It’s a place for people who don’t require much from the world. They are happier with less. Doesn’t make them less, it is just a difference. I come from there. I wouldn’t go back for all the money in the world. Who wants to live longer in Iowa?

Anonymous wrote:I agree, those are the best places to raise families. Especially if you can be a small town UMC family - doctor, lawyer, banker, insurance agent, small business owner, etc.

... for white people.

I agree, those are the best places to raise families. Especially if you can be a small town UMC family - doctor, lawyer, banker, insurance agent, small business owner, etc.

Anonymous wrote:Should rename the article 'Best places in America for white people'.

More like white people who like the cold and don’t like mountains.

The best places in the US have the ocean nearby.

Should rename the article 'Best places in America for white people'.

Anonymous wrote:The market strongly disagrees with this analysis. There is a reason it costs a lot more to buy a house in, say New Jersey, than it costs in North Dakota.

Not sure you have a grasp on what "the market" actually involves. Or what this research concluded. Hint: average home sale price was not a factor.

Anonymous wrote:The market strongly disagrees with this analysis. There is a reason it costs a lot more to buy a house in, say New Jersey, than it costs in North Dakota.

I think for professionals who want high paying jobs, big metro areas like NJ, DC, NY, SF.. are where it's at. If you are in the service sector, your chance of having more customers is greater in the more densely populated areas.

Also, those big metro areas have more jobs for people with limited skills.

Unfortunately, because those places have so many high paying jobs, the col goes up, and that creates more income inequality.

The states with most educated people are not in the midwest, except for IL.

The market strongly disagrees with this analysis. There is a reason it costs a lot more to buy a house in, say New Jersey, than it costs in North Dakota.

Anonymous wrote:These are some of the whitest places in the whole country, so of course there are fewer people being held back unfairly.

This degree of racial essentialism is just sad. Racial discourse in this country has truly broken you. Note that the study isn't listing the whitest states (ME, VT, WV, NH, MT, etc), but states which inhabit a common geographic region and possess similar economic and cultural attributes. But since these states have a white majority, everything which makes those states uniquely successful is discarded in favor of race. And again, the Upper Midwest is not unique in terms of demographics. That almost sounds like an argument a white supremacist would make—the more whites there are the better things will be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are some of the whitest places in the whole country, so of course there are fewer people being held back unfairly.

The authors debunked your assertion

WV is super white also but isn’t on the list

They didn't debunk that all.

West Virginia is an economically dead area with no opportunity for anyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are some of the whitest places in the whole country, so of course there are fewer people being held back unfairly.

The authors debunked your assertion

WV is super white also but isn’t on the list

You're saying that single factor analysis that uses race as the only relevant variable might be flawed?

Anonymous wrote:These are some of the whitest places in the whole country, so of course there are fewer people being held back unfairly.

The authors debunked your assertion

WV is super white also but isn’t on the list

These are some of the whitest places in the whole country, so of course there are fewer people being held back unfairly.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/08/poverty-income-index-deep-disadvantage/674878/

Two Princeton authors and one from UM seek to answer this.

- Income is one vital indicator of well-being, but it is not the only one: Things like health outcomes and social mobility matter too. That’s why we should shift our focus from poverty to disadvantage. Disadvantage is a more useful term than poverty because we aren’t just talking about income—we’re trying to capture the complexity of a person’s life chances being hindered by multiple circumstances. Disadvantage is more accurate because it implies an injustice. People are being held back—unfairly.

- the places identified as those of greatest advantage—was also vital to our research. Once again, we were surprised by where the index took us. It was not Manhattan or tech-rich Seattle. Instead, the list pointed us to the upper Midwest: Minnesota, the Dakotas, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa. Overall, poverty rates in these places are very low, babies are born healthy, people live to a ripe old age, and a low-income child usually has a similar chance of making it into the middle class as any other kid.

- The lesson is that people seem to thrive—not always in high salaries but in health and life chances—when inequality is low; when landownership is widespread; when social connection is high; and when corruption and violence are rare. The social leveling that is characteristic of communities in the upper Midwest is more than just a quaint cultural feature. It is the foundation of a community’s well-being. Until these regions’ virtues are shared nationwide, poverty and disadvantage will continue to haunt America.