Is Connecticut the Best State to Live In?

[Odin]

1. Hawaii (100%)
2. Massachusetts (98%)
3. Vermont (91%)
4. Washington (91%)
5. Oregon (88%)
6. Connecticut (87%)
7. Maryland (87%)
8. Minnesota (85%)
9. Wisconsin (84%)
10. New Jersey (83%)
11. California (77%)
12. Virginia (76%)
13. Rhode Island (75%)
14. District of Columbia (74%)
15. New York (73%)
16. New Hampshire (73%)
17. North Dakota (72%)
18. Illinois (69%)
19. Maine (69%)
20. Pennsylvania (67%)
21. Michigan (64%)
22. Ohio (64%)
23. Nebraska (64%)
24. Montana (60%]
25. Delaware (58%)
26. Iowa (57%)
27. Colorado (56%)
28. Wyoming (56%)
29. Florida (55%)
30. South Dakota (55%)
31. Arizona (54%)
32. Texas (54%)
33. Utah (53%)
34. Georgia (51%)
35. Indiana (51%)
36. New Mexico (50%)
37. Louisiana (48%)
38. Kansas (46%)
39. Idaho (46%)
40. North Carolina (46%)
41. Kentucky (45%)
42. Nevada (41%)
43. Alabama (39%)
44. South Carolina (39%)
45. Oklahoma (38%)
46. West Virginia (38%)
47. Alaska (37%)
48. Mississippi (37%)
49. Tennessee (36%)
50. Missouri (32%)
51. Arkansas (29%)

[Eric the Green]

(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.

[Eric the Green]

One thing is certainly true; tests like this can certainly be fun, but there's no way I (or others?) could make an actual decision based on one. There are many factors that aren't reducible to numbers and to one set of test questions. Hawaii? Might be nice, but might feel too isolated to me. No, never been there. I've been to Oklahoma because my grandparents lived there. It ranked above #42, but still near the bottom of my list.

[Odin]

There is also a test for individual metro areas and my top 12 are:

New York City
Washington DC
Philadelphia
Boston
Minneapolis
San Francisco
Portland, OR
Seattle
Providence, RI
Los Angeles
Chicago
San Diego

[TnT]

(05-20-2016, 05:13 PM)Odin Wrote: There is also a test for individual metro areas and my top 12 are:

New York City
Washington DC
Philadelphia
Boston
Minneapolis
San Francisco
Portland, OR
Seattle
Providence, RI
Los Angeles
Chicago
San Diego

How in god's name can San Diego NOT be above any of the east coast cities or Chicago?

[pbrower2a]

(05-20-2016, 05:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(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.

Being from a state with 'bad' statistics is not a ground for ridicule or shame.  Danilynn has shown that very ably. Furthermore there are good areas and bad areas in most states. Silicon Valley is nice. The southern San Joaquin Valley is dreadful. Both are in California.

[Ragnarök_62]

(05-20-2016, 07:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:pid=1067 Wrote: As I recall I put much value on high levels of educational achievement (better conversation) and a low rate of violent crime (I can see no positive in being in danger, or having loved ones in danger, of violent crime). Those two dovetail well. Climate? I have found that I do better in the absence of a high heat index; I might cope with a dry heat by drinking huge amounts of water, but there is nothing that one can do about high heat and humidity except to retreat to air conditioning.

I also picked low crime as a high priority. I got there by selecting for desolation. I suppose that's something that grows on you.
Small town living in Oklahoma and Los Alamos NM are as close to that as one gets. The heat index here isn't so bad since when the temperature exceeds 100, the winds are from the sourthwest which brings a desert airmass in. Taxes?  Neutral since excess taxes can drive out high income folks.  See Illinois for that one.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2...re-Fleeing

Quote:I had little concern for taxes (you generally get what you pay for), so bad schools are a poor compensation for low property, sales, or income taxes.

Sure, overly low taxes deprive needed services, but if they get too high a death spiral of folks leaving and eroding the tax base can happen.

Quote:Massachusetts and Washington are at the top. So do I go to Boston or Seattle?  I would probably find Connecticut and Massachusetts similar except that Massachusetts has Boston (a delight!) and Connecticut has Hartford and New Haven (dumps). Hawaii? Maybe I fit some Asian-American cultural pattern very well, and didn't know it. Oregon is likely very similar to Washington.

Here's a good tie breaker:  Choose the locale with the best credit rating.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and...tings-2014

Quote:Pennsylvania is a surprise. Southeastern Pennsylvania is hot and humid in the summer.  But winters are mild in contrast to those of the Midwest.  Colorado... Denver or Boulder, I guess. Virginia? Must be becoming more like New England and less like the South. Vermont? Sure, it's cold and rural, and not very prosperous. But it seems to do much well.  #10 is California. Maybe I did leave my heart in San Francisco... but much of California is awful, especially the Central Valley.

Coastal California should be much better after the real estate bubble pops. Who wants to compete with a bunch of hot Chinese money jacking up the prices of out and out shacks?

Dr. Housing Bubble Wrote:1644 Great Hwy  San Francisco, CA 94122
4 beds, 2 baths 1,832 square feet built in 1907
Set aside that this home was built 108 years ago.  The home was listed in February for $799,000.  Of course the listing warned that it would take a lot of work and that it was not for the “novice” aspiring flipper or investor.  Take a look at some other shots of the home:

Great Hwy?  I wonder if there's a freeway out back?

...OK. The bottom.

Quote:The bottom nine states are Mountain or Deep South. Low educational achievement, high crime rates, and high summer heat and humidity make them poor matches for me.

Small towns usually have lower crime rates. Now as far as the Deep South, Houston's sauna weather was lousy.

Quote: #42 is Kansas. Nasty politics? High summer heat and humidity?

It gets hot in Kansas, but the humidity isn't anything like Houston.

Quote: New Mexico would be OK except for its poverty,

That would be location. Los Alamos is pretty well to do with the lab. Folks are of course smart there.  Albuquerque should be OK for a lower elevation area with Sandia labs.

Quote:Nevada? Any place that relies heavily upon gambling for economic survival must have too little to offer.

I'd be more concerned about Las Vegas's long term water supply, and the place is just too large. The idea of placing a huge city in the middle of the desert is weird. Small towns in the Sierra Nevadas may work, depending on real estate prices.

[Ragnarök_62]

(05-20-2016, 12:24 PM)Bronco80 Wrote:

Quote:

rags Wrote:Idaho (56%)

 dunno??? I think there's snow there and not too many ppl. Property taxes?

Quote:Snow does happen, but it's getting rarer thanks to global warming.  It's certainly nowhere near as bad as New England or the Great Lakes area on a really stormy week.  Most cities are pretty isolated, though: it's about six hours each way to Seattle, Portland, Spokane, SLC, and Reno (probably longer for Reno).  I'm not aware of property taxes being really bad here.

Yup.

Wallethub Wrote:1 Alaska 5.69%

2 Delaware 6.02%

3 Montana 6.92%

4 Wyoming 7.45%
5 Nevada 7.72%


6 Tennessee 7.95%

7 Idaho 8.48%

8 California 8.80%

9 South Carolina 8.80%

10 Florida 9.03%

OK, it still doesn't make sense. Idaho has a lower effective peon tax rate than Oklahoma.  So.. it would just take finding a moderate sized town (10,000-25,000) with some altitude and half way decent real estate prices.

[pbrower2a]

[Eric the Green]

I always liked Seattle ever since 1962.

1. Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue WA (100%)
2. Portland, Vancouver, Hillsboro OR, WA (98%)
3. San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward CA (92%)
4. Boston, Cambridge, Newton MA, NH (89%)
5. New York, Newark, Jersey City NY, NJ, PA (80%)
6. San Diego, Carlsbad CA (80%)
7. Los Angeles, Long Beach, Anaheim CA (77%)
8. Boulder CO (75%)
9. San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara CA (75%)
10. Fort Collins CO (75%)
11. Denver, Aurora, Lakewood CO (72%)
12. Santa Rosa CA (71%)
13. Santa Maria, Santa Barbara CA (68%)
14. Urban Honolulu HI (66%)
15. Eugene OR (64%)
16. Worcester MA, CT (64%)
17. Bellingham WA (64%)
18. Colorado Springs CO (64%)
19. Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington MN, WI (63%)
20. Sacramento-Roseville-Arden, Arcade CA (63%)
21. Washington, Arlington, Alexandria DC, VA, MD, WV (62%)
22. Santa Cruz, Watsonville CA (61%)
23. Salt Lake City UT (60%)
24. Austin, Round Rock TX (60%)
25. Providence, Warwick RI, MA (60%)
26. Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, Ventura CA (59%)
27. Barnstable Town MA (59%)
28. Medford, Ashland OR (58%)
29. Olympia, Tumwater WA (58%)
30. Madison WI (58%)

[pbrower2a]

I'm going to figure that the worst cities are those with little desirability by any standard -- Flint MI, Dayton OH, Youngstown OH, Gary IN, Akron OH...

[Bronco80]

Without answering question #24, it gave me Phoenix (blah) as #1, and Boise was at #46.  Not putting a lot of stock into that quiz.

[pbrower2a]

I'm going to start by showing my worst matches:

306. Jackson TN (7%)
307. Jonesboro AR (7%)
308. Lawton OK (7%)
309. Lebanon PA (7%)
310. Mansfield OH (7%)
311. Morristown TN (7%)
312. New Bern NC (7%)
313. Springfield OH (7%)
314. Staunton, Waynesboro VA (7%)
315. Terre Haute IN (7%)
316. Texarkana TX, AR (7%)
317. Williamsport PA (7%)
318. Youngstown, Warren, Boardman OH, PA (7%)
319. Anniston, Oxford, Jacksonville AL (5%)
320. Cleveland TN (5%)
321. Daphne, Fairhope, Foley AL (5%)
322. Dothan AL (5%)
323. Vineland, Bridgeton NJ (5%)
324. Weirton, Steubenville WV, OH (5%)
325. Hilton Head Island, Bluffton, Beaufort SC (3%)
326. Beckley WV (1%)
327. Goldsboro NC (1%)
328. Hammond LA (1%)
329. Rocky Mount NC (1%)
330. Jacksonville NC (0%)

Draw your own conclusions.

Best 50?

1. Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington MN, WI (100%)
2. Portland, Vancouver, Hillsboro OR, WA (100%)
3. Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue WA (92%)
4. San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward CA (87%)
5. Boulder CO (83%)
6. Boston, Cambridge, Newton MA, NH (82%)
7. Santa Rosa CA (82%)
8. Fort Collins CO (80%)
9. San Diego, Carlsbad CA (80%)
10. Bellingham WA (78%)
11. Ann Arbor MI (76%)
12. Los Angeles, Long Beach, Anaheim CA (76%)
13. Madison WI (76%)
14. New York, Newark, Jersey City NY, NJ, PA (76%)
15. Salt Lake City UT (76%)
16. San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara CA (76%)
17. Santa Maria, Santa Barbara CA (76%)
18. Denver, Aurora, Lakewood CO (75%)
19. Olympia, Tumwater WA (75%)
20. Colorado Springs CO (73%)
21. Providence, Warwick RI, MA (73%)
22. Sacramento-Roseville-Arden, Arcade CA (73%)
23. Albuquerque NM (71%)
24. Santa Cruz, Watsonville CA (71%)
25. Worcester MA, CT (71%)
26. Eugene OR (69%)
27. Fargo ND, MN (69%)
28. Reno NV (69%)
29. Duluth MN, WI (67%)
30. Austin, Round Rock TX (66%)
31. Urban Honolulu HI (66%)
32. Chicago, Naperville, Elgin IL, IN, WI (64%)
33. La Crosse, Onalaska WI, MN (64%)
34. Provo, Orem UT (64%)
35. Barnstable Town MA (62%)
36. Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, Ventura CA (62%)
37. Kennewick, Richland WA (60%)
38. Medford, Ashland OR (60%)
39. Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale AZ (60%)
40. Rochester MN (60%)
41. San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande CA (60%)
42. Bend, Redmond OR (58%)
43. Sioux Falls SD (58%)
44. Washington, Arlington, Alexandria DC, VA, MD, WV (58%)
45. Bremerton, Silverdale WA (57%)
46. Grand Rapids, Wyoming MI (57%)
47. Greeley CO (57%)
48. Milwaukee, Waukesha, West Allis WI (57%)
49. Atlanta, Sandy Springs, Roswell GA (55%)
50. Bridgeport, Stamford, Norwalk CT (55%)

[pbrower2a]

Does anyone question that a high crime rate reflects such pathologies as under-education, poor economic opportunities, and general poverty? The only other imaginable correlation could be climate, with higher temperatures fostering more crime... it could not be that simple. Ethnic disparities? Those correlate again to poor social conditions.

Harsher courts and judges? The states in the darkest shades have some of the most active death rows in America... but if the death penalty serves as a deterrent to violent crime, then the connection must either be weak or even contrary to any reduction in violent crime.

Most criminals do their depredations locally. I doubt that Louisiana has a problem with out-of-state crooks coming to Louisiana for New Orleans jazz and Cajun cuisine, and then to commit some crime that results in a prison term at An-Gulag State Penitentiary.

It's unlikely to cconnect to

[Eric the Green]

Interesting map as usual. Let's make this more explicit for those like Copperfield who say there's no difference between red and blue states:

Lightest blue color: (3 blue)
ME blue
MN blue
HI blue

Next lightest: (at least 6 blue, 1 red, 2 purple)
IA purple/blue
WA blue
ND red
NY blue
NJ blue
MA blue
RI blue
VT blue
NH purple/blue
DC? blue

middle light blue (7 blue, 5 red, 3 purple)
CA blue
OR blue
MT red
UT red
CO purple
NE red
KS red
WI blue
IL blue
MI blue
OH purple
WV red
MD blue
CT blue
NC purple/red

Dark blue color: (9 red, 2 blue, 4 purple)
AK red
NV purple
ID red
WY red
NM purple/blue
SD red
MO red
IN red
KY red
TN red
SC red
FL purple
VA purple
DE blue
PA blue

light purple color (3 red)
AZ red
TX red
AR red

dark purple color (4 red)
MS red
AL red
GA red
OK red

black (1 red)
LA red

[pbrower2a]

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.

[pbrower2a]

Some new maps. Some of the images do not reflect so much good or bad as culture. For example, "Baptists" are in large numbers almost to the Missouri-Iowa state line, which may indicate why Obama won Iowa decisively in 2012 and lost Missouri decisively in 2012.  Some of the others relate statistics to pathologies if they are not pathologies themselves:



...Poverty, low education, diabetes, teen pregnancy, and deaths from child mistreatment seem to go together.

It is hard enough to get a good job with an excellent education -- let alone a substandard education. Diabetes is mostly a consequence of bad eating habits also connected to poverty, and it is easy to see why those with more education are more likely to go onto a good diet. Teen pregnancy often ends formal education, but it would seem that kids with good educations in other respects are more likely to control their sex drives or at least use protection. (I remember one news story in which young women discussed why they got pregnancies that led to abortion clinics; most involved ignorance about sex).

Slavery? All slave states except Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia seem to have statistically poor conditions. .

[Eric the Green]

America's healthiest and least healthy states
By Elizabeth Cohen, Senior Medical Correspondent
http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/12/health/201...index.html
cnn.com/2017/12/12/health/2017-health-disparities-report/index.html



lightest color: top 10 healthiest states. darkest color = lowest 10; etc. except on this map the 31-40 ranked states are in lighter color than the 21-30 ranked states. See also the lists and maps at https://assets.americashealthrankings.or...report.pdf

(CNN)Despite years of efforts to even out health disparities across the United States, some states are dramatically healthier than others, according to a new report.

Massachusetts, Hawaii, Vermont, Utah and Connecticut rank as the five healthiest states, while West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi rank the least healthy in America's Health Rankings, according to the report by the United Health Foundation.

The rankings take into account a variety of health factors, such as rates of infectious diseases, obesity, physical inactivity, smoking and infant mortality, as well as air pollution levels and the availability of health care providers.

This is the first time Massachusetts has been named the healthiest state, ending Hawaii's five-year reign.

The Bay State won the honor in part due to having the lowest percentage of uninsured residents at just 2.7% of the population, plus a low prevalence of obesity and a high number of mental health providers.

Mississippi and Louisiana, ranked 49th and 50th, have major health challenges, according to the report, including a high prevalence of smoking, obesity and children in poverty.

"We don't have a system with everybody in," said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, which was not involved in the new report. "We're failing in our fundamental task to be a healthier nation."

The report, America's Health Rankings, has been analyzing state health standings for 28 years. This latest report shows that the nation's health overall is getting worse.

The nation's premature death rate -- the number of years of potential life lost before age 75 -- increased 3% since 2015. That increase is driven in part by drug deaths, which increased 7% during that time, and cardiovascular deaths, which went up 2%. That leaves the United States ranking 27th in terms of life expectancy in a comparison of 35 countries, according to the report.

Benjamin said it's frustrating to see these numbers, despite the fact that the US spends significantly more on health care than other nations, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

"We're spending more on health care and we die sooner," he said. "We need to do a time out and figure out how to do this better."

Dr. Tom Frieden, former director of the US Centers for Disease Control, said the trends in higher death rates from cardiovascular disease and drug use can be reversed if four principles are followed.

The first is to follow the "ABCs" suggested by the federal Million Hearts program, which calls for aspirin when appropriate, blood pressure control, cholesterol management and smoking cessation.

The second is to reduce smoking nationwide through measures such as increased tobacco taxes and making all workplaces smoke-free.

The third is for the federal government to take 10 steps to reduce the opioid epidemic, including more cautious prescribing of drugs by doctors.

The fourth step is to decrease obesity by measures such as taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages.

"Increases in cardiovascular deaths and drug overdoses can be reversed, but it will take concerted action by government, health systems, communities and individuals," Frieden, now president and CEO of the group Resolve to Save Lives, wrote in an email.

https://assets.americashealthrankings.or...report.pdf

[pbrower2a]

National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 70, No. 1, March 11, 2021 3
Table A. Life expectancy at birth, rank, and standard error, by sex: Each state, the District of Columbia, and United States, 2018


Area Rank Total Standard error Rank Male Standard error Rank Female Standard error
Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 81.0 0.118 4 78.0 0.172 1 84.0 0.156
California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 80.8 0.021 1 78.4 0.031 2 83.1 0.028
New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 80.5 0.030 3 78.1 0.044 4 82.8 0.039
Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 80.5 0.056 2 78.4 0.082 5 82.6 0.074
Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 80.4 0.072 5 77.9 0.107 3 82.9 0.094
Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . 6 80.1 0.051 9 77.7 0.075 6 82.5 0.067
Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 80.0 0.049 6 77.9 0.071 10 82.1 0.065
Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 80.0 0.058 8 77.7 0.085 7 82.3 0.076
New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 79.8 0.046 11 77.3 0.067 8 82.3 0.059
Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . 10 79.8 0.131 12 77.2 0.192 9 82.2 0.173
Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 79.7 0.065 10 77.5 0.096 11 81.9 0.086
Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 79.6 0.079 7 77.7 0.117 18 81.5 0.105
Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 79.3 0.183 13 77.0 0.269 12 81.7 0.245
North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . 14 79.3 0.161 14 77.0 0.224 13 81.7 0.226
Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 79.3 0.057 15 76.9 0.084 14 81.6 0.076
Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 79.2 0.077 18 76.8 0.111 15 81.6 0.103
New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . 17 79.1 0.117 19 76.7 0.174 17 81.5 0.154
Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 79.1 0.099 16 76.8 0.142 21 81.4 0.133
Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 79.0 0.105 17 76.8 0.153 22 81.3 0.139
Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 79.0 0.047 20 76.6 0.069 23 81.3 0.063
South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . 21 78.9 0.154 22 76.5 0.220 20 81.4 0.209
Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 78.9 0.032 24 76.2 0.047 16 81.6 0.042
Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 78.8 0.040 23 76.2 0.058 24 81.3 0.052

United States . . . . . . . . . . . … 78.7 … … 76.2 … … 81.2 …

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 78.7 0.138 21 76.5 0.197 27 81.1 0.188
Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 78.7 0.055 28 76.0 0.080 19 81.5 0.071
Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 78.6 0.121 29 75.9 0.179 25 81.2 0.157
Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 78.5 0.058 30 75.8 0.087 26 81.1 0.075
Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 78.4 0.026 26 76.0 0.038 28 80.8 0.035
Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . 29 78.1 0.040 32 75.5 0.059 29 80.8 0.053
Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 78.1 0.185 25 76.1 0.267 35 80.3 0.252
Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 78.0 0.083 31 75.7 0.120 34 80.3 0.112
Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 78.0 0.168 27 76.0 0.240 36 80.2 0.232
Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 77.9 0.081 33 75.4 0.119 32 80.5 0.106
Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 77.8 0.150 36 74.8 0.226 30 80.6 0.195
Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 77.7 0.046 34 75.4 0.066 38 80.1 0.061
District of Columbia . . . . . . 36 77.7 0.184 38 74.6 0.272 31 80.5 0.245
North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . 37 77.6 0.045 35 74.9 0.066 37 80.2 0.058
Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 77.2 0.044 37 74.7 0.064 39 79.7 0.059
New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 77.2 0.106 41 74.2 0.157 33 80.4 0.138
Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 76.8 0.056 39 74.4 0.081 42 79.3 0.075
Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 76.8 0.043 40 74.2 0.062 40 79.3 0.057
Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 76.6 0.059 42 73.9 0.087 43 79.3 0.079
South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . 43 76.5 0.066 43 73.7 0.098 41 79.3 0.087
Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 75.6 0.086 45 73.0 0.124 45 78.2 0.116
Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 75.6 0.073 44 73.1 0.106 46 78.2 0.098
Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 75.6 0.069 47 72.7 0.101 44 78.5 0.091
Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 75.5 0.057 46 73.0 0.082 47 78.1 0.075
Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 75.3 0.068 48 72.6 0.099 49 77.9 0.091
Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 75.1 0.067 49 72.1 0.099 48 78.0 0.089
Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 74.6 0.088 50 71.7 0.126 50 77.5 0.119
West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . 51 74.4 0.114 51 71.7 0.164 51 77.3 0.152
… Category not applicable.
NOTE: Life expectancies shown in this table are rounded, but rankings are based on unrounded life expectancies.
SOURCE: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System, Mortality


I introduced this material in Talk Elections related to Leip's Atlas of Elections, and the color scheme fits that site better than the now-conventional Red for Republicans and Blue for Democrats. Dark shades are for margins of 10%, medium shades for margins of 5 to 10%, and pale shades are for margins under 5%. Leip has a very long view of American elections and sticks with the convention of FDR's time.  

Biden won states in shades of red, Trump won those in shades of blue. 

States toward the bottom are high in poverty, obesity, and smoking, and are generally toward the bottom in educational attainment. Hey! West Virginia now does worse than Mississippi. If you wonder why Texas does so much better than Oklahoma... Texans on the whole are better educated and smoke less.

Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio have actually had good responses to COVID-19.

[Anthony '58]

Doesn't North Dakota have the lowest housing costs, and the lowest crime rate?