Why, because quality of living and working is not impacted at all by degrees of inclusiveness and reproductive rights? I guess it depends on whether you would personally be affected, or lack any ability to emphasize or care about others.

Also, the category is called “Life, Health, and Inclusion”.

They make the link between inclusiveness/reproductive rights to living and working in a state clear right at the top of the article:

Each year, as part of our overall assessment of state business climates, CNBC’s America’s Top States for Business study considers how welcoming each state is to workers and their families.

Life, Health and Inclusion is one of the study’s ten categories of competitiveness. And this year, with the nationwide worker shortage so severe, the category is taking on increased importance in our methodology.

We consider multiple quality of life factors, including crime rates, environmental quality, and health care. We also look at the quality and availability of childcare, which is one of the most important factors in getting parents back into the workforce.

Casting the widest possible net for workers means not turning anyone away. So we consider inclusiveness in state laws by measuring protections against discrimination, as well as voting rights. And with surveys showing a substantial percentage of women considering abortion restrictions when making a choice of where to live in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, reproductive rights are part of this year’s equation as well.

One of the biggest categories they mention is access to childcare facilities. They also have crime as a category.

If by “don’t see anything” you ignore crime, health, workers’ rights. Sure

But since you asked, they’re amongst the lowest average/median salaries in the country. I’m sure access to good medical care is an imaginary thing, and will only get worse as doctors avoid working there due to patients’ rights that you’re so flippant about

You didn’t even read their metrics did you? It’s based on crime rates, healthcare, quality of health, etc. Those are pretty objective measures, and ones that republican-controlled states often fight against (see: reluctance to expand medicaid).

You had me in the first half.

It is skewed and should say that it’s terrible for liberals, not MAGA folks

You lost me at /r/politics being a democratic e ho chamber. That’s silly. Sounds like you might be happier in truth social.

“Something bad said against Republicans is propaganda” doesn’t sound fascist at all, huh?

Can you provide a ranking where you would say these states would come out top? What kind of metric would you like to see being used?

I suppose that’s the only reasonable explanation that doesn’t involve rethinking anything.

Oh bless your heart you never learned to read.

This is a U.S. community. Did you read the description?

Is this a troll question? The metrics used are so different it’s not even about the same thing.

It doesn’t say the exact opposite, that’s why. Your question is a non-sequitur.

I’m thinking that’s mostly retirees on fixed incomes. Low wages = low cost of living = crappy schools = low wages

I used pods to move from California to SC because I can work remotely, get paid a CA wage, could afford a house for the first time, while living close to family in SC.

Covid lockdowns in big cities made them feel much smaller and that started to feel a little claustrophobic- living in a tiny apartment, not really leaving that much. At least there’s more room to stretch out in smaller cities, but now that things are seemingly going back to normal (not that I think SC had any shifts in that aspect to begin with), I’d much rather be somewhere that doesn’t feel so hostile.

That being said, after a couple years of being here the vibes here are bad and I intend on moving possibly to Minneapolis as soon as I can.