Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Katelew who wrote (140917)	7/15/2010 4:29:51 PM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 543315

Curious how Texas ranks #1 in transportation; but when you factor in all their energy exports and being the NAFTA corridor with Mexico, they get high rankings just for what passes through and what comes out of the ground. I'd still like to see the roster of S&P 500 non-energy companies in Texas. Again, the total of 64 is thrown off by the high concentration of energy players. Looks like a lot of subjective notions built into this model. Chane some assumptions and metrics and the result could have been very different.

To: Katelew who wrote (140917)	7/15/2010 4:37:11 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543315

I'm not a fan of that kind of work, Kate. Everytime I look, carefully, at the weightings of the categories, I disagree. Usually, strongly. And then, if I can find them, the various items that go into each category, they look odd. And then at the judgment calls on each item in each category. Some magazines have US college ratings like these. In general, the industry thought they were nonsense, save for the fact that parents paid attention.

To: Katelew who wrote (140917)	7/15/2010 4:50:58 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 543315

<<<The first link explains how the study was done, and it looks perfectly kosher to me in terms of the variables used>>> There is nothing scientific about the categories. What metrics are there that gives you a scientific reading of categories like quality of life, work force, and technology and innovation. It is all subjective mumble jumbo. The weightings are all subjective. How could a study have any scientific validity when so many variables are subjective. In a scientific study, they study two or three variables, and they can contol other variables. This a poll - based on sentiment. There is no science here.