Top 10 Happiest & Depressed States In USA 2024

[Morphine Prince 109,650]

8 hours ago, Economy said:

 

I mean most of those States on that list are low income states so i am not surprised by this

 

I feel this probably has more to do with income and life oppurtunity than whether ur a Liberal or a Conservative. U can be happy or miserable either way

The poorest states are red states, there’s a direct correlation. 

[Economy 52,842]

5 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

The poorest states are red states, there’s a direct correlation. 

Im not sure its so cut and dry like like that. Those states are more interior and lower population.

 

Rurality tends to equal less development by default and rural areas also tend to be more conservative, its hard to assign effect vs causality

 

U can also come up with examples of more Right Winged States in their economic policies (like Texas) that have more population that have much better economies too

 

Edit: Here in Canada for example the poorest provinces in the East all have low populations and they arent all conservative

 

Meanwhile Alberta and Saskatchwean (the 2 most conservative provinces) all economically perform way abive average. 

 

I feel the rankings are all over the place with many factors. Its hard to pin that 1 political leaning automatically equals better or worse performance. Same can be said for Countries as a whole where theres both failures and success stories all over the political spectrum

 

 

[Morphine Prince 109,650]

40 minutes ago, Economy said:

Im not sure its so cut and dry like like that. Those states are more interior and lower population.

 

Rurality tends to equal less development by default and rural areas also tend to be more conservative, its hard to assign effect vs causality

 

U can also come up with examples of more Right Winged States in their economic policies (like Texas) that have more population that have much better economies too

 

Edit: Here in Canada for example the poorest provinces in the East all have low populations and they arent all conservative

 

Meanwhile Alberta and Saskatchwean (the 2 most conservative provinces) all economically perform way abive average. 

 

I feel the rankings are all over the place with many factors. Its hard to pin that 1 political leaning automatically equals better or worse performance. Same can be said for Countries as a whole where theres both failures and success stories all over the political spectrum

 

 

I live in TX so I know this is a good state (economically speaking) but the reality is most of the poorest states in the US are red states and ironically depend more on the federal government than the blue states who actually contribute more to the economy. 

[Economy 52,842]

13 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

I live in TX so I know this is a good state (economically speaking) but the reality is most of the poorest states in the US are red states and ironically depend more on the federal government than the blue states who actually contribute more to the economy. 

I know thats true. But that may partly be due to their low population and rurality.

 

I do personaly prefer some degree of a socialist mentality, because its not just how the economy does as a whole but also how the poorest do as well.

 

But if ur gonna look specifically at overall economic status, i think there isnt always a rule that right wing or left wing equals poor or rich. There seems to be a bit of both in both spectrums all over the world.

 

I think in the US specifically u just coincidentally have a tone of low population states (many of them in the interior) that happen to be conservative. Low pop in the interior is an automatic disadvantage and theres no way to know if theyd be significantly better had they been blue states

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

I expected Hawaii to be #1

 

[Foxyy 345]

11 hours ago, Economy said:

Im not sure its so cut and dry like like that.

 

10 hours ago, Economy said:

I think in the US specifically u just coincidentally have a tone of low population states (many of them in the interior)

If it were just a state or two then you'd be right but it's true for nearly all 50 states.

Healthcare, education, worker's rights, civil rights, prosperity, security, safety, the list goes on.

Red states have higher crime rates, higher rates of STDs and teenage pregnancies, lower levels of education and poorer quality of education, lower wages, less/worse employee benefits, little to no protections for workers other than federal laws, higher rates of poverty, higher rates of chronic illnesses like obesity and diabetes, higher rates of cancer, lower life expectancies in general, crumbling infrastructure, little to no public transportation, and so much more.

This isn't all because they live in rural places. It's because they're run by politicians who abuse poorly educated religious voters by throwing red meat at their worst qualities and quietly rigging their states for either their own enrichment or the enrichment of the people paying them.

Meanwhile blue states are run by politicians that largely invest back into the communities they're responsible for representing which is why prosperity, safety, health, education and life in general is better in Democratic states.

Also to the second point, there are many, many rural areas in blue states that do not have the problems rural areas in red states have. That's because the state leadership is better (Democratic).

I did not mean to write a novel but there you go 🤡

[Economy 52,842]

20 minutes ago, Forlorn said:

 

If it were just a state or two then you'd be right but it's true for nearly all 50 states.

Healthcare, education, worker's rights, civil rights, prosperity, security, safety, the list goes on.

Red states have higher crime rates, higher rates of STDs and teenage pregnancies, lower levels of education and poorer quality of education, lower wages, less/worse employee benefits, little to no protections for workers other than federal laws, higher rates of poverty, higher rates of chronic illnesses like obesity and diabetes, higher rates of cancer, lower life expectancies in general, crumbling infrastructure, little to no public transportation, and so much more.

This isn't all because they live in rural places. It's because they're run by politicians who abuse poorly educated religious voters by throwing red meat at their worst qualities and quietly rigging their states for either their own enrichment or the enrichment of the people paying them.

Meanwhile blue states are run by politicians that largely invest back into the communities they're responsible for representing which is why prosperity, safety, health, education and life in general is better in Democratic states.

Also to the second point, there are many, many rural areas in blue states that do not have the problems rural areas in red states have. That's because the state leadership is better (Democratic).

I did not mean to write a novel but there you go 🤡

By rural i also meant the state as a whole. If u have a small town but ur 45 min from major metros aud ur state as a whole is populated its probabky still more developed

 

So much of red states are in the interior, landlocked and very low population density. That tends to be a bad combination anywhere

 

Like I dont disagree with u about community investment in the people. But i also believe thats far from the only factor especially when u look globally to get a larger sample on right wing vs left wing jurisdictions and u see varying circumstances in each one

[Lady Palutena 3,147]

Arizona = Bitter