4 ms·
CNBC’s model puts hefty weight on social-policy scores (abortion, LGBTQ protections, worker rules) and only a light touch on nuts-and-bolts stuff like housing c
by sMarsIntruder 1y ago
CNBC’s model puts hefty weight on social-policy scores (abortion, LGBTQ protections, worker rules) and only a light touch on nuts-and-bolts stuff like housing costs, taxes, and job growth. If those social factors top your list, the rankings make sense; if you care more about affordability or wages, the picture flips.
- ethan_smith 1y agoCNBC's methodology assigns 15% weight to "Life, Health and Inclusion" (social policies) versus 5% for "Cost of Living" and 15% for "Economy" - the full breakdown is available in their methodology document.
- sMarsIntruder 1y agoI read that, but you can see a common factor and probably bias just by reading the descriptions and photos used. I understand that people have opinions and my comment goes against this community, but this is what people with common sense can notice.
- dlcarrier 1y agoThe article has a confusing link to their methodology section. The article itself is about their "Quality of Life" ranking, which is weighted into (at 10.6%) their "Top States for Business" ranking. The methodology link in the article jumps to the "Quality of Life" section within the "Top States for Business", ranking, but the other "Top States for Business" weights aren't considered in the "Quality of Life" ranking given in the article. If you only look at just the "Quality of Life" methodology you'll see that it's— much worse than you were thinking. There's no weights given, but of more than ten metrics considered, it looks like eight or nine of them are purely based on policy, with almost no nuts-and-bolts consideration.
- stogot 1y agoIt’s a trash article based on cherry picked data that likely fit the bias of the author. You can immediately tell what those biases are by looking at the states picked & the reasons why