High rates of incarceration indicate either (if not a combination)
1. Longer sentencing (for example, the penalty for armed robbery in Michigan is the same as for attempted murder -- 25 years to life... defensible because any robbery with a gun is a potential murder)
2. Tougher parole, so offenders do not get off from a burglary conviction with a ten-year sentence after six months (two of the murderers in the infamous dragging death in Texas were rushed 'graduates' of the Texas penal system).
3. More likelihood of conviction and sentencing for offenses (thus in some states a conviction for marijuana use can put one in prison for a year and in others it will be a mere 'civil infraction')
and the big one:
4. MORE CRIME -- a reflection of incompetence in public services including law enforcement and public education, and mass distress in economic life.
I had my favorite metric for showing disparities between the states in economic distress: statewide credit scores:
Credit scores are a relevant metric for determining the quality of life. Unlike GDP per capita they can make their own adjustments for the cost of living and for the degree of economic equality in a State.
It's been done.
T-1 Hawaii, Minnesota 667
3 Wisconsin 663
4 District of Columbia 660
5 Massachusetts 659
6 New Jersey 658
7 New York 657
T-8 California, Vermont 656
10 Washington
T-11 Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut 652
14 Utah 650
15 Oregon 648
T-16 Illinois, North Dakota 647
T-18 Iowa, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Virginia 646
T-22 Montana, Rhode Island 645
24 South Dakota 644
25 Idaho 643
26 Maryland 642
T-27 Arizona, Kansas, Maine, Pennsylvania 641
T-31 New Mexico, Wyoming 637
T-33 Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio 636
37 Delaware 635
38 North Carolina 634
39 Georgia 633
T-40 Indiana, Missouri 632
42 Texas 631
43 Tennessee 629
44 Oklahoma 628
45 Kentucky 627
46 West Virginia 626
47 Arkansas 623
T- 48 Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina 622
51 Mississippi 613
Here, Connecticut drops significantly and Minnesota goes to the top.
Does anyone see a correlation between credit scores and statewide HDI? Political results
Obama twice
Obama once
Obama never
It's certainly not race. DC has a high average credit score and Mississippi has the worst. DC has a larger percentage of blacks than does Mississippi. Maryland and Delaware do worse in credit scores than their statewide HDI. California has a huge Hispanic population in proportion to its population and a good statewide credit score -- but so does Arizona, which is just below the median.
It's not income, either. Louisiana does well in income (17th in GDP per capita) but is tied for second-worst for statewide credit scores. Vermont is tied for eighth in statewide credit scores. (In fact, income is rarely part of the assessment of a credit score unless for a giant purchase such as a house or car or for a gigantic credit line). A worker in a sweatshop or a small-town clergyman might have a low income but good credit, and a store owner with a high income might have very poor credit.
States being stressed economically due to declines in key industries (Michigan, Nevada, Ohio) do badly.
The connection between statewide credit scores to HDI might reflect the competence of State and local governments to meet basic human needs. The Federal government is effectively the same everywhere. I suspect that well-educated people have better habits that allow them more economic resilience in hard times, to have some savings socked away, to be more mobile, to be less sentimental, and to be more decisive in their actions so that they can go from Michigan to Minnesota. A good welfare system might ensure that people get help when they need it most and keep people from facing shut-offs of utilities; keep people from having to choose between food, rent, and medical bills; take away the need to write hot checks -- all of which put people in trouble with their credit scores. Mass poverty (often related to poor educational achievement) is the norm in several states with low statewide credit scores.
Of course such bad habits as smoking and pathological drinking have their contributions to poor health and (due to expense) economic distress.
...New Orleans might be fun, but it is the wrong city to which to go to improve your economic prospects. Duluth might be dull (OK, I have never been there... and I am playing on the name of the city more than upon anything else), but it is likely a better place for a better life even if that better life comes with occasional -40F (coincidentally also -40C) temperatures in the winter. Being paid well enough to afford well-insulated housing, a serviceable (if dowdy) winter wardrobe, and adequate fuel for the winter mean more than do living in a climate warm enough in which one does not need those.
1. Longer sentencing (for example, the penalty for armed robbery in Michigan is the same as for attempted murder -- 25 years to life... defensible because any robbery with a gun is a potential murder)
2. Tougher parole, so offenders do not get off from a burglary conviction with a ten-year sentence after six months (two of the murderers in the infamous dragging death in Texas were rushed 'graduates' of the Texas penal system).
3. More likelihood of conviction and sentencing for offenses (thus in some states a conviction for marijuana use can put one in prison for a year and in others it will be a mere 'civil infraction')
and the big one:
4. MORE CRIME -- a reflection of incompetence in public services including law enforcement and public education, and mass distress in economic life.
I had my favorite metric for showing disparities between the states in economic distress: statewide credit scores:
Credit scores are a relevant metric for determining the quality of life. Unlike GDP per capita they can make their own adjustments for the cost of living and for the degree of economic equality in a State.
It's been done.
T-1 Hawaii, Minnesota 667
3 Wisconsin 663
4 District of Columbia 660
5 Massachusetts 659
6 New Jersey 658
7 New York 657
T-8 California, Vermont 656
10 Washington
T-11 Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut 652
14 Utah 650
15 Oregon 648
T-16 Illinois, North Dakota 647
T-18 Iowa, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Virginia 646
T-22 Montana, Rhode Island 645
24 South Dakota 644
25 Idaho 643
26 Maryland 642
T-27 Arizona, Kansas, Maine, Pennsylvania 641
T-31 New Mexico, Wyoming 637
T-33 Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio 636
37 Delaware 635
38 North Carolina 634
39 Georgia 633
T-40 Indiana, Missouri 632
42 Texas 631
43 Tennessee 629
44 Oklahoma 628
45 Kentucky 627
46 West Virginia 626
47 Arkansas 623
T- 48 Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina 622
51 Mississippi 613
Here, Connecticut drops significantly and Minnesota goes to the top.
Does anyone see a correlation between credit scores and statewide HDI? Political results
Obama twice
Obama once
Obama never
It's certainly not race. DC has a high average credit score and Mississippi has the worst. DC has a larger percentage of blacks than does Mississippi. Maryland and Delaware do worse in credit scores than their statewide HDI. California has a huge Hispanic population in proportion to its population and a good statewide credit score -- but so does Arizona, which is just below the median.
It's not income, either. Louisiana does well in income (17th in GDP per capita) but is tied for second-worst for statewide credit scores. Vermont is tied for eighth in statewide credit scores. (In fact, income is rarely part of the assessment of a credit score unless for a giant purchase such as a house or car or for a gigantic credit line). A worker in a sweatshop or a small-town clergyman might have a low income but good credit, and a store owner with a high income might have very poor credit.
States being stressed economically due to declines in key industries (Michigan, Nevada, Ohio) do badly.
The connection between statewide credit scores to HDI might reflect the competence of State and local governments to meet basic human needs. The Federal government is effectively the same everywhere. I suspect that well-educated people have better habits that allow them more economic resilience in hard times, to have some savings socked away, to be more mobile, to be less sentimental, and to be more decisive in their actions so that they can go from Michigan to Minnesota. A good welfare system might ensure that people get help when they need it most and keep people from facing shut-offs of utilities; keep people from having to choose between food, rent, and medical bills; take away the need to write hot checks -- all of which put people in trouble with their credit scores. Mass poverty (often related to poor educational achievement) is the norm in several states with low statewide credit scores.
Of course such bad habits as smoking and pathological drinking have their contributions to poor health and (due to expense) economic distress.
...New Orleans might be fun, but it is the wrong city to which to go to improve your economic prospects. Duluth might be dull (OK, I have never been there... and I am playing on the name of the city more than upon anything else), but it is likely a better place for a better life even if that better life comes with occasional -40F (coincidentally also -40C) temperatures in the winter. Being paid well enough to afford well-insulated housing, a serviceable (if dowdy) winter wardrobe, and adequate fuel for the winter mean more than do living in a climate warm enough in which one does not need those.
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.