Edit: yep, 41/50
I realize 0% of blue states are in the top ten and 70% of the bottom 10 are blue. I also realize that 90% of the time you are wrong and the other 10% of the time you aren't right.
Take #3 South Dakota, for example, where I grew up. The legislative session lasts 40 working days in odd-numbered years, and 35 days working days in even numbered years.
That's ALL!
Then take a look at the worst managed states. By and large, the legislatures in those states are in session for month after month after month, to include all twelve months in some cases.
"That government is best which governs least." ....................Thomas Jefferson
New Mexico is a close 2nd, so I guess that means we are the 1st place losers!
Gray Ghost's Link
See my link for a States ranking that is a little more in depth than just fiscal solvency.
Matt
Like I said, you can find stats that fit any narrative.
Matt
Yes, words are important. Like the misuse of "best run" in your original article. Most solvent doesn't necessarily mean "best run".
In Florida and NDs case, they receive 3-4 times more federal funding than they put in. Do you think that may help their solvency some? That's rhetorical, no need to answer.
Matt
The average tax burden for the top 10 in his study: 8.5%
The average tax burden for the bottom 10 in his study: 10.2%
< 2% tax difference wouldn't seem to dictate the conclusions that they are drawing.
South Dakota? For corruption? HA! You guys are not even on the charts for corruption when compared to Illinois. How many of YOUR governors served/are serving time for corruption? We have FOUR that were convicted and served time (one is still there, Blagojevich) over the past 40 years. And this doesn't even include state legislators and Chicago aldermen, of which there could be an entire prison built for.
WE'RE NUMBER 1, WE'RE NUMBER 1!
Convicted............
Otto Kerner, Jr. (D), governor from 1961 to 1968; Stratton's successor and later a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, was convicted of 17 counts of bribery, conspiracy, perjury, and income-tax charges from his time as governor,[5] and received three years in prison and a $50,000 fine in 1973. He was prosecuted by future Illinois governor Jim Thompson.[5]
Daniel Walker (D), governor from 1973 to 1977, was later involved in the savings and loan scandals and convicted of federal crimes related to fraudulent loans to himself from his own First American Savings & Loan Association of Oak Brook. He was sentenced to seven years in prison with five years of probation following his release.[6]
George Ryan (R), governor from 1999 to 2003, was convicted in 2006 of corruption related to his time as Illinois Secretary of State in the 1990s, when commercial driver's licenses were issued to unqualified truckers in exchange for bribes, and one of the truckers was involved in a crash that killed six children. Former governor Jim Thompson, whom Ryan had served under as Lieutenant Governor of Illinois in the 1980s, was manager of the law firm that defended Ryan.[7] Ryan was released in 2013.
Rod Blagojevich (D), governor from 2003 to 2009, and Ryan's successor, was impeached and removed from office by the Illinois General Assembly in a unanimous vote in January 2009 after being tied to multiple "pay to play" schemes, including attempting to sell the former Senate seat of recently elected President Barack Obama.[8] In August 2010, he was convicted of lying to the FBI in connection with the investigation, but the jury deadlocked on 23 other charges.[9] Blagojevich was retried on 20 counts from his 2010 trial and on June 27, 2011, Blagojevich was convicted on 17 counts of fraud, acquitted on one count and the jury was hung on two. On December 7, 2011, Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in prison.
Yes it is, but that never seems to stop you from posting them.
It's absurd to rank states based on one criteria, like solvency, especially when other states are funding many of the most solvent ones. To imply they are the "best run" states is disingenuous, at best.
Matt
Here's what I mean; start one state with 2% more funds than another. If the state with the 2% head start is governed by fiscal imbeciles (like mine for example) they'll be in the red regardless. The state starting out 2% in the hole on the other hand, if governed by the fiscally sane may actually be able to come in on or above budget.
When we focus on fiscal performance I think what should be scrutinized in deciding "best run" is to be colloquial, "who got the best bang for the buck".
My two cents from the couch......carry on......
Fun of sharing info? Really? Even when the info, and implied conclusions are bunk? Good luck with that.
Look, 7 out of the 10 "best run" states (according to your article) are also in the top half of states sucking on the federal teat. Doesn't that fly in the face of the whole conservative "less government is more government" mantra?
Critical thinking...you should try it sometime.
Matt
Being a Republican in West Virginia and running for office is like being right of Mike Lee in Nancy Pelosi's district. You are going to lose. Things are slightly changing thanks to Obama but it is still deeply Democrat on the local level.
Matt
The average tax burden for the bottom 10 in his study: 10.2%
< 2% tax difference wouldn't seem to dictate the conclusions that they are drawing."
Not to pick, but the percentage point difference is 2%, the actual difference is 20%.
Thank goodness I'm moving to Idaho soon!!
Congrats on the good news! Ironically I almost shot you a PM yesterday to see how things went on the interview.
Best of luck in your new job and new state!
