opportunity costs, etc.

Progressive Farmer magazine released its top 200 counties in Rural America today. This is my top-third of the front page on the matter, with which I am quite pleased -- at least for my skill set. You can't see it sowell, but you get the general idea. (And to go with the quiz theme, you can take a find-my-spot kind of rural quiz at progressivefarmer.com.)

• My journalism prof has a syndicated weekly column. This week he wrote about how there is a tendency among secular journalists to be completely ignorant of religion. "Another time, an "eager young thing" from the same national newspaper called todiscuss a political scandal. Sadly, Neuhaus said,corruption has 'been around ever since thatunfortunate afternoon in the garden.' There was a long pause and she asked: 'What garden was that?'"
• Yesterday, a study came out about the increasing number of women who have to decide whether to go off their anti-depressants during pregnancy. (Any medication could pose a threat to the baby, and earlier studies have shown anti-depressants taken during pregnancy lead to a higher risk of birth defects.) It sounds pretty clear when you hear there's a risk of birth defects that you go off the medication. But the study showed that women who go off their medications also put their babies in jeopardy, as they are unable to get enough sleep, less likely to eat well, and less able to mentally prepare for having a child. The risk for post-partum depression also skyrockets. While this situation is not a pressing one for me personally, it's one that will be faced by, if not me, those near and dear to me in the next decade or so. There are risks on both sides...which is greater?
• A study came out in South Dakota this week about the impacts of raising the state minimum wage. The wage hasn't risen since 1997, but inflation has, meaning workers earning the legal $5.15 an hour are making $4.22 in 1997 purchasing power. I make somewhere between twice either of those, but I feel it's a real challenge to make ends meet. I'm frugal, too. The study, anyhow, said that raising the wage would mean unemployment would rise. So some workers would see a better standard of living and others would see much worse. This is a tough call. My gut reaction is to at least give some workers enough to really get by, and they'll stop relying on forms of welfare. (Because, frankly, there's no way you can make less than I do now and not need government assistance.) On the other hand, is it better for more to have a job of some sort? It has to be raised, though. $5.15 wasn't adequate to begin with. $4.22 is far worse -- unliveable.
• One more bit of politics: The House has approved a $11.9 billion cut in student aid. It sounds like the Senate has also approved it.