri has the largest gap between its highest- and lowest-scoring districts; and for
small states, New Mexico contains the biggest disparities.
•
In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American
Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
•
• Life expectancy, the primary indicator of health and survival, ranges from just under 84 years in California District 19 (San Jose and part of Santa Clara County) to just under 73 years in Kentucky District 5 (rural southeastern Kentucky). Put another way, residents of the San Jose area can expect to live longer than the people of the longest-lived country, Japan (83.1 years)—while residents of southeastern Kentucky can expect to live about as long as residents of Gaza and the West Bank (73.0 years). Long-lived districts tend to be clustered in cities; districts with low life expectancies are mainly in the South.
• In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American
Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
....Comment: maybe those places are just too lacking in opportunity to attract people not from there.
Is there anything good to say about gun-related violence?
![[Image: gunviolencemap.jpg]](http://ecolocalizer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/gunviolencemap.jpg)
OK, venison dinner if you are into that.
(to)
Did anyone say that Connecticut is an easy state in which to live? The only people who say that the fire-and-ice Dfa climate is wonderful are the sorts of people who make a living by wring copy that elevates the lowly and banal hamburger to a gourmet experience. Connecticut is infamous for traffic jams. Hartford and New Haven are dumps, and the demographics reflect a large proportion of people as high-income commuters who earn their high incomes in Greater New York City. To earn such high incomes one must already be highly-educated and have specialized skills. The cost of living, naturally, is sky-high where those NYC commuters live.
One need not have such a high level of education to do farm labor, work in retail or food service, or work in a foundry. If anything, the lower one's learning the more one can tolerate such work. Such is so where I live... where demographics look like an outlier of Appalachia. But there are no traffic jams and there is plenty of free parking, which indicates a paucity of attractions where I am for now.
Much of life is a contest between difficulties and rewards. Arnold Toynbee applies such to climate: New England never was an easy place in which to make a living. The poor, stony soils ensured that only small family farms could ever be formed there -- no gigantic slave-worked plantations as in Maryland and further south. There were no valuable minerals other than just enough iron ore for a little metalworking suitable for late-agricultural-era farm implements and housewares. The only reliable building material was wood -- and it takes more work to extract than any other building material. (Granite was a late discovery). There wasn't even much coal. People turned to fishing and eventually whaling to supplement what would have otherwise been meager diets. But for Toynbee, southern New England was the optimum of challenge. Even so, New England became a hotbed of intellectual life and entrepreneurial activity. New Englanders founded such cities as Cleveland, Chicago, Omaha, Denver, Salt Lake City, and Seattle -- and turned San Francisco from an isolated mission-and-garrison town into a world-class city in a very short time.
It's a long argument, but very convincing, in Toynbee's A Study of History.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 04-20-2016 at 05:18 PM.
Speaking of obesity,
![[Image: 2013-state-obesity-prevalence-map.png]](http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/images/2013-state-obesity-prevalence-map.png)
Overweight and obese individuals are at increased risk for many diseases and health chronic conditions, including the following:
Hypertension (high blood pressure)
Osteoarthritis (a degeneration of cartilage and its underlying bone within a joint)
Dyslipidemia (for example, high total cholesterol or high levels of triglycerides)
Type 2 diabetes
Heart disease
Stroke
Gallbladder disease
Sleep apnea and respiratory problems
Some cancers (pancreas, kidney, prostate, endometrial, breast, and colon)
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/...ed-states.aspx
The states and their percentages of self-reported obesity in 2012, with color indicating how the states voted in elections from 2000 to 2012:
State % State %
Colorado 20.5
District of Columbia 21.9
Massachusetts 22.9
Hawaii 23.6
Vermont 23.7
New York 23.6
Montana 24.3
Utah 24.3
New Jersey 24.6
Wyoming 24.6
Florida 25.2
California 25.0
Connecticut 25.6
Alaska 25.7
Rhode Island 25.7
Minnesota 25.7
Arizona 26.0
Nevada 26.2
Idaho 26.8
Delaware 26.9
Washington 26.8
New Mexico 27.1
New Hampshire 27.3
Oregon 27.3
Virginia 27.4
Maryland 27.6
Illinois 28.1
South Dakota 28.1
Maine 28.4
Nebraska 28.6*
Georgia 29.1
Pennsylvania 29.1
Texas 29.2
Missouri 29.6
North Carolina 29.6
North Dakota 29.7
Wisconsin 29.7
Kansas 29.9
Ohio 30.1
Iowa 30.4
Michigan 31.1
Tennessee 31.1
Kentucky 31.3
Indiana 31.4
South Carolina 31.6
Oklahoma 32.2
Alabama 33.0
West Virginia 33.8
Arkansas 34.5
Mississippi 34.6
Louisiana 34.7
all times D
three times D, once R
twice D, twice R
once D, three times R (*The second Congressional district of Nebraska voted for Obama in 2008, but otherwise went R)
all times R
(This time it is on Congressional districts. A hint: California has one of the best districts in which to live and one of the worst, so it isn't only the state that matters.
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY:
Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
Geographies of opportunity is an in-depth look at how residents of America’s 436 congressional districts are faring in three fundamental areas of life: health, access to knowledge, and living standards. While metrics in these three areas do not measure America’s natural bounty, the rich diversity of its population, or the vibrant web of organizations and individuals engaged in making it a better place, they capture outcomes that are essential to well-being and opportunity. This report makes the case that geography- and population-based approaches offer a way to address the multiple and often interlocking disadvantages faced by families who are falling behind. Only by building the capabilities of all residents to seize opportunities and live to their full potential will the United States thrive.
The hallmark of this work is the American Human Development Index, a supplement to Gross Domestic Product and other money metrics that tells the story of how ordinary Americans are faring. The American Human Development Index brings together official government data on health, education, and earnings and allows for well-being rankings not just of congressional districts but also of states, counties, census tracts, women and men, and racial and ethnic groups. The Index can empower communities and organizations with a tool to identify priorities and track progress over time.
ii
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY
Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
• The top ten congressional districts in terms of human development are all in the greater metropolitan areas of Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. These global cities attract skilled workers, world-class employers, diverse immigrants, and substantial investment of private and public resources.
• The bottom ten districts disproportionately comprise struggling rural and urban areas in the South. These lagging areas face interlocking challenges in terms of residential segregation by income and race, poor
health, under-resourced educational infrastructure, and limited job prospects.
• Gaps in human development within states tend to be bigger than the gaps between states. While state
population differences make comparisons difficult, among large states, California is the most unequal; among medium-sized states, Missouri has the largest gap between its highest- and lowest-scoring districts; and for small states, New Mexico contains the biggest disparities.
• In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
ii
GEOGRAPHIES OF OPPORTUNITY
| Ranking Well-Being by Congressional District
•
The top ten congressional districts in terms of human development are all in the greater metropolitan areas
of Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. These global cities attract skilled workers,
world-class employers, diverse immigrants, and substantial investment of private and public resources.
•
The bottom ten districts disproportionately comprise struggling rural and urban areas in the South. These
lagging areas face interlocking challenges in terms of residential segregation by income and race, poor
health, under-resourced educational infrastructure, and limited job prospects.
•
Gaps in human development within states tend to be bigger than the gaps between states. While state
population differences make comparisons difficult, among large states, California is the most unequal; among
medium-sized states, Missouri has the largest gap between its highest- and lowest-scoring districts; and for
small states, New Mexico contains the biggest disparities.
•
In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American
Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
•
• Life expectancy, the primary indicator of health and survival, ranges from just under 84 years in California District 19 (San Jose and part of Santa Clara County) to just under 73 years in Kentucky District 5 (rural southeastern Kentucky). Put another way, residents of the San Jose area can expect to live longer than the people of the longest-lived country, Japan (83.1 years)—while residents of southeastern Kentucky can expect to live about as long as residents of Gaza and the West Bank (73.0 years). Long-lived districts tend to be clustered in cities; districts with low life expectancies are mainly in the South.
• In the 22 congressional districts where almost all residents (98 percent or more) are native-born, American
Human Development Index scores are all below the national average.
....Comment: maybe those places are just too lacking in opportunity to attract people not from there.
Is there anything good to say about gun-related violence?
OK, venison dinner if you are into that.
(to)
Danilynn Wrote:http://connecticut.news12.com/news/r...-1.10670658?89
"A new report released today shows residents are leaving Connecticut faster than nearly any other state in the country.
Bloomberg News looked at the top 100 most populous cities in the U.S. and found that people are leaving Connecticut at a surprising pace.
Between 2013 and 2014, only two cities lost a higher percentage of their population than the New Haven-Milford metropolitan "
Did anyone say that Connecticut is an easy state in which to live? The only people who say that the fire-and-ice Dfa climate is wonderful are the sorts of people who make a living by wring copy that elevates the lowly and banal hamburger to a gourmet experience. Connecticut is infamous for traffic jams. Hartford and New Haven are dumps, and the demographics reflect a large proportion of people as high-income commuters who earn their high incomes in Greater New York City. To earn such high incomes one must already be highly-educated and have specialized skills. The cost of living, naturally, is sky-high where those NYC commuters live.
One need not have such a high level of education to do farm labor, work in retail or food service, or work in a foundry. If anything, the lower one's learning the more one can tolerate such work. Such is so where I live... where demographics look like an outlier of Appalachia. But there are no traffic jams and there is plenty of free parking, which indicates a paucity of attractions where I am for now.
Much of life is a contest between difficulties and rewards. Arnold Toynbee applies such to climate: New England never was an easy place in which to make a living. The poor, stony soils ensured that only small family farms could ever be formed there -- no gigantic slave-worked plantations as in Maryland and further south. There were no valuable minerals other than just enough iron ore for a little metalworking suitable for late-agricultural-era farm implements and housewares. The only reliable building material was wood -- and it takes more work to extract than any other building material. (Granite was a late discovery). There wasn't even much coal. People turned to fishing and eventually whaling to supplement what would have otherwise been meager diets. But for Toynbee, southern New England was the optimum of challenge. Even so, New England became a hotbed of intellectual life and entrepreneurial activity. New Englanders founded such cities as Cleveland, Chicago, Omaha, Denver, Salt Lake City, and Seattle -- and turned San Francisco from an isolated mission-and-garrison town into a world-class city in a very short time.
It's a long argument, but very convincing, in Toynbee's A Study of History.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 04-20-2016 at 05:18 PM.
Speaking of obesity,
Overweight and obese individuals are at increased risk for many diseases and health chronic conditions, including the following:
Hypertension (high blood pressure)
Osteoarthritis (a degeneration of cartilage and its underlying bone within a joint)
Dyslipidemia (for example, high total cholesterol or high levels of triglycerides)
Type 2 diabetes
Heart disease
Stroke
Gallbladder disease
Sleep apnea and respiratory problems
Some cancers (pancreas, kidney, prostate, endometrial, breast, and colon)
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/...ed-states.aspx
The states and their percentages of self-reported obesity in 2012, with color indicating how the states voted in elections from 2000 to 2012:
State % State %
Colorado 20.5
District of Columbia 21.9
Massachusetts 22.9
Hawaii 23.6
Vermont 23.7
New York 23.6
Montana 24.3
Utah 24.3
New Jersey 24.6
Wyoming 24.6
Florida 25.2
California 25.0
Connecticut 25.6
Alaska 25.7
Rhode Island 25.7
Minnesota 25.7
Arizona 26.0
Nevada 26.2
Idaho 26.8
Delaware 26.9
Washington 26.8
New Mexico 27.1
New Hampshire 27.3
Oregon 27.3
Virginia 27.4
Maryland 27.6
Illinois 28.1
South Dakota 28.1
Maine 28.4
Nebraska 28.6*
Georgia 29.1
Pennsylvania 29.1
Texas 29.2
Missouri 29.6
North Carolina 29.6
North Dakota 29.7
Wisconsin 29.7
Kansas 29.9
Ohio 30.1
Iowa 30.4
Michigan 31.1
Tennessee 31.1
Kentucky 31.3
Indiana 31.4
South Carolina 31.6
Oklahoma 32.2
Alabama 33.0
West Virginia 33.8
Arkansas 34.5
Mississippi 34.6
Louisiana 34.7
all times D
three times D, once R
twice D, twice R
once D, three times R (*The second Congressional district of Nebraska voted for Obama in 2008, but otherwise went R)
all times R
Quote:Could it be ethnic? Hawaii has a huge proportion of lactose-intolerant Asian-Americans; dairy products are fattening. Alaska -- much the same among the large proportion of First Peoples.
Black vs. white? Mississippi is near the bottom in most social measures (including public health)... but DC is even 'blacker' than Mississippi, and it doesn't have quite the problem with obesity.
Vermont (one of the least-obese states) and West Virginia (one of the most-obese states) are mountainous states with nearly lily-white populations... must be the sorts of white people who live in both states.
Quote:Last edited by pbrower2a; 08-16-2015 at 08:58 PM.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.