West Virginia people most unhappy in U.S.
by M. Stewart
The results of a "Well-Being Index" poll conducted by Gallup-Healthways has determined that Ohio is #45 of the 50 states in the overall happiness of its citizens; however, West Virginia comes in dead last. Pennsylvania, while no barrel of laughs, is considerably higher on the index at #30.
The results were based on 1000 interviews per day throughout 2010 in which participants answered questions having to do with general life evaluation, emotional health, physical health, healthy behavior, work environment, and access to basic necessities. The top "happy" states are in the West, while clearly the most unhappy people in our country live in the South.
Ohio, which I now consider a southern state, has only Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky and West Virginia below it in the ratings. That's some pretty dismal company, folks. In contrast, the state with the happiest citizens is Hawaii, followed by Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, and Colorado.
Source: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. The full list of states, their ranking, and their scores are as follows:
1. Hawaii: 71.0
The results of a "Well-Being Index" poll conducted by Gallup-Healthways has determined that Ohio is #45 of the 50 states in the overall happiness of its citizens; however, West Virginia comes in dead last. Pennsylvania, while no barrel of laughs, is considerably higher on the index at #30.
The results were based on 1000 interviews per day throughout 2010 in which participants answered questions having to do with general life evaluation, emotional health, physical health, healthy behavior, work environment, and access to basic necessities. The top "happy" states are in the West, while clearly the most unhappy people in our country live in the South.
Ohio, which I now consider a southern state, has only Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky and West Virginia below it in the ratings. That's some pretty dismal company, folks. In contrast, the state with the happiest citizens is Hawaii, followed by Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, and Colorado.
Source: Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. The full list of states, their ranking, and their scores are as follows:
1. Hawaii: 71.0
2. Wyoming: 69.2
3. North Dakota: 68.4
4. Alaska: 68.3
5. Colorado: 68.0
6. Minnesota: 68.0
7. South Dakota: 68.0
8. Utah: 67.9
9. Connecticut: 67.9
10. Massachusetts: 67.8
11. Nebraska: 67.8
12. Maryland: 67.5
13. Washington: 67.5
14. Montana: 67.3
15. Kansas: 67.2
16. New Hampshire: 67.2
17. Vermont: 67.1
18. California: 67.0
19. Iowa: 66.9
20. Idaho: 66.9
21. New Mexico: 66.7
22. Virginia: 66.7
23. Wisconsin: 66.7
24. New Jersey: 66.6
25. Maine: 66.4
26. Illinois: 66.3
27. Oregon: 66.3
28. Texas: 66.3
29. Arizona: 66.2
30. Pennsylvania: 66.1
31. Georgia: 66.1
32. New York: 65.9
33. Rhode Island: 65.7
34. Missouri: 65.6
35. South Carolina: 65.3
36. North Carolina: 65.1
37. Florida: 65.1
38. Oklahoma: 64.9
39. Indiana: 64.8
40. Tennessee: 64.8
41. Michigan: 64.6
42. Louisiana: 64.3
43. Delaware: 64.2
44. Nevada: 64.2
45. Ohio: 63.8
46. Alabama: 63.7
47. Arkansas: 63.7
48. Mississippi: 63.0
49. Kentucky: 61.9
50. West Virginia: 61.7
posted by M. | 8:41 AM
45 Comments:
No, say it's not so. Ohioans miserable? I just can't believe it.
I wonder if this poll was conducted before or after the Tressel story broke? While I was a student at YSU and he was the head football coach, a few shady things occurred with his program but hardly received press. Now that he's at OSU and in the national spotlight, it's more difficult to cover up wrong actions. Tressel is not a terrible person for what happened, but it's now becoming clear that he's no better than the other guys.
Yea, so!
Jeeze, I don't know what to think. Perhaps ignorance really is bliss.
Or, without an "R" or "D" beside each state, I don't know who to blame.
Or, maybe I should quit going to church or work, drink more, fight with the wife and yell at the cat.
Seriously, I wonder how this compares to the poverty index for each state? Looks like it might match up. Interesting.
This does not come as a surprise to me. Did you see East Liverpool made the news? Check out the guy in the first interview. Don't you think they could have found someone different? Well maybe he was the best candidate for the interview.
http://www.wtov9.com/video/27124866/index.html
Interesting that other than Hawaii ( Duhhh) the rest of the top ten are all cold weather states. In fact the next 17 are not the warm weather states.
I would like to have the time and money wasted on such stupid studies.
stupid--
But you don't have the time or the money, and no one asked you to contribute to those who do. Are you frustrated because you don't like the results?
SG--
I don't pay attention to college football, and one of the biggest reasons I don't is the rampant and systemic hypocrisy of the NCAA. This case is a classic example.
No one asked me about it. Did they just ask the homeless and the welfare recipients?
Did the government pay for this indirectly? It certainly looks like something the government would fund. Did you get this out of USA Today?
Happy--
This is not a government study, and it didn't come from USA Today. I provided the link to the study in my story. It was conducted by the Gallup company, which is one of the oldest independent polling organizations in the country.
Why the hell would I be frustrated by the results? I can't understand why anyone would care about such a study.I think it's a waste of time and energy and most likely money to find out something that doesn't matter.
Responses such as these are why WVA is #50 and Ohio is #45 regarding unhappy people.
Fred--
I think you're onto it.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/09/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T1
This will make Kasichs cuts look union friendly. What's next for Ohio?
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/09/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T1
This is ............
Sorry I took an intelligent position here....
Bozo--
Not sure, but I think Fred's comment may have been influenced by "stupid."
Not influenced by anyone.
Then might I ask what you meant by your comment?
Many of your readers would like to hear your comments on the lastest NPR incident where a sting outed the fair and balanced attitudes of the leaders of the network.
Happy Go--
I'd be happy to respond to the NPR story. First of all, the fundraiser, Ron Schiller, didn't say anything that I haven't said on these pages a hundred times, but I am not associated with a national media network whose flagship activity is news.
Second, the guy was a fundraiser who had nothing whatsoever to do with NPR news, so the incident has no connection to the quality or character of the news department, regardless of what some conservatives might claim. Keep in mind, too, that the "sting" didn't actually work. In other words, NPR did not accept the large donation offered by the punksters. That fact is likely to get lost in the discussion.
Third, I think NPR would, in fact, be just fine without government subsidies, which is relatively small to begin with. NPR's corporate and listener support could easily make up the difference if federal subsidies were eliminate. I can assure you that NPR has been ready to deal with this for many years. Repeat: I am all for eliminating federal subsidies for NPR.
As for NPR President and CEO Vivian Schiller's resignation, I think it had more to do with the Juan Williams firing than anything else. This incident was merely the tipping point for the board of directors. NPR news people were incensed by the Williams firing, as were many other journalists. I do think, however, that Williams' association with Fox News was problematic for a lot of NPR journalists for purely journalistic reasons, but they did not support Vivian Schiller's overreaction to the Fox News comment that got him fired.
Lastly, these sting operations are hardly legitimate in the first place. This sort of thing could be done literally to any organization, regardless of perceived political persuasion. Every organization, company, and group has people in it that could be set up and stung in this fashion. But in this case, the donation was refused even before the true identities of the actors were revealed.
If you think that this incident somehow tarnishes the reputation and integrity of NPR news, you are wrong. I suggest listening to what NPR journalists have to say about the two people involved in these controversies. They have been openly critical and very frank. I suspect, however, that the knee-jerk response from conservatives will ignore these facts. To me, the real story here is that the phoney donation was refused. Even so, NPR acted quickly in firing the person involved in the unsuccessful sting based on his comments about the Tea Party. I would think that Tea Party people would be happy about NPR's response, but somehow, I doubt that will happen.
M,
How could the reputation of a disreputable organization be tarnished any more than it already is? These recent incidents simply show in greater detail the bias leadership and the reveal the true nature of NPR that most people. I see you are still being deceived.
Here's an easy test: If Obama is for it, it must be bad. By the way, has anyone actually seen Barry's birth certificate?
Once again, I make the mistake of taking a question seriously and taking the time to offer a reasonable response. Of course you know nothing about NPR, nor will you ever. Instead, all you have is a bombastic political viewpoint which you offer with platitudes and inaccuracies. I won't make the mistake again of taking fools seriously.
Typical socialist response. I have listened to NPR. They are pro-big government and pro-king obama. Nothing else need said. NPR should be dismantled from the top down. This incident is a good start.
I'm sorry M doesn't take other opinions seriously. If you don't agree with him you are stupid and don't know what you are talking about. That's a socialist trick.
Happy--
You people assume that if news isn't biased toward the right-wing agenda it's "socialist." That's your buzz-word for everything, isn't it. Yet you offer no examples, no facts, nothing beyond a politically charged opinion.
I don't assume everyone's opinion is stupid, only those that make claims based on no or invalid evidence. That you claim to have listened to NPR is not proof or evidence of anything.
It is possible for people to learn new things, like how to present a reasonable, convincing argument without merely shouting out one-dimensional, bombastic political propaganda. Have a look at Bozo the Clown's posts, for example. He makes a case for his positions. I might still disagree with some of his positions, but I respect them.
M,
If you actually followed the NPR story the facts are all there. These things are self explanatory. No need to argue or discuss what happened here to the leadership of NPR. What other facts are there?
Calling you a socialist might be too weak, you are a marxist. However, having said that you see and understand the tragic results of big government and the welfare state in EL. And you don't like it. That's a good sign.
I wonder if that little girl from Newell's parents read her this article and "she" is going to write Gallop a letter. I guess our potholes in East Liverpool aren't making us number 50 unhappy- just 45.
Happy--
The only reason I let your comments through is to provide more and more evidence for my position. So by all means, keep talking.
For the rest of you--
the people of Ohio and of the nation have a choice. We can identify with those who spend all their time flaming this site with idiotic reactionary gibberish, or we can maintain a little dignity and choose the path of reason, enlightenment, and decency. It's our choice. For me, the choice is clear.
I understand M. The truth hurts.
Happy--
Again with the snappy platitudes. Substance. Show me some substance to your claim. Not your opinion, but facts, evidence.
You called me a "socialist" and a "Marxist." Well how about giving some evidence of your claim. First, show ORL readers that you even know what these terms mean, then show how I am a socialist and a Marxist. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO MADE THE CLAIM. All I'm asking is that you provide evidence of for your claim. Until you do that, I won't bother responding to you.
I think East Liverpools population plummeting 1894 citizens is a huge cause for concern. That is a substantial loss for the city not only in citizens but also the tax base. If those 1894 people each made the average area wages of 20,000 per year that's 37,880,000.00 which translates into a yearly tax loss of 568,200.00. No wonder the city is having such financial problems.
Ok, here something to chew on. You are a supporter of Obama and his programs, right? Then you are a socialist. He is. Are you in favor of the redistribution of wealth Obama has implemented? Purposely stopping new off shore oil drilling to purposely make America more dependent on foreign oil driving the cost to all Americans higher and higher. Do you support the current outrageous federal budget? How about the two current wars we continue for no reason whatsoever with no end in sight. How about Obama Care? The country is broke yet we are told the economy is coming back, getting better. If you believe all of that then you are either in idiot or a marxist.
I could go on and on and on, but what's the use. You're asleep.
Happy--
I am a supporter of some of Obama administration sponsored programs, particularly those that have dealt with banking reform. Regulation of the banking industry is neither new nor socialist. We have had a good look at what happens when Wall Street operated without regulation.
I am not familiar with the "redistribution of wealth" programs that you mention, so I would have to say that I am not in favor of them, whatever they are.
The purpose of the off-shore drilling suspension had to do with the Gulf oil spill and making sure that oil companies could reform their drilling techniques to avoid further disasters. It had absolutely nothing to do with "purposely making America more dependent on foreign oil or "purposely driving the cost to all Americans higher and higher." That really is a stupid statement. The reason oil prices have risen is revolution and destabilization in the Middle East. Everybody but you knows this.
I am opposed to continuation of the war in Afghanistan and have said so on many occasions. American involvement in Iraq is winding down under Obama. In either case, the wars have nothing to do with Marxism or socialism. The Obama administration inherited both those wars from the Bush Administration, or didn't you know that?
The U.S. economy is in recovery, regardless of what you say. The economic crisis was the fault of Wall Street capitalists, not socialist or Marxists.
I do support health care reform, but I do not agree with all the policies of the health care bill that passed last year. I do support those aspects of the bill that offer more protection against insurance companies. I do not think insurance companies should run the health care system without regulation and oversight. I am opposed to forcing everyone to purchase health insurance.
The federal budget is a compromise process--one that is currently under debate in the Congress. I do not believe that spending cuts should be limited to discretionary spending funds because they comprise only 12 percent of the federal budget. I believe cuts should occur across the board, including all non-discretionary funds, which represent the bulk of federal spending.
Most of these positions have been made clear in my writings over the years. In some cases, my positions have evolved as new information has come to light, but overall, they have been consistent.
How does any of this make me a socialist and a Marxist?
M. said...
How does any of this make me a socialist and a Marxist?
[end quote]
It doesn't but that is irrelevant.
He/they say you are so you are simply because he/they say it.
I have dealt with this online since 1993. Not so much on the politics per se side since I have little interest in such. I don't find politics a very noble profession nor most politicians honorable people. I don't see much difference between the various political parties. When I say I have dealt with this I refer to the role politics play in Church state issues.
There is a formula that is a constant in all those years and it is alive and well here as well. The formula goes like this:
It has to be true because they say it is true.
The use of distortions, misinformation, disinformation. Misrepresentation of Opponents [This includes inventing positions and comments of opponents.
Doctoring, speculating, and creating positions and quotes that he will
them claim is the other person's positions and words.]
The use of code words: Commie, Liberal, Democrat, Atheist, Marxist, Socialist, anti-religion are some examples.
Never providing any actual evidence, actual facts,. actual documentation, etc. When asked for sure there is a rapid shift to attack mode, i.e. name calling, personal insults, etc.
As a result of this over the years a number of people have noticed these universal tactics by certain people and offered the following in reply:
Your unsubstantiated claim is noted.
Ordinary or extraordinary claims require ordinary or extraordinary proof.
If you're going to claim something and especially something outlandish
you're going to need some pretty extraordinary and/or irrefutable proof to
back up such a claim. "Where's the beef?" Where's the ordinary or
extraordinary proof for their ordinary or extraordinary claims? If one is
not responding with ordinary or extraordinary, *factual* proof, then the
claim is not worth considering
-----------------------------------------------------------
[ as Homer@nospam said]
Why is asking for "proof" considered truculence? Do you consider it
truculence for a judge to ask for evidence in a trial. Would you rather
that people just testified that they believed in the guilt of the suspect?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[as Gray Shockley said:]
Your "opinion" is not an adequate citation.
You forgot your citations.
Or, are your opinions more valid than facts?
You do realize, do you not?, that opinion without substantiation is just
propaganda for those without critical thinking abilities and originate with
those who are attempting to manipulate rather than those who are attempting
to clarify.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Veverka wrote:
One of the ways to counter the attack on American Constitutional principles
by the religious right is to address their revisionism, misinformation and
distortions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The late USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
I am an actual Socialist. Not the kind that most Americans know about, but the kind you could read about in a government class textbook. The majority of Americans never paid attention in their government class...McCarthyism is still alive and well.
Does anyone remember the story of Joesph in Egypt? Seven years of prosperity followed by seven years of famine. The Egyptian government stockpiled grains for years and the whole country made it through the famine without trouble. That's socialism...living for the common good.
I know its not popular and I certainly don't expect everyone to believe the way I do...but that is what people should be celebrating about this country, not name calling because someone has a different political belief...and that is what socialism and even communism are.
I'm sure there will be posters who think I'm a "radical" for my beliefs, but those who cannot abide a differing opinion are the true radicals. They want discord...they want fights and arguments. They want the name calling and the bitter interaction.
As far to the left as my personal political beliefs are, I still believe in a centrist approach to government, because its for the common good.
buckeyeelo; You missed a few of the code words; Racist, xenophobe, sexist, redneck, uneducated, reactionary.
There are actually huge differences in the general politics of the country but the methodology used by both sides to promote their positions is closely aligned. They both use the politics of personal destruction and hyperbole, the creation of fear and panic to enhance a emotional reaction to any perceived issue. The one true concern that both sides of the political divide is to get re-elected and hold on to power.
M; I appreciate your compliment more than you know. On your last comment, you covered many issues, too many to to respond to individually. But there were two I would like to address; the Gulf oil spill and the banking crisis.
Both of these were terrible events that did much damage. And knee jerk reaction of our political class is to pass more laws because this makes it look like they are attempting to prevent future events. More importantly, for a politician, is that these new laws give them something to brag about in their next run for re-election. But both fields have plenty of regs that would have prevented those incidents that just weren't enforced.
But neither of them requires new regulation but more enforcement of existing regs. The BP and subcontractors on that rig cut corners and broke laws on their way to disaster. They had gone 35 years without a major incident and were complacent and worshiped their technology to the point of over confidence.
All that needs to be done to prevent another blowout is to put several people in jail, including the officer in charge of the rig, the rig's main compliance officer, the governmental official in charge of that rig's compliance, and BP's main person on shore in charge of rig safety. If they all did 3-5 years in the big house, all other people in the industry would be much more concerned about safety and compliance.
Same with the financial crisis; throw in some Wall Streeters, the head honchos at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack, the compliance people at the SEC, and a couple of Congressmen like Chris Dodd and Barnie Frank. If about twenty people do some serious time, it wouldn't happen again.
About the only new regs needed for finance are some requirements for hedge funds like more disclosure and more reserves.
how come i never get a sense of discourse closure on this site? it's just round and round and no one goes anywhere. just a thought.
Jeff--
Should I swoop down and announce that the discussion is finished? Should I provide a concluding paragraph? What?
I think I was successful in closing the argument with "Happy Go Lucky." Once he realized that he could no longer sustain his assault, he disappeared.
"Bob" is another example. Once a poster forced him to admit that he does not work or pay taxes, his vicious comments stopped. A lot of these guys will flame a site until they lose credibility and/or realize no one is paying attention to them anymore, then they trawl the internet for another venue that will put up with their poison. The two posters who refer to themselves as "Wiz" are similar examples.
So closure sometimes does happen if you know where to look for it.
M,
In your diatribe you said you are everything I said you were. Go figure.
i don't want to look for it. i should just get this inner glow that some distant shore has been reached following a long float in the spat in spittle that is modern discourse. the last few posts has been like riding my bike through a car wash.
Happy--
You've shown everyone that you're just a garden-variety dumb ass, and we've already wasted enough time with you. Get lost.
Jeff--
I hear you.
Bozo--
Couldn't agree more about the crime and punishment issue. Lots of folks should have been sent to prison for the economic meltdown. I do, however, think that a lot of good consumer protection came out of the legislation, and I think that's an important step.
The oil drilling situation is more complex. Clearly the investigation showed systemic problems in the offshore oil industry, the biggest of which was that the industry was, in effect, overseeing itself. I believe strongly that government must have a strong oversight role when it comes to public safety and environmental issues.
Matt,
Are you going to post my earlier comment? I don't see it? Is there a reason why you haven't posted it?
Bob--
No, I'm not. It was boring. Isn't that the word you used?
Post a Comment
<< Home