• Ohthereyouare@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I personally agree with this list. But, we have to be pragmatic here. This is what CNBC says they did:

      “The study measures quality of life issues including crime, health care, childcare and health care, as well as inclusive policies on discrimination and reproductive rights.”

      See, the last two skew this study. People in these shit hole states (not all, but at least enough of the voting public) don’t want inclusive policies or reproductive rights. So, to them, this metric is backwards. They would argue that living in California or New York was way more terrible because of the brown people and gays.

      This isn’t exactly a scientific study. It’s taking objective data to reach a subjective conclusion. Neat headline though.

      • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean… if you want to move to one of these states as potentially any type of person (ie. perhaps not white and straight) then the inclusive policies are not an optional feature. If you’re a woman, having the government meddle in your health decisions can actually be life threatening.

        For white, straight folks, and especially males, it’s easy to think these other two factors just subjectively improve life, but that’s because they already have a baseline level of respect and power in society.

        Based on your take, I’d guess you’re straight, white and male.

        • OwenEverbinde@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Granted, I’m also straight, white, and male… But there are a hell of a lot of women who support abortion bans AND adore Mr “Grab 'em by the Pussy!”

          I know one who doesn’t believe God would allow a dangerous, nonviable pregnancy to take hold in (or in the case of ectopic pregnancies, outside of) a woman’s uterus. She just doesn’t believe something as sacred as a uterus can have that kind of flaw built into it.

          And even if you could convince her dangerous pregnancies were real, I think @Ohthereyouare@lem.ee was saying that Republican women would not agree that their ability to survive an ectopic pregnancy is good or worth it if it also helps the “sluts” they despise to have more “convenience abortions.”

          Surviving might seem pretty good to you and I, but that doesn’t make that ability objectively desirable to the people voting against their own interests. And they would be offended if their access to healthcare was deemed “better” in a quality-of-life metric than access to a set of theocratic restrictions.

          They would tell you, “well I’m happier. Liberals think they can speak for me just because I’m a woman and my opinion doesn’t matter! But if they asked me, I’d tell them I would prefer to live in a place where the sanctity of life was valued! They’d have to censor me and edit me out of their videos because I wouldn’t support their narrative!”

          • TechyDad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know one who doesn’t believe God would allow a dangerous, nonviable pregnancy to take hold in (or in the case of ectopic pregnancies, outside of) a woman’s uterus. She just doesn’t believe something as sacred as a uterus can have that kind of flaw built into it.

            But I guarantee that the second that she (or any other woman with similar views) had a pregnancy that threatened their life, they’d opt for an abortion ASAP. They’ll rationalize that their abortion was justified and blessed by God, but all those other abortions are just “liberal sluts who want to kill babies” or something.

        • Professorozone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup, I am, but if it’s fair to say that the positive things about Florida don’t count because those positive things exist in other states then it seems to me that it’s fair to say that prejudice against minorities should count against those other states too. Florida does not have exclusive rights to mistreatment of minorities. In fact I’m pretty sure that exists in all 50 states.

          My only point, was addressing the thought that a poster said he felt sorry for people living in those states (Florida in this case) and all I was saying was it wasn’t like we all just get up every morning and fail to function because we are all so overwhelmed by how bad it is where we live. We have running water in Florida.

        • Ohthereyouare@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yep. It is. That’s sorta the point though. “Worst” is subjective. Personally? I’d never move to one of those 10 places. But, a lot of them don’t think that the lack of reproductive rights is a good thing, not a bad thing.

          I don’t think that… But, a lot of folks in America do.

            • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              23
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Healthcare isn’t a right because a right cannot be reliant on service provided by others. That’s just an entitlement given out by shitty governments. Not to mention that abortion isn’t Healthcare

              • JoeyJoeJoeJr@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                15
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Your right to a jury trial depends on the service of your fellow citizens, as well as the judge, etc.

                Your right to vote depends on the service of many volunteers to work the polls, count votes, etc.

                Rights are granted and protected by governments; whether they require a service is irrelevant.

                  • JoeyJoeJoeJr@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    That sidesteps my point, which was that “rights” are granted by governments (the first of those two, jury trial, is literally in “The Bill of Rights”). You can disagree about what should be a right, and in a country with a democratic procedure for determining rights, you can vote to change what is considered a right, but whether it requires a service or not is irrelevant.

                    Healthcare requiring service does not preclude it from being a right.

      • atempuser23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the premise is that the laws on reproductive rights have managed to effect the overall availability of health care. So it’s not that the laws are bad, but some of them are written in such a way that it creates problems, or potential problems, for doctors. So Dr’s are overall not choosing to get into situations where the law could make them liable and are choosing to set up practice in other locations where the government overreach isn’t as bad.

        The affirmative discrimination laws are generally hard to write well so they tend to add restrictions to people and businesses that are unintended.

        It seems that those discrimination and reproductive rights are no longer ‘soft’ issues and this poll is acknowledging that.

    • Clown_Tempura@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As someone from West Virginia I’m stunned we didn’t make the list. McDowell county is hell on earth. The northern part of the state really does hard carry the rest of it.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Economic and health factors in this ranking are severely downplayed in favor of hot social issues.

    • Jeff@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Moved from TX to DMV in Feb and it’s night and day here. Love the idea of Texas but the reality didn’t come close.

        • Jeff@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          DC Maryland Virginia area.

          Don’t get me wrong it not a utopia but much better. I miss Bucees and HEB. There’s also just as many bad drivers here, and the speed limits are LOOOOOW. But folks are on the whole nicer (which to me is weird as I heard folks here weren’t as nice as in Texas). And where I used to live 4 hours would get you to Beaumont and here it’ll get you through three states.

      • BigNote@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        One would only think that’s surprising or funny if they assumed that “best economy” and “best states to live in” necessarily have a one to one overlap. While I can see there being some overlap, l think we all know that business-friendly policies that foster economic growth almost always come with a suite of larger demographic costs.

        The key is to seek balance between what’s good for business and what’s good for the public, and in that light it shouldn’t really come as a surprise that some of the most business-friendly states are also the worst places to live.

    • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      So basically this is just a “10 states where you can’t abort your unborn baby and men can’t compete against women in sports” list.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Go read the article. It’s basically a “who’s who” of stricter abortion and “gender affirming surgery” laws, all other factors be damned. Education? Pfft, who needs it. Infrastructure and technology? Irrelevant. Business quality and work opportunities? As if you’d care about that.