Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Seriously, the state that brought you the 38 Studios bond plus car-eating potholes and you'regoing to argue our debt-per-capita merely reflects our far-sighted investment in productive infrastructure? Really?
Obviously those of us actually living it every day are clueless; I'm glad we have people from out of state who haven't lived here in a generation, if ever, tell us how it really is.
Can you share any data relating why single women shouldn't use public transportation in Providence?
Ask some single women who work in downtown Providence and have to take RIPTA back and forth.
A 'generation' ? LOL! How many 'generations" have you lived there? It might surprise you to learn that this is a very mobile society -- at any given time you have native RI'ers coming and going there -- and omg, maybe even extended stays !
Good grief, they must be spies. They might be there right now !
Ask some single women who work in downtown Providence and have to take RIPTA back and forth.
As I recall, the single woman in question was commuting to St. Joseph's and found other single women making the same commute to ask, finding out that there's nothing to worry about.
Quote:
A 'generation' ? LOL! How many 'generations" have you lived there?
I guess you can say three, since I lived here with my parents and now I live here with my children.
Quote:
It might surprise you to learn that this is a very mobile society -- at any given time you have native RI'ers coming and going there -- and omg, maybe even extended stays !
You need to do more than "come and go" to speak so definitively about a place. And by "more" I don't mean "listen to what John DePetro has to say about it."
Quote:
Good grief, they must be spies. They might be there right now !
Goody! Since you're slumming for the holidays, let us know which buses you've been riding at night to make your observations.
"Worst run states." Hummmm. Wonder what that means? The operation of an entity, whether a family, a small business, a corporation, a charity, a regulated industry (think Blue Cross), a city or state government, or a national government, can be measured. Perhaps inexactly, but it can be measured. For example, efficiency is a good antonym for "worst run," and one would measure that by the overall administrative/overhead costs to deliver a service, or by other metrics such as the effectiveness of government spending (ios the money wisely spent). Or by the priorities of a state, as in whether it spends money on education or wastes it on tax breals which do not stimulate its economy or enable growth. All good metrics,
So this article. Does it use similar, relevant metrics that measure state government efficiency? Nope. This report racks and stacks state "efficiency" using these measures:
1. Debt per capita
2. Credit rating
3. Unemployment rate
4. Median household income
5. Poverty rate
Debt per capita is not always bad and is often good. It costs money to invest in or maintain a state's infrastructure, such as public safety and higher education. These expenditures via bonds (thus debt per capita) are generally agreed to improve the quality of life -- to provide services people want or need. Debt builds things, whereas tax breaks, by example, build nothing but wealth for the already wealthy.
Credit Ratings are never static, in fact, they change all the time based on borrowing for infrastructure. Typically, states that do not invest in infrastructure have high ratings because they do not invest in their state. That results in infrastructural decay and lower quality of life. States like Florida, where even public water is often suspect, or W VA, where the air is polluted because they do not invest in pollution control, will always have higher credit rating because they do not borrow.
Unemployment rate is a long term and often transitional metric.
Median household income often reflects the value and level of education/skills to employers who pay prevailing wages. Level of education and skill of workers is partly a function of states.
Poverty rate is affected by the unemployment rate and the median income. Poverty forces states to spend more money to assist its citizens.
So. These are all metrics to measure "something," but none of them directly are tied to "efficiency."
As such, this article's headline (efficiency of a state government) is not validated by the metrics used -- at all. It doesn't tally overhead/admin costs as a percentage of delivering services, it doesn't indicate if states with lower credit ratings are investing for future growth, it doesn't indicate the percentage of a state's revenues spent on education vs. subsidizing poor people -- you know, metrics that measure government efficiency. Or government priorities.
For example your state, Maine, "is one of only a handful of states where welfare spending exceeds education spending as a percentage of total expenditure. Each year, the state’s education expenditure equals 25.6% of total spending, the lowest percentage compared with other states.
Annual welfare spending, on the other hand, is equal to 36.7% of total spending, the third largest share of any state. The percentage of people receiving food stamps, at 16.9%, is the sixth largest share nationwide." (cited from your article). Maine's credit rating is exactly the same as RI, yet its median income is only 88% of Rhode Island's; it is 3rd highest in welfare spending and 50th --- lowest in the nation -- in education spending per capita. Yet Maine is ranked 39th, higher ranked than Rhode Island, which has higher income and better educational outcomes and more public investment?
West Virginia has the highest unemployment rate in the nation, It's poverty per capita is 18.3% (tied-7th highest), or more than 30% greater than Rhode Island, and its median income is only 64% in relation to Rhode Island. Yet it scored 32nd highest?
Please.
Look. The article not only does not support its headline, it doesn't even make any sense!
Now, you of course failed to even post one single word to discuss this topic, the equal of throwing a bomb just to see how people react. And you failed to even present a cite that is worth reading, and I serious doubt you even gave any thought to the validity of the article, or even read it. But it provided what you so desperately need -- you perceive it as a mighty shiv in the back of the state that, for whatever reason, you so thoroughly hate and which you use even red herrings to taunt. Again, like the poor marksman that you are, you missed by a mile, you weren't even in the game.
I'm done.
I'm not sure which exact metrics are used, or how it weighed each individual one (explaining why one state might rank higher than another even though those metrics they highlighted appear to be lower). Unfortunately the article didn't specify. These rankings are never scientific anyhow, they are what they are intended for (a fun read, the reason I posted it). I have posted similar cites where RI ranks more favorably, so you can put your inferiority complex aside for now.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
.
