Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 118 posts

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#51

Post by ars »

ncallaway wrote: post #26
daenz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are the metrics they used for quality of life: Community Engagement Social Support Voter Participation Drinking Water Quality Low Industrial Toxins Low Pollution Health Risk Urban Air Quality

Was like...a survey of the happiness of the population not at least one of the metrics they used? It seems...like a really silly metric not to include in a quality of life ranking.

> a survey of the happiness

It's not possible to measure happiness by asking people.

I remember reading a study about, maybe someone can find it.

The only thing you can measure (or ask about) are proxies to happiness.

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#52

Post by Baeocystin »

briga wrote: post #28

Does this apply to tech workers in the Bay Area? Because it seems like the quality of life should be very high with what they're getting paid.

When you take the cost of living in to account, the QOL on the peninsula sucks. I live in Gilroy, which is ~40 miles south of SV, and like it a lot. But I also almost never have to drive north.

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#53

Post by masonic »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #5

Mischaracterization in the title. Actual title, which I think matters, is: "California’s quality of life is the worst in the country: Says who?" Perhaps correct? It does change the tone.

The "Says who?" addendum is only on the one version they put on the web (they use varying headlines on their 10+ member papers). The original print title is right in the URL:

  california-has-the-worst-quality-of-life-study-says/
I added "US News" to clarify the source of the study.

Please, admins, consider the possibility that some of us use honest forethought in entering a title. (The most recent change of adding a question mark is the most editorializing choice of all.)

[Update]: the Mercury News archive edition title for this article (Page 1A) is

  CALIFORNIA’S NO. 50!

  In quality of life, study calls us Worst Coast
I was erroneous in calling the original web posting title the "original print title".

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#54

Post by pedrosorio »

jjeaff wrote: post #23
matmo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I'd like to buy a house outside of California, I can't imagine living in cold weather constantly. I really need sunlight/warmth, and I can't help but feel like I would miss California's weather.

Luckily, there are plenty of other states with similarly nice weather.

There are no other states that have mostly Mediterranean hot/warm summer climates (Csa/Csb) - Oregon being the exception if you enjoy a colder/wetter Csb than what you find in the Bay Area:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/US_50_st...

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#55

Post by ryanobjc »

cpt1138 wrote: post #24
ihsw2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rampant homelessness and drug use for one, the putrid mess that is downtown SF for another.

I believe other states send us their homeless cause here you can find places you wont actually freeze to death in winter. It may skew things a bit. Not sure.

The ag of California sure Nevada for doing exactly this. Nevada settled:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-reaches-400k-settlement-proposa...

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#57

Post by ars »

sehugg wrote: post #25

Here are the criteria: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/quality-of-... Among the measures used to evaluate states' natural environments are drinking water quality, air quality and total toxic chemical pollution per square. The ranking also considers how much each state puts its citizens at risk for long-term, chronic health effects from pollution. Social environment, on the other hand, investigates ho…

That says more about you than about the study.

Have you ever lived in a place like that? With real community? Neighbors that care about you? Who know who you are? Who notice if you are having an issue? Who go out of their way to help you if you need it?

Could you, right now, walk over to a neighbor and say "I need to go to xxx for reason xxx, could you watch my kids for 2 days?", and expect them to either say yes, or help you find someone who can?

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#58

Post by sjg007 »

almostApatriot1 wrote: post #15

>The state performed well in terms of its economy, coming in at No. 4 This isn't surprising. The reality is California's good economy, relatively good school system, attractive West Coast appeal, and high influx of immigrants make California VERY competitive (i.e. overcrowded), which brings down the quality of life for all. This is an end result of sorts of our global society. A California will always exist.

What does this even mean? Your comment is vague and nonspecific. California chose its path at the polls.

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#59

Post by chillacy »

ihsw2 wrote: post #12
plusbryan wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to expand?

The rampant homelessness and drug use for one, the putrid mess that is downtown SF for another.

What large US cities don't have these issues? People complain about the same things in Seattle, LA, NY, etc.

In fact, it's not the worst based on the data: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/is-seattl...

Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?

#60

Post by goawayracists »

ajross wrote: post #50
sehugg wrote: post #25

Here are the criteria: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/quality-of-... Among the measures used to evaluate states' natural environments are drinking water quality, air quality and total toxic chemical pollution per square. The ranking also considers how much each state puts its citizens at risk for long-term, chronic health effects from pollution. Social environment, on the other hand, investigates ho…

Indeed. To put it more bluntly: the social criteria seem almost purpose-designed to punish immigrants specifically. Put more mexicans in a state and virtually every one of those measurables is going to drop. This is a measure of whiteness. Now, sure, you could make an "objective" case that these immigrant communities are less involved in traditional community and employment structures, pull down voter turnout numbers…

Fuck off you hipster racist.
Post reply on HN