Staycations are just days off minus travel
I’m sure some of you have had the displeasure of seeing horribly useless websites like WalletHub.
They’ve made it their purpose to “analyze” data (which is suspect to begin with) and formulate lists (or “listicles” as we’ve covered in the past) which are presented as “studies.” Best and worst lists of stupid subjects. One recently about “Best Cities for Staycations” and “Worst Cities for Staycations.” Dear God.
NYC was ranked nearly last. One of the best places to “stick around, too!” (Jersey City was also near the bottom of this useless list.)
Let’s review the stupidity below.
WalletHub “studies” “Staycations”
With summer upon us and nearly 66 percent of Americans not planning to take a vacation this year [where the hell do they get that information?], the personal-finance website WalletHub today released its report on 2016’s Best & Worst Cities for Staycations.
To help Americans find the best staycation spots in the U.S. — and the ones worth leaving home for [Wait a minute, doesn’t that totally contradict what a staycation is?]— WalletHub’s number crunchers compared the 150 largest cities across 28 key metrics [I hardly use that many metrics in a year – who does that?]. Our data set includes such metrics as movie and bowling costs [bowling is necessary for all staycations], golf courses, frozen-yogurt shops [Golf and yogurt apparently pair well together] and spas [a lot to do during your staycation]per capita, and the cost of house-cleaning services [Won’t be a staycation without the cleaning lady!].
Comparing the Best & Worst
• New Orleans has the most museums per 100,000 residents, 23.34, which is 79 times more than in Aurora, Colo., the city with the fewest, 0.29. [Check.]
• Columbus, Ga., has the most parks per 100,000 residents, 213.37, which is 22.5 times more than in Hialeah, Fla., the city with the fewest, 9.47. [No need to consider size of parks, nah.]
• Seattle has the most coffee shops per 100,000 residents, 109.43, which is nearly 30 times more than in Laredo, Texas, the city with the fewest, 3.67. [You have to visit every coffee shop or else]
• Orlando, Fla., has the most ice-cream and frozen-yogurt shops per 100,000 residents, 57.15, which is 13 times more than in Detroit, the city with the fewest, 4.31. [Why even include Detroit in anything?]
• Columbus, Ga., has the most tennis courts per 100,000 residents, 70.11, which is 26 times higher than in Gilbert, Ariz., the city with the fewest, 2.69. [Tennis?]
• Buffalo, N.Y., has the lowest bowling costs, $3.09, which is nearly four times less expensive than in New York City, the city with the highest, $12.28. [Bring hand-sanitizer]
• Fort Wayne, Ind., has the lowest beauty-salon costs, $22.42, which is nearly three times less expensive than in New York City, the city with the highest, $66.18. [You haven’t seen the hair styles in Indiana, have you?]
• Columbus, Ga., has the lowest cost of house-cleaning services, $110, which is four times less expensive than in Salt Lake City, the city with the highest, $454. [Someone in Columbus, GA obviously funded this article.]
See their “methodology” below.
Totally random way of “reaching a conclusion.” Holy crap. Some data contradicts others. Like hiking trails and basketball hoops?
And no mention of crime or transportation?
They send me these “studies” for consideration for publication. Otherwise – I’d NEVER even waste my time with them. Not sure why they are so popular and shared among the masses. Blows my mind, really. I guess using sophisticated words (dimensions, metrics, weights, methodology) plus some numbers and “math” is all you need to come across as an “authority” to the general population. This type of study would have been laughed off the planet 200 years ago when real thinkers existed.