On the crime numbers, Illinois looks pretty bad, too. (That's relevant to the "failing state" claim, because anarchy in the streets means that the state's law enforcement efforts are ineffective.)
I'm skeptical of that claim. The only economies that Chicago is at the middle of in the Midwest are agriculture futures for big ag business and options trading for big financial business. Otherwise, Chicago's economic footprint outside of Illinois extends to cover Milwaukee and maybe western Michigan and Indiana.
If Illinois suffered an economic collapse I'm pretty sure the futures and options exchanges could be moved out of the city in short order. There are other big cities on Lake Michigan or Superior that can (and do) act as ports that could take over the shipping traffic. What else would be left?
The state is an interesting mix of utterly dysfunctional state government and reasonably competent city governments, in a state where most of the people live in either Oklahoma City or Tulsa metro areas. I don't know much about Tulsa but Oklahoma City has repeatedly passed sales taxes over the last 30 years in order to bring about civic improvements. These tax plans are known as MAPS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Area_Projects_Pla... These plans have been executed pretty much according to what they claimed to do, and the administration over the years has been competent and uncontroversial.
The state government, on the other hand, is totally dominated by the homophobia, Islamophobia, and the rest of the guns-and-gays distractions of the national far right. State government has repeated slashed taxes on oil and gas extraction, plunging the state into the crisis described in this article. No meaningful debate ever takes place in the state legislature or executive. Campaigns are fought entirely on the basis of who hates gays and loves Jesus more than the other guy. It is really sad, and a strange contrast to the major local governments.
When I was going to high school in Oklahoma I was offered a perfectly adequate education at the public school nearest my house. We had all the AP subjects. We had music, drama, and art. We had football, baseball, basketball, swimming, and any other sport you'd care to think of, even rodeo. Of course we didn't have sex education, which is why Oklahoma suffered from, and continues to suffer from the worst teen birth rate of any state in the nation.
Back then, people went to private schools only because either their parents were utterly unhinged Jesus freaks, or because they failed out of the public schools. Private schools were for weirdos and losers. Now it's the opposite. No family with any kind of money sends their children to public school in Oklahoma. The state educational apparatus has completely failed in the span of only about 25 years.
I have to imagine a failed public education system is going to reduce the likelihood of any state elected officials being held accountable. A democracy requires an educated populace.
Another Oklahoman here. I graduated from a public school ten years ago and my graduating class had students who attended MIT, Princeton, and so forth. From what I understand, my community has continued to send students from public schools to first-rate colleges. So I don't know if I would say that "the state educational apparatus has completely failed." Perhaps that could be true from some of the non-population-center schools. It sounds a bit heavy handed for OKC, Tulsa, Norman, and Edmond, at least.
I agree that the well-funded suburban districts like Edmond will be the last to show signs of distress, but even Edmond has "emergency certified" teachers on staff. This term "emergency certified" means "uncertified". My sister lives in Edmond and her kids are going to private schools.
If you graduated ten years ago you probably got, according to aggregate measures, an education on par with the one being offered 25 years ago. The real crisis has accelerated in the last five years. Per-pupil spending is declining not only in real dollars, but even in nominal dollars, and stood fourth-lowest among the states in 2014. It is even lower today.
Maybe it's time to get rid of privatized prisons and maximizing incarceration and felony convictions. May also be time to start expunging most felony records after N years. Who tries to start a large-ish business when 1/12 the population is caught, how many other felonies are committed? This is of course only part of the problem.
In the end, it's time to look at the value proposition everywhere, cutting education as deeply as they have should be a last resort. I'm all for cutting in most places, but it's pretty clear that they have larger issues to address than 4-day schools and a 1:12 felony rate will fix.
"Expunging" criminal records might be a bit too much, since this information might be still be useful for public statistics bureaus and for policy makers. Making criminal records past a certain period unavailable to the public would suffice.
What works in NY and CA is often very harmful in low population states. Laws like AHCA and agencies like the EPA often give little consideration to the economies of low density states. It doesn't have to be this way, we can exploit natural resources safely, and we can have affordable health care, but not in the current fashion.
Oklahoma's natural resource exploitation regime is so lacking in regulation that they are notorious for their man-made earthquakes. It is near the theoretical lower limit of regulation. It is unimaginable that excessive regulation is the state's foremost problem.
I live in Kansas, I'm well aware. The story is much more complicated than that, there are a ton of contributing factors that stem from intentional regressive regulations.
The earthquake problem is caused by salt-water injection over-budgets (no, fracking does not cause earthquakes no matter what you read on the news). The better question is: why was this never an issue when business was _booming_ in the 70s-80s?
Obama's administration removed a key tax credit for prospecting businesses if they hit a dry hole (A tax credit that's available to any other business for failures). These wells used to be completed and leased as injection wells. Now, if a hole starts to appear dry, drilling is stopped and the well sealed and capped.
This has decrease the diversity of injection sites across the states, straining current infrastructure.
What a difference between California and these stupid states. Calfornia is about to become the 5th largest economy in the world. And these guys are trying to prove a failed ideology over and over.
California is succeeding despite it's "stupid" government and policies. Not because of.
Add to that, shipping ports and the fact that both Hollywood and tech started there and a nice eternally warm climate and you have a recipe for a thriving economy. None of which have anything to do with political leanings.
The author of this article lives in Canada and has written a book called "You Dumb Okie." I don't see anything constructive about his tone, nor do I find any new ideas in his writing. It sounds like criticism and resentment pointed at red states.
> I don't see anything constructive about his tone, nor do I find any new ideas in his writing.
Umm... the article is making the case for how Oklahoma is failing it's people. A case accompanied with publicly available data. The tone seems mostly reasonable.
> It sounds like criticism and resentment pointed at red states.
You seem to be the one who's conflating Oklahoma with red states.
If you think there's something wrong about the article, maybe critique something in the article. Right now, all you seem to be doing is lobbing ad-hominem attacks.
As an Oklahoman, I think it's a little strange when someone at a Canadian university writes an article funded by the Rockefeller Foundation about "failing" Oklahoma, and has written a book called You Dumb [Epithet that applies to me]. I don't see how the tone there is remotely reasonable.
The author explicitly links Oklahoma to Trump by describing it as having the third-largest margin of victory in the presidential election. Hence the red state comment.
I don't think you actually read the article, because you assumed that i was lobbing ad-hominem attacks instead of directly referencing what the author has written.
> As an Oklahoman, I think it's a little strange when someone at a Canadian university writes an article funded by the Rockefeller Foundation about "failing" Oklahoma, and has written a book called You Dumb [Epithet that applies to me]. I don't see how the tone there is remotely reasonable.
Three points:
One, your argument seems to be with the title and the tone of the author's book. I'm looking purely at the content of the article which seems reasonable to me.
Second, the response of Oklahoma's /governor/ to falling revenues is prayer:
> “Our situation is dire,” Oklahoma finance director Preston Doerflinger said. “To use a pretty harsh word, our revenues are difficult at best. Maybe they fall into the category of somewhat pathetic.”
> Governor Mary Fallin had an answer: prayer. The governor issued an official proclamation making 13 October Oilfield Prayer Day.
Doesn't that seem mind boggling to you? That definitely seems /dumb/ to me.
Third, I don't think that epithet "dumb okie" necessarily applies to you. The author's argument -- without having read the book -- seems to apply to a subset of Oklahoma. For instance the author is clearly sympathetic to the victims of police brutality, the teachers of Oklahoma etc.
> The author explicitly links Oklahoma to Trump by describing it as having the third-largest margin of victory in the presidential election. Hence the red state comment.
That's fair. Sidepoint: how do you feel about Pruitt at EPA?
your own black box idea of "Reasonable" is basically the justification for everything you're saying. I can't really communicate with you when you are setting the criteria for every point on which you and I seem to disagree.
It's totally impossible to debate your opinion of something being "reasonable." I think the tone of the article is not reasonable. You think it is. What is there to discuss if "reasonable" is your test of correctness? It can't be proven or disproven.
And you totally glossed over something from the article that I referenced, instead calling it an ad hominem attack against the author. He straight up linked Oklahoma to Trump as a glaringly high-margin-of-victory state. I'm not disputing the vote tally, but I'm simply saying that the mention of it in the article expressed an opinion on the relationship between red-state conservatism and allegedly bad government.
So your comments aren't actually connected to what the author is saying, and my larger criticism of his bias. I don't buy the idea that the funding and role of the speaker are irrelevant. You seem to be pushing that idea pretty hard. It just seems like you're selectively ignoring certain aspects of the discussion because they don't line up with what you want to believe.
Not only that, but if I say something is a "failing" government entity, then I am absolutely setting a critical tone, and perhaps a pejorative one. You can have efficient, good government among religious folks, or you can have ineffective government among religious folks. There isn't a causality demonstrated by the author, but he still implies that government administered by religious people is naturally ineffective.
You're going through the motions of discussing the article but you're arbitrarily ignoring the context of the article, the bias clearly represented by the author both in the text and in his other work, and the links the author draws between Oklahoma, Trump and religion as a way of disparaging the state.
If you can't see that the author is not cold and unbiased in his arguments, and would clearly prefer to live in a more secular and socialist (why else criticize his own mother for refusing government welfare money) place than Oklahoma, then I don't know how to say anything that is "reasonable" in your view.
I'm fairly certain that the author grew up in Oklahoma, which is why he writes about it. Note the anecdote about his mother, which doesn't make sense otherwise.
I also thought the tone was unhelpful but the BPD patient dying in the Tulsa jail was reprehensible. Although his family just leaving him at a hotel in the midst of a manic episode was wildly unresponsible and they deserve some blame for what befell their son. I can't imagine leaving a family member in an emergency mental health crisis alone and surrounded by strangers. At the very least, they should have followed up on their son's location after they abandoned him to his fate. That being said, the police spectacularly failed and are ultimately to blame for his death.
> I also thought the tone was unhelpful but the BPD patient dying in the Tulsa jail was reprehensible.
I totally agree.
I do note that the conversation about prisons, and about mental healthcare, is larger than Oklahoma.
There have also been incidents in recent years of police officers in Oklahoma killing innocent people of nonwhite descent. That conversation about police brutality is also larger than Oklahoma.
I think the best argument in criticism of the Oklahoma state government is to say: Look at the wealth amassed by oil companies like Continental, Devon Energy, and Chesapeake. Devon Energy was building a massive skyscraper during the financial crisis, as the rest of America reeled. Now juxtapose that massive profitability in oil and gas with Oklahoman problems like drug abuse among young people, inadequate funding for schools, and significant amounts of high school pregnancy. Clearly there's a disparity between what the petroleum companies are earning, and what Oklahoma is receiving (as a state) for its part as an enabler of their profits. Further, it's easy to argue that these firms not only benefit from selling Oklahoma's resources and harvesting talent from petroleum engineering programs in the state's public universities, they also have caused geological anomalies with yet-unknown consequences.
And I suppose Oklahomans are complicit in this, because ultimately they elect the government and they remain tacit about many things that happen in the state. But if there were a discussion, it would have to start with, "is this how an oil-rich region should function?"
Edit: and btw, I would argue that even if DVN, CLR, and CHK are going through a turbulent market moment, the problems we are discussing preceded the selloff in crude oil by at least a decade.
Does anyone know if there is some mechanism for the general public to provide funds to the education system in Oklahoma? Something like a gofundme page where it is clear the money is going to the system and not getting mis-used or mis-directed?
Yes, absolutely! I'm a public school teacher in OKC and this year the admins have heavily encouraged us to make use of donorschoose.org to request items we need for the classroom.
I haven't used the site yet, but know of several teachers who were able to purchase things for their classroom (computers, instruments, etc) that they wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise thanks to people asking questions like yours!
Thanks -- took a look and donated to a couple of projects. It seems like most of the schools represented are in the urban areas though...from the original article it appears that Oklahoma City is still mostly doing well. How is the school district faring in general?
"Governor Mary Fallin had an answer: prayer. The governor issued an official proclamation making 13 October Oilfield Prayer Day."
With such leadership is it any wonder the state is failing? Oil is over. Either find another industry or accept the inevitable poverty. If the cities are indeed doing well, however, then it's hard to say the state is failing. Of course rural areas are poor, though the police and public workers could have some empathy and compassion, both sorely lacking. Rural areas will fail as they are failing and have been failing everywhere in the world. Only entitlement created by some unusually prosperous years due to oil have made the people not realize this.
46 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 70.4 ms ] threadThis is about what you expect from kakistocracy.
If Illinois suffered an economic collapse I'm pretty sure the futures and options exchanges could be moved out of the city in short order. There are other big cities on Lake Michigan or Superior that can (and do) act as ports that could take over the shipping traffic. What else would be left?
The state is an interesting mix of utterly dysfunctional state government and reasonably competent city governments, in a state where most of the people live in either Oklahoma City or Tulsa metro areas. I don't know much about Tulsa but Oklahoma City has repeatedly passed sales taxes over the last 30 years in order to bring about civic improvements. These tax plans are known as MAPS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Area_Projects_Pla... These plans have been executed pretty much according to what they claimed to do, and the administration over the years has been competent and uncontroversial.
The state government, on the other hand, is totally dominated by the homophobia, Islamophobia, and the rest of the guns-and-gays distractions of the national far right. State government has repeated slashed taxes on oil and gas extraction, plunging the state into the crisis described in this article. No meaningful debate ever takes place in the state legislature or executive. Campaigns are fought entirely on the basis of who hates gays and loves Jesus more than the other guy. It is really sad, and a strange contrast to the major local governments.
When I was going to high school in Oklahoma I was offered a perfectly adequate education at the public school nearest my house. We had all the AP subjects. We had music, drama, and art. We had football, baseball, basketball, swimming, and any other sport you'd care to think of, even rodeo. Of course we didn't have sex education, which is why Oklahoma suffered from, and continues to suffer from the worst teen birth rate of any state in the nation.
Back then, people went to private schools only because either their parents were utterly unhinged Jesus freaks, or because they failed out of the public schools. Private schools were for weirdos and losers. Now it's the opposite. No family with any kind of money sends their children to public school in Oklahoma. The state educational apparatus has completely failed in the span of only about 25 years.
If you graduated ten years ago you probably got, according to aggregate measures, an education on par with the one being offered 25 years ago. The real crisis has accelerated in the last five years. Per-pupil spending is declining not only in real dollars, but even in nominal dollars, and stood fourth-lowest among the states in 2014. It is even lower today.
In the end, it's time to look at the value proposition everywhere, cutting education as deeply as they have should be a last resort. I'm all for cutting in most places, but it's pretty clear that they have larger issues to address than 4-day schools and a 1:12 felony rate will fix.
That's the easy part.
Maybe when an ultra conservative stake goes bankrupt, they will turn around.
To put that in perspective, a single large frac well can pull in a million dollars a day easily.
The earthquake problem is caused by salt-water injection over-budgets (no, fracking does not cause earthquakes no matter what you read on the news). The better question is: why was this never an issue when business was _booming_ in the 70s-80s?
Obama's administration removed a key tax credit for prospecting businesses if they hit a dry hole (A tax credit that's available to any other business for failures). These wells used to be completed and leased as injection wells. Now, if a hole starts to appear dry, drilling is stopped and the well sealed and capped.
This has decrease the diversity of injection sites across the states, straining current infrastructure.
Add to that, shipping ports and the fact that both Hollywood and tech started there and a nice eternally warm climate and you have a recipe for a thriving economy. None of which have anything to do with political leanings.
Umm... the article is making the case for how Oklahoma is failing it's people. A case accompanied with publicly available data. The tone seems mostly reasonable.
> It sounds like criticism and resentment pointed at red states.
You seem to be the one who's conflating Oklahoma with red states.
If you think there's something wrong about the article, maybe critique something in the article. Right now, all you seem to be doing is lobbing ad-hominem attacks.
The author explicitly links Oklahoma to Trump by describing it as having the third-largest margin of victory in the presidential election. Hence the red state comment.
I don't think you actually read the article, because you assumed that i was lobbing ad-hominem attacks instead of directly referencing what the author has written.
Three points:
One, your argument seems to be with the title and the tone of the author's book. I'm looking purely at the content of the article which seems reasonable to me.
Second, the response of Oklahoma's /governor/ to falling revenues is prayer: > “Our situation is dire,” Oklahoma finance director Preston Doerflinger said. “To use a pretty harsh word, our revenues are difficult at best. Maybe they fall into the category of somewhat pathetic.”
> Governor Mary Fallin had an answer: prayer. The governor issued an official proclamation making 13 October Oilfield Prayer Day.
Doesn't that seem mind boggling to you? That definitely seems /dumb/ to me.
Third, I don't think that epithet "dumb okie" necessarily applies to you. The author's argument -- without having read the book -- seems to apply to a subset of Oklahoma. For instance the author is clearly sympathetic to the victims of police brutality, the teachers of Oklahoma etc.
> The author explicitly links Oklahoma to Trump by describing it as having the third-largest margin of victory in the presidential election. Hence the red state comment.
That's fair. Sidepoint: how do you feel about Pruitt at EPA?
your own black box idea of "Reasonable" is basically the justification for everything you're saying. I can't really communicate with you when you are setting the criteria for every point on which you and I seem to disagree.
And, then I even give examples from the article describing how they seem reasonable.
Look you clearly disagree with my criteria -- so go ahread and back that disagreement up with an example from the article.
And you totally glossed over something from the article that I referenced, instead calling it an ad hominem attack against the author. He straight up linked Oklahoma to Trump as a glaringly high-margin-of-victory state. I'm not disputing the vote tally, but I'm simply saying that the mention of it in the article expressed an opinion on the relationship between red-state conservatism and allegedly bad government.
So your comments aren't actually connected to what the author is saying, and my larger criticism of his bias. I don't buy the idea that the funding and role of the speaker are irrelevant. You seem to be pushing that idea pretty hard. It just seems like you're selectively ignoring certain aspects of the discussion because they don't line up with what you want to believe.
Not only that, but if I say something is a "failing" government entity, then I am absolutely setting a critical tone, and perhaps a pejorative one. You can have efficient, good government among religious folks, or you can have ineffective government among religious folks. There isn't a causality demonstrated by the author, but he still implies that government administered by religious people is naturally ineffective.
You're going through the motions of discussing the article but you're arbitrarily ignoring the context of the article, the bias clearly represented by the author both in the text and in his other work, and the links the author draws between Oklahoma, Trump and religion as a way of disparaging the state.
If you can't see that the author is not cold and unbiased in his arguments, and would clearly prefer to live in a more secular and socialist (why else criticize his own mother for refusing government welfare money) place than Oklahoma, then I don't know how to say anything that is "reasonable" in your view.
I totally agree.
I do note that the conversation about prisons, and about mental healthcare, is larger than Oklahoma.
There have also been incidents in recent years of police officers in Oklahoma killing innocent people of nonwhite descent. That conversation about police brutality is also larger than Oklahoma.
I think the best argument in criticism of the Oklahoma state government is to say: Look at the wealth amassed by oil companies like Continental, Devon Energy, and Chesapeake. Devon Energy was building a massive skyscraper during the financial crisis, as the rest of America reeled. Now juxtapose that massive profitability in oil and gas with Oklahoman problems like drug abuse among young people, inadequate funding for schools, and significant amounts of high school pregnancy. Clearly there's a disparity between what the petroleum companies are earning, and what Oklahoma is receiving (as a state) for its part as an enabler of their profits. Further, it's easy to argue that these firms not only benefit from selling Oklahoma's resources and harvesting talent from petroleum engineering programs in the state's public universities, they also have caused geological anomalies with yet-unknown consequences.
And I suppose Oklahomans are complicit in this, because ultimately they elect the government and they remain tacit about many things that happen in the state. But if there were a discussion, it would have to start with, "is this how an oil-rich region should function?"
Edit: and btw, I would argue that even if DVN, CLR, and CHK are going through a turbulent market moment, the problems we are discussing preceded the selloff in crude oil by at least a decade.
I think this article touches on at least one of the problems: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/21/univer...
Here's a link to current projects that teachers in OKCPS are requesting: https://www.donorschoose.org/donors/search.html?state=OK&cit...
I haven't used the site yet, but know of several teachers who were able to purchase things for their classroom (computers, instruments, etc) that they wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise thanks to people asking questions like yours!
With such leadership is it any wonder the state is failing? Oil is over. Either find another industry or accept the inevitable poverty. If the cities are indeed doing well, however, then it's hard to say the state is failing. Of course rural areas are poor, though the police and public workers could have some empathy and compassion, both sorely lacking. Rural areas will fail as they are failing and have been failing everywhere in the world. Only entitlement created by some unusually prosperous years due to oil have made the people not realize this.