U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: Which of the wealthiest states would you live in?
Maryland 20 9.95%
New Jersey 31 15.42%
Connecticut 10 4.98%
Alaska 9 4.48%
Hawaii 11 5.47%
Massachusetts 25 12.44%
New Hampshire 8 3.98%
Virginia 19 9.45%
California 44 21.89%
Washington 24 11.94%
Voters: 201. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 11-04-2009, 05:21 PM
 
522 posts, read 1,523,191 times
Reputation: 317

Advertisements

I would live in Washington -- in the city of Seattle, to be specific.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-19-2010, 02:20 AM
 
10 posts, read 10,804 times
Reputation: 27
Default The raw stats are very misleading.

I see the same mistake over and over again.

People judge how wealthy a state or city are by the uncorrected per capita or median household income numbers.
To have an intelligent understanding of true wealth - purchasing power - you have divide the raw income stats by the cost of living index.
This will give you radically different results and throw a bucket of cold water on left wingers who take pride in their misperception that liberal politics creates better wealth.

I was just reading an article by Eamon Moynihan on Newgeography.com where he laments that when of cost of living is taken into account New York state drops from 17th place in median household income to 49th.
California drops from 6th to 31st in the 2006 ranking.

I wish I could find a list of cost of living adjusted median household incomes by states. It would be quite interesting.

I read a fact sheet from National Intstitute for labor Relations Institute on
nilrr.org that workers from less unionized states were earning $2500 more a year in 2008 cost of living-adjusted wages.
The less unionized states used for comparison were Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.

If you want some real eye openers, use City-Data's stats of America's cities and get the cost of living adjusted median household incomes by dividing the cities raw median income stats by their cost of living index.

You'll find that these ultra blue cities that Lefties are so proud of are amazingly poor, particulary, relative to Southern cities.

By the way, I consider people with degrees in engineering, science, medicine, and business to be truely well educated; This leaves out the great majority of liberal graduates who seem to major in fields requiring the least amount amount of brainpower and the least benefit to our economy.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2010, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Germantown, MD
1,358 posts, read 2,269,842 times
Reputation: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by SABALPALM61 View Post
I see the same mistake over and over again.

People judge how wealthy a state or city are by the uncorrected per capita or median household income numbers.
To have an intelligent understanding of true wealth - purchasing power - you have divide the raw income stats by the cost of living index.
This will give you radically different results and throw a bucket of cold water on left wingers who take pride in their misperception that liberal politics creates better wealth.

I was just reading an article by Eamon Moynihan on Newgeography.com where he laments that when of cost of living is taken into account New York state drops from 17th place in median household income to 49th.
California drops from 6th to 31st in the 2006 ranking.

I wish I could find a list of cost of living adjusted median household incomes by states. It would be quite interesting.

I read a fact sheet from National Intstitute for labor Relations Institute on
nilrr.org that workers from less unionized states were earning $2500 more a year in 2008 cost of living-adjusted wages.
The less unionized states used for comparison were Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.

If you want some real eye openers, use City-Data's stats of America's cities and get the cost of living adjusted median household incomes by dividing the cities raw median income stats by their cost of living index.

You'll find that these ultra blue cities that Lefties are so proud of are amazingly poor, particulary, relative to Southern cities.

By the way, I consider people with degrees in engineering, science, medicine, and business to be truely well educated; This leaves out the great majority of liberal graduates who seem to major in fields requiring the least amount amount of brainpower and the least benefit to our economy.
Don't know why you bumped this thread. You have one or two valid points, but also some blatantly incorrect broadbrush, assertions such as: "You'll find that these ultra blue cities that Lefties are so proud of are amazingly poor, particulary, relative to Southern cities."

For one this isn't about cities, it's about states. Median income doesn't tell the entire story, but it's a very, very good indicator. Any idiot could tell from just a quick visit that Maryland was wealthier than West Virginia, and New Jersey wealthier than South Carolina. Sure there are many Northern intercity areas in places such as Detroit, Camden, Baltimore, and Chicago that are impoverished, but the South certainly isn't devoid of them either (Memphis, Atlanta, New Orleans).

You welacome to your own (misguided) opinion of the definition of "educated," but the fact is that the wealthiest states have the highest HS graduates, as well as bachelor, graduate, and doctoral degree holders.

These are the top 5 states by GDP per capita (which adjusts for purchasing power):

1. Connecticut
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Wyoming
5. Maryland

3 out of the 5 were in the top 5 by median income, Mass. was in the top 10, and I'm pretty sure there's some extraneous variable that would explain Wyoming's surprise ranking.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2010, 11:56 PM
 
Location: H-town!
1,016 posts, read 1,068,329 times
Reputation: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpterp View Post
Don't know why you bumped this thread. You have one or two valid points, but also some blatantly incorrect broadbrush, assertions such as: "You'll find that these ultra blue cities that Lefties are so proud of are amazingly poor, particulary, relative to Southern cities."

For one this isn't about cities, it's about states. Median income doesn't tell the entire story, but it's a very, very good indicator. Any idiot could tell from just a quick visit that Maryland was wealthier than West Virginia, and New Jersey wealthier than South Carolina. Sure there are many Northern intercity areas in places such as Detroit, Camden, Baltimore, and Chicago that are impoverished, but the South certainly isn't devoid of them either (Memphis, Atlanta, New Orleans).

You welacome to your own (misguided) opinion of the definition of "educated," but the fact is that the wealthiest states have the highest HS graduates, as well as bachelor, graduate, and doctoral degree holders.

These are the top 5 states by GDP per capita (which adjusts for purchasing power):

1. Connecticut
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Wyoming
5. Maryland

3 out of the 5 were in the top 5 by median income, Mass. was in the top 10, and I'm pretty sure there's some extraneous variable that would explain Wyoming's surprise ranking.
It seems like Texas ought to be pretty high on the list. I know in Texas the wages are lower than a lot of states but the cost of living is lower than a lot of states too. Also Texas has oil wells and all that stuff. It seems like Texas would at least crack the top ten.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 02:21 AM
 
10 posts, read 10,804 times
Reputation: 27
Default Your'e the showing NOMINAL per capita GDP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpterp View Post
Don't know why you bumped this thread. You have one or two valid points, but also some blatantly incorrect broadbrush, assertions such as: "You'll find that these ultra blue cities that Lefties are so proud of are amazingly poor, particulary, relative to Southern cities."

For one this isn't about cities, it's about states. Median income doesn't tell the entire story, but it's a very, very good indicator. Any idiot could tell from just a quick visit that Maryland was wealthier than West Virginia, and New Jersey wealthier than South Carolina. Sure there are many Northern intercity areas in places such as Detroit, Camden, Baltimore, and Chicago that are impoverished, but the South certainly isn't devoid of them either (Memphis, Atlanta, New Orleans).

You welacome to your own (misguided) opinion of the definition of "educated," but the fact is that the wealthiest states have the highest HS graduates, as well as bachelor, graduate, and doctoral degree holders.

These are the top 5 states by GDP per capita (which adjusts for purchasing power):

1. Connecticut
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Wyoming
5. Maryland

3 out of the 5 were in the top 5 by median income, Mass. was in the top 10, and I'm pretty sure there's some extraneous variable that would explain Wyoming's surprise ranking.
I was suspicious of the validity of your reply since you didn't cite your source.
The article in Wikepedia which presents the state rankings by GDP per capita specificaly states that the figures are not adjusted for purchasing power disparities.

That list has your exact top 5 in order with New York ranked #6 and California at #11.
Eamon Moynihan's article in Newgeography.com indicates the huge difference that a states' cost of living makes in true wealth i.e. purchasing power.
California dropped from 6th to 31st in the 2006 rankings and New york plummeted from 17th to 49th in the recent year Moynihan used.
Moynihan didn't provide the entire rankings list, but did state that Utah was #1.

As to my "blatantly incorrect" broadbrush assertion that ultra liberal cities are amazingly poor, I suggest you do some politcally incorrect math.

Nominal median household income / cost of living index = Real median household income.

San Francisco 73.8/1.82 = 40.55 in thousands of course.
boston 51.69/1.36 = 38.01
New York City 51.1/177.1 = 28.87

Virginia Beach 65.77/.88 = 74.74
Charlotte N.C. 52.5/.86 = 61.05

The source of my data is City-Data.com

There are endless other informative comparisons.

My opinion as to who is truely well educated is guided by the knowledge that the great economic struggle of the world is overwhelmingly about the broad field of Technology i.e. Engineering and Applied Science.
It is not about lawsuits and liberal arts etc.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 04:53 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
3,394 posts, read 2,596,122 times
Reputation: 1970
Quote:
Originally Posted by SABALPALM61 View Post
I was suspicious of the validity of your reply since you didn't cite your source.
The article in Wikepedia which presents the state rankings by GDP per capita specificaly states that the figures are not adjusted for purchasing power disparities.

That list has your exact top 5 in order with New York ranked #6 and California at #11.
Eamon Moynihan's article in Newgeography.com indicates the huge difference that a states' cost of living makes in true wealth i.e. purchasing power.
California dropped from 6th to 31st in the 2006 rankings and New york plummeted from 17th to 49th in the recent year Moynihan used.
Moynihan didn't provide the entire rankings list, but did state that Utah was #1.

As to my "blatantly incorrect" broadbrush assertion that ultra liberal cities are amazingly poor, I suggest you do some politcally incorrect math.

Nominal median household income / cost of living index = Real median household income.

San Francisco 73.8/1.82 = 40.55 in thousands of course.
boston 51.69/1.36 = 38.01
New York City 51.1/177.1 = 28.87

Virginia Beach 65.77/.88 = 74.74
Charlotte N.C. 52.5/.86 = 61.05

The source of my data is City-Data.com

There are endless other informative comparisons.

My opinion as to who is truely well educated is guided by the knowledge that the great economic struggle of the world is overwhelmingly about the broad field of Technology i.e. Engineering and Applied Science.
It is not about lawsuits and liberal arts etc.
Great post. You did a good job of discounting the OPs skewed data.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 06:24 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,180 posts, read 5,172,121 times
Reputation: 4047
Yeah this list has probably had some massive changes.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 06:44 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,059 posts, read 20,052,573 times
Reputation: 10146
I'm so glad that the 2008 rankings are now available. And we're not even halfway through 2010.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 10:29 AM
 
Location: St Paul, MN - NJ's Gold Coast
5,262 posts, read 7,780,815 times
Reputation: 2912
There's a lot of advantages and disadvantages living in the wealthiest states.
Take Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut for example.. Where do the poor, hard working people go? There's not a lot to choose from.
New Jersey's cities are all pretty dangerous, and ironocially some of the poorest cities in the nation (Newark & Camden) the reason why-- because the poor people congest themselves in these cities and then start havoc because basically, there's nowhere else to go. Same goes for Connecticut's cities such as Bridgeport and New Haven. Baltimore has a little more hope considering its size, but still among the most dangerous cities in the nation.
The states don't have a total loss of urban living, but they're not really country known cities (Hoboken, Waterfront/downtown Jersey City, Stamford, and Near the Harbor in Baltimore) and these places are NOT cheap what so ever.

New Jersey has the best location in the country in terms of job/education opportunity because of two very significant cities on NJ borders. This is why the tax burden here will turn your stomach. Property taxes are capable of reaching $15K+ a year in some spots (depending on the price of your home)! To think people pay $1,000
But obviously, as the nations densest state, people think it's worth it. NJ is superior than the majority of states when it comes to education, income/jobs, safety, mass transportation, and walk-ability because of all the money the state sucks up in taxes.

And I kinda-sort of agree that the red states strip a lot of these advantages away by making taxes so low (which is why I don't believe beyond low property taxes is a good thing). For the first time in 12+ years, NJ now has a republican governor- What is he doing? He laid off thousands of teachers, cut their salary, and cutting taxes that go towards schools. Teachers are furious! Obviously, education isn't important to republicans for the most part.
Though it kind of ridiculous that NJ has nearly 600 school districts!!!! Florida has nearly 70 and it's twice the size in population. This is the main reason NJ is in the sh*** when it comes to taxes.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2010, 11:13 PM
 
Location: H-town!
1,016 posts, read 1,068,329 times
Reputation: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPerone201 View Post
There's a lot of advantages and disadvantages living in the wealthiest states.
Take Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut for example.. Where do the poor, hard working people go? There's not a lot to choose from.
New Jersey's cities are all pretty dangerous, and ironocially some of the poorest cities in the nation (Newark & Camden) the reason why-- because the poor people congest themselves in these cities and then start havoc because basically, there's nowhere else to go. Same goes for Connecticut's cities such as Bridgeport and New Haven. Baltimore has a little more hope considering its size, but still among the most dangerous cities in the nation.
The states don't have a total loss of urban living, but they're not really country known cities (Hoboken, Waterfront/downtown Jersey City, Stamford, and Near the Harbor in Baltimore) and these places are NOT cheap what so ever.

New Jersey has the best location in the country in terms of job/education opportunity because of two very significant cities on NJ borders. This is why the tax burden here will turn your stomach. Property taxes are capable of reaching $15K+ a year in some spots (depending on the price of your home)! To think people pay $1,000
But obviously, as the nations densest state, people think it's worth it. NJ is superior than the majority of states when it comes to education, income/jobs, safety, mass transportation, and walk-ability because of all the money the state sucks up in taxes.

And I kinda-sort of agree that the red states strip a lot of these advantages away by making taxes so low (which is why I don't believe beyond low property taxes is a good thing). For the first time in 12+ years, NJ now has a republican governor- What is he doing? He laid off thousands of teachers, cut their salary, and cutting taxes that go towards schools. Teachers are furious! Obviously, education isn't important to republicans for the most part.
Though it kind of ridiculous that NJ has nearly 600 school districts!!!! Florida has nearly 70 and it's twice the size in population. This is the main reason NJ is in the sh*** when it comes to taxes.
If you look at most of your blue cities in blue states not only are the taxes high but the housing prices are high. It's the combination of high taxes and high housing prices that make these places expensive.

I see your point about the advantages. There must be something good about these places or nobody in their right mind would live there. Why would you live in a place that's real expensive and there aren't any benefits to living there? That wouldn't make any sense. There are good things and bad things about every place on earth. So there are a lot of factors to consider when picking a place to live. Most people don't live where they would really like to live they just live where their job is. Getting that good paying job is the number one reason to live in a place for most people.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top