« Coffee and Retaliation | Main | Clean, Green, & Insane »

Sunday, March 06, 2011



We tied with Minnesota. Interesting.

I wonder just how tangible the differences are in a range spanning scores of 61.7 to 71.0 on a 100-point scale. I know 60s on this scale don't correspond to failing 60s in a classroom, but consider: suppose I showed you a class of 50 students, could point to one that got a barely passing grade, and had to note that everyone else got 60s. How much difference would you see in thoe students' performance?


Also interesting that SD scores highest in work environment, the category that gets the lowest scores nationwide. I could contend that lots of people dislike their jobs, but we just dislike our jobs least (and are just thankful for low unemployment)?


Just you wait: Atlas Shrugged will hit the theaters, and all the John Galt types will fall in love with high-speed rail.



Cory, you are repeating yourself. You are starting to sound like Larry in writing the same posts on different threads and/or blogs. You also appear to be talking to yourself.
I do not believe one could use the scale as seen as being the same type of scale used for grading someone in a classroom. For one thing, it is based upon perceptions. How one person perceives his/her situation could be different from another. I also see the bottom score is 61.7. We are talking a total difference of about 9 points from top to the bottom. This really is not a lot of difference. I also note from year to year things remain pretty stable except for the period of the end of 2008 to the beginning of 2009. I am not sure what this index tells us except that a scale of 66.5 seems to about normal.

larry kurtz

Good find, Ken. Who would have thunk it? Doug, it's so sweet that you're such a happy guy in a happy state. Hook up with Tim Fountain and spread some christian hope and succor to people huddled up to the stove; http://northernplainsanglicans.blogspot.com/2011/02/diocese-of-south-dakotas-new-outreach.html

Stan Gibilisco

A few days ago, I saw the results of one of these "happiness-coefficient" studies on a popular Web site (not sure, but I think it was MSNBC). The outfit that performed the surveys was a well-known and respected publication (for some reason Forbes Magazine comes to mind, but I'm not sure of that either).

Cities were ranked according to "happiest" and "most miserable." Miami ranked number 2 in +both+ categories. Evidently the people there are very very happy and very very sad.

I lived in Miami for nearly 20 years, and I can tell you all that there might in fact be something to this apparent contradiction. Miami is a bittersweet place, hot-and-cold, light-and-dark.

My point: I reject all of these "happiness coeffient" studies out of hand. I'm pretty happy here in Lead, and I hope I give the people around me a few laughs (with me or at me, who cares?).

Wherever ye go, there ye be.


Well, I guess we all know now what is wrong with Harry Reid!!!


dugger, first, my apologies: I meant the Atlas Shrugged comment to go on KB's post on trains. I regret the error.

That said, your response sounds a lot like mine: whether or not we compare the scale to classroom grades, the range seems rather small. Given the size of the sample, the results may be statistically significant, but I'm wondering if they are practically significant.


(Paperback) I like that the stories are short, but feel like in some cases that meant imntaorpt details were not included. I think it would have been helpful, even being a life long resident of South Dakota, if there had been a map of SD in the back of the book with key locations from the book identified. NOTE to author: The Missouri River runs through our beautiful state not the Mississippi! All in all, I enjoyed the book. Many of the stories were familiar to me, but I enjoyed learning more details about them.

The comments to this entry are closed.