That's your interpretation of the article. I don't believe that's how the article was written. Author acknowledge the high housing cost but states that the met

That's your interpretation of the article. I don't believe that's how the article was written. Author acknowledge the high housing cost but states that the metric that was used only account for a few things and it ignore other metrics which can skew it towards a certain argument. Author also stated that the other person lied about how large state employment for California is. Author actually normalize/standardize it per capital instead of a having stating this is a large number. You and the article can argue whatever yall want but it's just an opinion until yall do factor analysis or some sort of algorithm to figure out what's the right combination of metric is.