"However, Winston-Salem was ranked 90 in lowest percentage of people who engage in physical activity."
So apparently this isn't a measure of how healthy people really are.
Interestingly enough the Winston-Salem Journal, which is owned by Berkshire Hathaway just as is the News & Record, saw no need to mention this story today or any other day thus far.
So I decided to go find the actual WalletHub Rankings and see what the News & Record left out.
For example: while it is true that Greensboro was given a score of 75th overall by WalletHub Greensboro's “Budget & Participation” Rank was lower at 87 and our “Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment” Rank was higher at 64.
But check this out: Laredo, Texas which came in at 100 on the scale had a “Budget & Participation” Rank of 93 and a “Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment” Rank of 100.
So what do these rankings mean? From WalletHub:
"Methodology
In order to identify the cities that encourage an active lifestyle, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 100 most populated U.S. cities across two key dimensions, “Budget & Participation” and “Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment.” The latter was weighted more heavily than the former because the accessibility of public facilities mainly determines how well the population can engage in physical activity.
With regard to our sample, please note that “city” refers to city proper and excludes surrounding metro areas.
Next, we compiled 24 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was given a value between 0 and 100, wherein 100 is the best value for that metric and 0 is the worst. Data for metrics marked with an asterisk (*) were available only at the state level and therefore received only half a weight.
Finally, we calculated the overall score for each city and ranked them using the weighted average across all metrics.
Budget & Participation – Total Points: 30
- Average Monthly Fitness-Club Fee: Double Weight (~7.06 Points)
- Average Bowling Cost: Half Weight (~1.76 Points)
- Average Cost of Playing Squash: Half* Weight (~1.76 Points)
- Average Tennis Court Rent (for one hour during the weekend): Half Weight (~1.76 Points)
- Number of Sporting-Goods Stores per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~3.53 Points)
- Number of Sports Clubs per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~3.53 Points)
- Percentage of Residents Who Engage in Any Physical Activity: Full Weight (~3.53 Points)
- Number of Little Leagues per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~3.53 Points)
- Pick-Up Soccer Meetups per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~3.53 Points)
Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment – Total Points: 70
- Number of Swimming Pools per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Basketball Hoops per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Tennis Courts per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Public Golf Courses per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Baseball Diamonds per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Ice-Skating Rinks per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Skateboard Parks per 1,000,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Bike Score: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Bike Rental Facilities per 1,000,000 Residents: Half Weight (~2.41 Points)
- Walk Score: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Fitness Centers per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Fitness Trainers & Aerobics Instructors per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Park Playgrounds per 100,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- Number of Parkland Acres per 1,000 Residents: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)
- WalletHub “Weather” Ranking: Full Weight (~4.83 Points)"
And yet Laredo, Texas which came in at 100 on the scale still had a “Budget & Participation” Rank of 93 and a “Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment” Rank of 100. How can that be? And what about Scottsdale, Arizona which came in #1 on the list with a “Budget & Participation” Rank of only 11 and a “Sports Facilities & Outdoor Environment” Rank of a measly 4. Does that mean these rankings are skewed? Rigged perhaps?
No, what it means is the one thing the News & Record and Greensboro's elected leaders would rather I not tell you. Your health has more to do with your income than the number of parks or fitness centers where you live.
In Laredo there are lots of public spaces and places where you can get lots of exercise and it never gets cold. But per capita income in Laredo is extremely low so people can't afford to stay healthy. And Scottsdale beats out Greensboro on most every WalletHub list that indicates folks in Scottsdale might have more money:
Education:
Most Caring.
Best and Worst Cities for Hispanic Entrepreneurs That's amazing considering that Scottsdale is almost all white and rich.
Amazingly, Scottsdale is smaller than Greensboro. The first time I saw Scottsdale it was smaller than Burlington. Scottsdale was "incorporated in 1951 with a population of 2000, the 2014 population of the city is estimated to be 230,512 according to the U.S. Census Bureau." I remember building cable television systems in Scottsdale before most of the houses were built when most of the city was still desert.
So why did Scottsdale grow over the course of the last 30 plus years while Greensboro died? And why won't the media tell you?
