"The People's Republic of Taxachusetts"

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
Don’t Mess with Massachusetts - It may be everyone’s punching bag, but it’s time to face facts: The Bay State is best.

Massachusetts, in today’s political culture, is more epithet than state. The People’s Republic, Taxachusetts, “Sweden”—this is America’s arugula-munching, maple syrup-swigging, receding-ponytail hippy uncle, exiled to its cold, lonely corner of American geography by Sunbelt population growth and a rightward-leaning national discourse. That “Spirit of America” license plate doth protest too much. For much of the country, Massachusetts, if not actually un-American, is the suspicious redoubt of the American left.

As a native, I’m willing to take it on the chin for the state’s crimes against the republic: certain unfortunate regional accents, the term wicked, and that image of Michael Dukakis in a tank . For the state’s affection for happy-clappy bumper stickers (“no one is free when others are oppressed”) and the drivers my brother calls “Ms”—I apologize.

Still, all the Bay State-baiting can get depressing. Especially in the recent primary season, as Mitt Romney, pummeled by charges of “Massachusetts moderate,” has run far from the state he once governed. Et tu, Mitt?

On the brighter side, though, Gov. Romney’s candidacy is an opportunity to take a closer look at the state that dare not speak its name. Through all the red mist and flying blue fur this election year, it’s worth reminding voters of a truth Romney probably won’t be emphasizing: The nation’s favorite punching bag is an exceptionally successful state.

Let’s compare Massachusetts to its peers on three basic measures of success: education, social well-being, and economic strength. Some Americans believe good results on these metrics are the goals of responsible government, and others believe they’re the happy consequences of free markets. But however we get there, these are desirable outcomes for all Americans.

First up is education, the foundation of America’s meritocratic values and the key to whatever success the country will find in a globalized, knowledge-based economy. Massachusetts is renowned for its higher-education institutions. Less well known, though, is that the home of the original Tea Party also has the best schools in the country. On the most basic measures of educational achievement—fourth- and eighth-grade math and reading skills—Massachusetts tops the nation.

Education Week’s Quality Counts 2012 report expands on this success. On their overall index, Massachusetts ranks second, to Maryland. But on two of the index’s most important measures of results—a lifetime educational Chance for Success index, and a K-12 Achievement index that bundles metrics such as test results, year-on-year improvement, and the gap between poor and wealthier kids (perhaps the truest test of our fabled meritocracy)—the Bay State again leads the nation.
And most of the world. According to a 2011 Harvard study, while reading proficiency in Mississippi is comparable to Russia or Bulgaria, Massachusetts performs more like Singapore, Japan, or South Korea. Often better: Massachusetts students rank fifth in the world in reading, lapping Singapore and Japan, and needless to say, every state in the union. In math, Massachusetts slots in a global ninth, ahead of Japan and Germany. (Some international educational studies rank Shanghai and Hong Kong as separate countries; if this wasn’t done, Massachusetts would likely rank two places higher.)

What about social well-being? Above all, we want kids to have a healthy start in life. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, Massachusetts has the nation’s highest level of first-trimester prenatal care, and the third-lowest infant mortality rate (Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Missouri are about 50 percent higher). It also has the second-highest rate of child access to both medical and dental care, the nation’s lowest child mortality rate, and the lowest teen death rate.

t goes without saying that Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of uninsured residents—5 percent (Thanks Mitt! Mitt? You there, Mitt?), compared to 16 percent nationally, and a whopping 25 percent in Texas. On life expectancy, Massachusetts ties for sixth-highest, about five years longer than the worst-performing states. In another political universe far, far away, you might describe a place like this as pro-life.

A few other metrics of social well-being: The Bay State has the second-lowest teen birth rate, the fourth-lowest suicide rate, and the lowest traffic fatality rate. The birthplace of Dunkin’ Donuts has the sixth-lowest obesity rate. And depending on the source, the first state to legalize gay marriage has either the lowest or one of the very lowest divorce rates in the country.

Finally, let’s take a purely dollars-and-cents look at Massachusetts. No matter where you start on the political spectrum, this is the most important question, because many Americans believe we must choose between social investments and a competitive economy. So what economic sacrifices is Massachusetts making to achieve such extraordinary educational and social outcomes?

None, apparently. Massachusetts has the second-highest per capita personal income among the states. Unemployment in March was 6.5 percent, well below the national 8.2 percent. Its state per-capita GDP ranks sixth-highest. Its median household income (a measure of widely-distributed income) is fifth.

Massachusetts is looking particularly sharp when it comes to the globalized, tech-driven economy on which America’s superpower standing hinges. According to a 2011 report, Massachusetts has the highest per-capita venture capital, patents, and technology licensing of 10 leading high-tech states. Worker productivity in Massachusetts (GDP per employed person) is the third-highest in the world. And research and development spending as a share of GDP in Massachusetts is higher than any country anywhere.

All this isn’t to suggest that the Bay State doesn’t have problems. While the state is among the lowest for property crime, it ranks considerably worse on violent crime. On a recent corruption index, it ranked 13th—nice, but not A-list. Its unemployment figure handily beats the national number, but 14 states do better. And, what you’ve all been wondering about: Massachusetts has high taxes, though perhaps not as lofty as reputed. It ranks 11th-highest (and at 10 percent, only barely above the national average of 9.8 percent).

It’s also worth noting that there are many ways to cut the statistical cake. Massachusetts’ second-lowest teen birth rate, for example, may reflect a higher abortion rate (though one that’s still below the national figure). The low traffic deaths may be due to the molasses-like flow of traffic on the state’s notorious roadways. And the marvelously low divorce rate is paired with a below-average marriage rate.

So, what of the charge that good outcomes result from high incomes? Lewis says “you might turn the question on its head” and ask, instead, why is Massachusetts so rich? “Massachusetts and others at top of the index tend to make significant public and private investments in the ingredients of well-being,” explains Lewis. Ultimately, these investments pay off both socially and economically. She points out that Maryland is third on Measure of America’s income index, but 33rd in life expectancy. Virginia comes in 6th on income (right behind Massachusetts), but 11th on education, and 25th on health.

So high income is no guarantee of good social outcomes and strong investments in people clearly haven’t punished one of our wealthiest and most globally competitive state economies. In fact, if America wants to be a healthy, smart, rich, globalized, high-tech powerhouse, we arguably have no better model than Massachusetts.

For many, a steady drizzle of mockery for the state and its “moderates” is the only response to that uncomfortable truth. Still, it’s hard not to dream of a presidential campaign in which a former governor would run on, not from, his associations with Massachusetts. Dukakis, of course, ran on a “Massachusetts Miracle.” But Gov. Romney is already too far from home for that, and probably knows better than to try.

How Massachusetts compares to Florida, according to the Tampa Bay Times:

Chance of Student Success: A vs C
Reading proficiency: 1 vs 31
Prenatal care: 1 vs 48
Health Insurance coverage: 1 vs 49
Fatal car crashes: 1 vs 35
Per capital income: 2 vs 25

Do you think Americans should take heed of a state which does far better than most in providing the basic elements of a successful and happy life? Or should we continue to ridicule a successful model of prosperity and wealth because it is too "liberal" when compared to the more backward states?
 
It is going to be great having a real liberal in the White House when Mitt wins.
 
And an elitist Northern one to boot.
 
California comes very close. It is as if a far greater number of motorists from those two states don't understand what "slower traffic keep right" actually means.
 
As nice as that all sounds, it misses one important stat: debt. Massachusetts has the highest per capita debt load of all the states at $11,310 per resident.
 
That is less than the city and state tax I paid the last year I lived in Manhattan. But I do think it should be zero.
 
As nice as that all sounds, it misses one important stat: debt. Massachusetts has the highest per capita debt load of all the states at $11,310 per resident.

Yeah, they are the best in state debt! You gotta be either #1 or #50 to have bragging rights. :lol:
 
There was also the problem that Massachusetts ranked 47th in job creation under Mitt Romney.

The 3 states worse were Michigan (loss of manufacturing jobs), Ohio (same as Michigan), and Louisiana (hit by Hurricane Katrina).

Although that's been mitigated by the new Democratic governor, Deval Patrick.
 
Yes, Mass is doing well.
How is CA doing?
DC?
Michigan?

Both sides boast states that are doing well, and have states that are doing poorly...
 
Which "side" is that?

What is an example of a state which is ranked badly in regard to these criteria which is doing well?
 
Which "side" is that?

What is an example of a state which is ranked badly in regard to these criteria which is doing well?
Which "side"? Why play coy? Your OP is about liberal ideology working out well.
The other side, well, that would be conservative.
Why would you ask that question?

And, why on earth should we limit this discussion to those three areas?
That's like when people say, well, USA is #1... Why? Because it leads in these 3 areas! Duh!
Kind of limits the discussion in an artificial way, doesn't it?
If you cherry pick the discussion strictly to where a state excels, then, yes, it will seem to be amazing. Go figure.
 
Yes, Mass is doing well.
How is CA doing?
DC?
Michigan?

Both sides boast states that are doing well, and have states that are doing poorly...

Michigan's unemployment rate has fallen more than any other state over the last 2 years, and Washington DC is probably doing better now than it has over the last 15 yeras, buttressed by a TON of corporate money going into their school system, and a yuppie migration that has gentrified a lot of the bad areas.

To be fair, Michigan is governed by conservatives right now.
 
Which "side"? Why play coy? Your OP is about liberal ideology working out well.
It is hardly "liberal ideology" to provide the necessary governmental framework so people can properly live and thrive. None of this would have been foreign at all to even Republicans not all that long ago. That is, before the party was co-opted by those who really have no clue what it takes to be a successful modern country in this day and age, and who are completely unwilling to pay the necessary costs of doing so.

The other side, well, that would be conservative.
Why would you ask that question?
What are examples of "conservative" states which have similarly thrived? Mississippi? South Carolina?

And, why on earth should we limit this discussion to those three areas?
What "three areas" are that? This OP is about a highly successful state which is used as a form of ridicule by ultraconservatives, instead of as a model as it should be. It is not about "three areas".

If you cherry pick the discussion strictly to where a state excels, then, yes, it will seem to be amazing. Go figure.
What criteria would you suggest we use? The states which rival Bulgaria and Russia in the reading level of its children? The ones where infant mortality is more reminiscent of developing countries instead of modern ones? The percentage of citizens with concealed carry permits? The states with the highest income disparities? The states which receive far more federal funds than they pay in?
 
I was born in CA, grew up in MA as a proud product of MA public schools, and now live back in CA. I can safely say MA schools are far, far superior. I tell people what I studied and did in High School and they think I went to a private school.

I can say, however, that MA is not as liberal as people think. CA and MA, for instance, are not very similar culturally. MA is way less diverse, first of all. I think this is why racism--particularly of the "well I am not racist but isn't this joke funny" variety--is still alive and well in MA. It is super segregated. There are clearly white towns and clearly black towns and very seldom do you see many diverse neighborhoods, especially outside of Boston proper. There is a big drop off from the "haves..." kids like myself who grew up in affluent suburbs and went to nice public schools, and the have nots, kids who grew up in Jamaica Plain (worse when I was there, apparently better now) or Roxbury and who, even if they were bussed out to my old school on the Metco program, were still either (a) harassed by the cops if they dared to hang out in our town after school was done or (b) going home to gang violence and troubled homes.

MA is an economically progressive but often surprisingly socially conservative place. It can be fairly old fashioned at times, and remarkably forward thinking at others. I think it is the odd mixture of old-blooded North Eastern Protestants and Catholics with a more "European" I guess you could say mentality about government. We regularly elect Republic moderate Governors. And if you grow up there, odds are you are not going to experience much diversity amongst your peers, but how important that is is arguable. (I think it's very important)
 
I was born in CA, grew up in MA as a proud product of MA public schools, and now live back in CA. I can safely say MA schools are far, far superior. I tell people what I studied and did in High School and they think I went to a private school.

I can say, however, that MA is not as liberal as people think. CA and MA, for instance, are not very similar culturally. MA is way less diverse, first of all. I think this is why racism--particularly of the "well I am not racist but isn't this joke funny" variety--is still alive and well in MA. It is super segregated. There are clearly white towns and clearly black towns and very seldom do you see many diverse neighborhoods, especially outside of Boston proper. There is a big drop off from the "haves..." kids like myself who grew up in affluent suburbs and went to nice public schools, and the have nots, kids who grew up in Jamaica Plain (worse when I was there, apparently better now) or Roxbury and who, even if they were bussed out to my old school on the Metco program, were still either (a) harassed by the cops if they dared to hang out in our town after school was done or (b) going home to gang violence and troubled homes.

MA is an economically progressive but often surprisingly socially conservative place. It can be fairly old fashioned at times, and remarkably forward thinking at others. I think it is the odd mixture of old-blooded North Eastern Protestants and Catholics with a more "European" I guess you could say mentality about government. We regularly elect Republic moderate Governors. And if you grow up there, odds are you are not going to experience much diversity amongst your peers, but how important that is is arguable. (I think it's very important)


Connecticut is like that too. It's funny, polls of business executives say that Connecticut is the worst place in the country. Yet many of them choose to live here. CT has the highest percapita income not because everyone is well off here, but rather that the super rich live here in large numbers.
 
Back
Top Bottom