[ExI] you'll never see this again

Sun Jul 5 01:08:27 UTC 2020

I think Spike sent this:

> You mention racial data in Wyoming.  Why is that relevant please?  Wyoming is one of the smartest, and in some years the smartest state in the union by the only objective metric we have: average SAT scores.
>  
> My home state is Florida, which is middle of the pack.  How did your state do, compared to Wyoming?
>  
> Other persistent powerhouses in SAT: Utah, Idaho, Montana.  Those states spend the least and do the most. 

These four states also share an interesting common demographic: Mormons.

https://utahvalley360.com/2015/07/13/top-10-states-mormons/

As of 2015: 
# 1: Utah, 55% Mormon
# 2: Idaho, 19% Mormon
# 3: Wyoming, 9% Mormon
& #8: Montana, 4% Mormon

Feel free to trawl through the data on the SAT site to confirm, but the actual top states are:

#1 Minnesota: 1295
#2 Wisconsin: 1291
#3 Iowa: 1275
#4 Missouri: 1271
#5 Kansas: 1260
#6 North Dakota: 1256
#7 Nebraska: 1253
#8 Kentucky: 1247
#9 Mississippi: 1242
#10 Utah: 1238
#11 Wyoming: 1230
#12 Tennessee: 1228
#13 South Dakota: 1216
#14 Arkansas: 1208
#15 Colorado: 1201
And just for fun, #16 Louisiana: 1198

There seems to be something odd going on. A form of self-selection bias, where in states with poor educational attainment, lower level students don’t take the SAT, because they have no dreams of college. 

A look at the “best states” for education ranking shows a very different picture. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/education/prek-12

I would be very amused by someone with a firm grasp of stats finding the correlation between various factors in the above data. Or even I might do it (badly) and share some graphs with y’all. 

SR Ballard

> On Jul 4, 2020, at 7:14 PM, spike jones via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 
>  
>  
> > On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat
> 
>  
> >…1) The US spends far FAR FAR more on healthcare than any other country…
>  
> These costs include facelifts, hair implants, butt lifts, boob jobs, liposuction, gender reassignments and so forth.  Remove all that and what do we spend?
> 
> >…2) Despite spending that vast amount of money the US only has the 38th longest life expectancy in the world.
>  
> None  of that stuff listed above extends life.  Medical care does more than extend life.
>  
> 
> >… might be wise to show a little humility and admit that we don't know everything and some other countries might be able to do some things better than we can. So let's swallow our pride and learn from them…
>  
> The obvious way to reduce spending on health care is to stop requiring a qualification process for new medications.  Allow anyone to bring any medication to market.  That would reduce drug costs to a fraction of what they are now.  Most countries do not have anything analogous to that process in the USA.
>  
> …
>  
> >…I don't know where they're pushing the papers to, but if they're using all that money for testing efficacy then obviously their testing sucks because 37 countries are spending far less and getting far more. So that's pretty damn ineffective efficacy testing!
>  
> Can’t we just coattail on their system? 
>  
>  
> >>…..I wasn't aware you were in favor of affirmative action to favor minorities…
>  
> > All minorities deserve protection,
>  
> >…Who is protecting those poor second class citizens who get 66.7 times fewer citizenship rights?
>  
> Those are neither second class citizens nor minorities.
>  
>  
>  
>  
> >>>… but Wyoming is lily white, only 2.47% of the population is Native American and 1.8% black…
>  
> >>… Why is that relevant please? 
>  
> >…Beats the hell out of me, but then I'm not the one who made the ridiculous claim that the electoral college protects minority rights.
>  
> nd the citizens of every single one of these countries live longer than Americans do…
>  
> People with money in those countries travel to the USA to get top-notch medical care, both for cosmetic and for health purposes.
>  
> >… Don't you think that maybe just maybe the US could learn something from them? Or do you continue to think there is no need to change a thing because we've already got our healthcare working just perfectly despite what the data clearly shows?
>  
> Filter out the cosmetic stuff, come back when you have numbers.
> >>  …The minority of voters who live in less populated areas [...]
> >….I don't even know what "minority" means in this context…
>  
> I do.  There are fewer people in less populated states.  Minority means fewer people.  Minorities should be protected.
>  
> >…If I'm the only one living in a state with a large land area then I'm the majority of the population…
>  
> But a minority of the US population.  Don’t get hung up on land area, for that really is irrelevant.  The fewer people in a minority state have more control over a state government in the United States of America.  So, they have more influence.  Why is that so hard to grasp?
>  
> If you really think this is unfair, start a party with the platform to overthrow the constitution.
>  
> >… And besides as you point out, people are able to move, so those who live in less populated areas can always move to more populated areas…
>  
> Why would they want to?  Those few people in Wyoming control two senators and three EC votes.  Wyoming people are smarter than us.  They are really nice people out there too.  You would like them.  I do.
>  
> >…If it's not land area then what the hell is the secret magical quality that makes people who live in Wyoming 66.7 times better than people who live in California?!
>  
> Those few people control two senators and three EC votes.  Wyoming people are smarter than Californians.
>  
> >…Could the secret sauce be that people who live in Wyoming are 66.7 times as likely to be MAGA Hatter gun nuts?  John K Clark
>  
> You were doing so well right up to the end.  With the revelation in the last sentence that everything is STILL all about politics, you are STILL campaigning, your credibility dropped to half what it was.  Notice nothing I wrote is partisan in any way. 
>  
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200704/914ea3d5/attachment.htm>