Wild & Wacky Stats!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

But then again, how many people are still living in farms in some of those places?

Not many.

[Verily]

Percentage of Married Couples with Both Spouses in the Workforce:

I have no idea what to make of those numbers. None.

Try, "Glad to see the south is progressive in yet another area."

Err... the South does not appear to be doing too well on that map.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Percentage of Married Couples with Both Spouses in the Workforce:

I have no idea what to make of those numbers. None.

Try, "Glad to see the south is progressive in yet another area."

Err... the South does not appear to be doing too well on that map.

This map is not surprising at all.  Places in the upper midwest have long had a reputation of hard work ethics.  I'd say a combination of poverty and social conservatism tends to lead to lower workforce participation among married women.  They either can't find a job or they don't want one, citing "traditional values".

[Хahar 🤔]

I'm still confused about California, though. There are poors, jobs, and farmers.

[Verily]

I'm still confused about California, though. There are poors, jobs, and farmers.

Hispanic migrant workers DNE Plains farmers. And the extreme wealth of much of the white population (and WASPiness) lends itself to fewer working women, too.

[jimrtex]

Percentage of Married Couples with Both Spouses in the Workforce:

I have no idea what to make of those numbers. None.

Try, "Glad to see the south is progressive in yet another area."

Err... the South does not appear to be doing too well on that map.

This map is not surprising at all.  Places in the upper midwest have long had a reputation of hard work ethics.  I'd say a combination of poverty and social conservatism tends to lead to lower workforce participation among married women.  They either can't find a job or they don't want one, citing "traditional values".

The congressional districts below 40% are:

AZ-4 (Phoenix)
CA-31,34 (Los Angeles & SE suburbs)
FL-5,13,14,16,19 (W Coast, north of St. Pete, south of St. Pete, and inland Palm Beach)
IL-4 (Chicago)
KY-5 (Eastern)
NY-16 (Bronx)
TX-15,16,29 (South, El Paso, and Houston)
WV-3 (South)

Below 45%

AZ-1,2,7 (Southwest, and North)
CA-18,20,28,32,33,35,37,38,39,41,43,45,47,51 (Mostly LA)
FL-15,18
LA-3 (Acadia)
MI-13,14 (Detroit)
NJ-13 (Jersey Shore of Hudson)
NM-2 (South)
NY-5,7,8,9,10,12,13 (NYC)
OK-2 (East)
PA-1 (Philadelphia)
TX-18,27,28 (Houston, and South)

Those over 60%

CO-2,6 (Denver suburban)
CT-2 (east)
GA-7 (Atlanta suburban north)
IA-2,3,4,5 (All but eastern)
MD-4,5 (DC suburbs, exurbs)
MN-1,2,3,4,5,6,7 (All but northeast).  MN-2 (southern Twin Cities sub/ex-urbs is national leader at 69.8%.
NE-1,2,3 (all)
NH-1,2 (all)
NC-4 (Research Triangle)
ND-AL
O-15 (Columbus west)
SD-AL
TX-24 (Mid Cities)
VT-AL
VA-8,10,11 (NOVA)

[Willy Woz]

Opposition to homosexuality (DOMA):

[Alcon]

Opposition to homosexuality (DOMA):

"Opposition to homosexuality"?  Not...really.

And not an especially meaningful map for various reasons.

[Willy Woz]

"Opposition to homosexuality"?  Not...really.

Why not? Even you say that DOMA supporters are homophoic.

[Ban my account ffs!]

"Opposition to homosexuality"?  Not...really.

Why not? Even you say that DOMA supporters are homophoic.

Oh, please.  I don't care, if you support something as retarded and ill-thought-out as Defense of Marriage, then you are homophobic.

If you aren't homophobic, then what is wrong with giving gays and lesbians equal access to the benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy?

There is no other reason except that you think homosexual couples deserve less, lest heterosexuals somehow spontaneously combust when two women tie the knot.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE GAY MARRIAGE, DON'T HAVE ONE.  End of story.

[Alcon]

"Opposition to homosexuality"?  Not...really.

Why not? Even you say that DOMA supporters are homophoic.

I don't recall saying that.  Some are, many just honestly believe their religion requires them to not support any governmental recognition.

But using that map to gauge opposition to homosexuality is wrong on other levels too.

[Willy Woz]

"Opposition to homosexuality"?  Not...really.

Why not? Even you say that DOMA supporters are homophoic.

I don't recall saying that.  Some are, many just honestly believe their religion requires them to not support any governmental recognition.

But using that map to gauge opposition to homosexuality is wrong on other levels too.

Yeah, I guess you're right. After all, many states with DOMAs also consistently favor civil unions in polls. The South being an exception of course...

[nclib]

Percentage of Married Couples with Both Spouses in the Workforce:

I have no idea what to make of those numbers. None.

Try, "Glad to see the south is progressive in yet another area."

Err... the South does not appear to be doing too well on that map.

This map is not surprising at all.  Places in the upper midwest have long had a reputation of hard work ethics.  I'd say a combination of poverty and social conservatism tends to lead to lower workforce participation among married women.  They either can't find a job or they don't want one, citing "traditional values".

The congressional districts below 40% are:

AZ-4 (Phoenix)
CA-31,34 (Los Angeles & SE suburbs)
FL-5,13,14,16,19 (W Coast, north of St. Pete, south of St. Pete, and inland Palm Beach)
IL-4 (Chicago)
KY-5 (Eastern)
NY-16 (Bronx)
TX-15,16,29 (South, El Paso, and Houston)
WV-3 (South)

Below 45%

AZ-1,2,7 (Southwest, and North)
CA-18,20,28,32,33,35,37,38,39,41,43,45,47,51 (Mostly LA)
FL-15,18
LA-3 (Acadia)
MI-13,14 (Detroit)
NJ-13 (Jersey Shore of Hudson)
NM-2 (South)
NY-5,7,8,9,10,12,13 (NYC)
OK-2 (East)
PA-1 (Philadelphia)
TX-18,27,28 (Houston, and South)

Those over 60%

CO-2,6 (Denver suburban)
CT-2 (east)
GA-7 (Atlanta suburban north)
IA-2,3,4,5 (All but eastern)
MD-4,5 (DC suburbs, exurbs)
MN-1,2,3,4,5,6,7 (All but northeast).  MN-2 (southern Twin Cities sub/ex-urbs is national leader at 69.8%.
NE-1,2,3 (all)
NH-1,2 (all)
NC-4 (Research Triangle)
ND-AL
O-15 (Columbus west)
SD-AL
TX-24 (Mid Cities)
VT-AL
VA-8,10,11 (NOVA)

From that list, aside from the Florida ones which are skewed by retirees, it looks like in general this is correlated with economic conditions. It also seems that districts with a high Hispanic population make up the first two lists, which could be due to economic conditions or traditional values.

Edit: In fact the first list, aside from the Florida ones (retirees), all are majority-Hispanic districts except for KY-5 and WV-3 (poor, rural, Appalachian whites).

[Ban my account ffs!]

The number of megawatts of wind energy produced per 1000 people by state.

Wyoming and Iowa lead with North Dakota, New Mexico, and Minnesota rounding out the top 5.  The red represents less than 0.01 megawatts per 1000 people.

The top 5 states for absolute wind power production are:

1)  Texas
2)  California
3)  Iowa
4)  Minnesota
5)  Washington

These numbers were as of 2007.  Minnesota is expected to surpass Iowa in absolute numbers as the industry is exploding in the state.

[Brittain33]

My regional energy provider is planning to offer wind power from Maine this summer. I wonder if they're transmitting from Canada or the project came on line too recently for these data.

[Adam Griffin]

Percentage of People Who Abuse Alcohol by State:


Percentage of People Who Casually Drink Alcohol by State:


Looks like people in the Midwest with high work ethic reward themselves with 30 beers after a long day at the job.

[Willy Woz]

Percentage of People Who Abuse Alcohol by State:

This has all the looks of "bogus". Why the fock would anybody answer a question like that?

[Joe Republic]

This has all the looks of "bogus". Why the fock would anybody answer a question like that?

The data would not have been gathered by participant self-assessment, I would expect.

[Willy Woz]

This has all the looks of "bogus". Why the fock would anybody answer a question like that?

The data would not have been gathered by participant self-assessment, I would expect.

I doubt it's too accurate. The states with the most dry counties should have the lowest alcohol consumption rate.

[Joe Republic]

This has all the looks of "bogus". Why the fock would anybody answer a question like that?

The data would not have been gathered by participant self-assessment, I would expect.

I doubt it's too accurate. The states with the most dry counties should have the lowest alcohol consumption rate.

I'll reserve judgement on its accuracy for now, but the data displays alcohol abuse, not consumption.

[Aizen]

Pop vs Soda vs Coke (WTF?)

[Ban my account ffs!]

This has all the looks of "bogus". Why the fock would anybody answer a question like that?

The data would not have been gathered by participant self-assessment, I would expect.

I doubt it's too accurate. The states with the most dry counties should have the lowest alcohol consumption rate.

Look, mommy!  It's the thought process of a 6 year old!

Alcohol consumption has always been high in the upper-midwest.  It is just more a part of our culture than it is in other areas of the country.  Having some wine with dinner or a few beers while you grill is not frowned upon.

What is surprising and alarming is the high rate of binge drinking in the upper-midwest.  I think it has a lot to do with the long winters.  But I don't think our rates are any higher than the rates of western Europe.  It's just that the rest of America is quite conservative.

[Speed of Sound]

Pop vs Soda vs Coke (WTF?)

I resent this map. I hate the term 'pop'. I know one friend from Minnesota who says it, but everywhere else in at least SE PA is all 'soda'.

[Verily]

Pop vs Soda vs Coke (WTF?)

I resent this map. I hate the term 'pop'. I know one friend from Minnesota who says it, but everywhere else in at least SE PA is all 'soda'.

There's a map online that aggregates a huge number of responses; it's actually really interesting. I'll see if I can find it.

[Verily]

Here it is: http://popvssoda.com:2998/countystats/total-county.html