The Ten Worst States to Live In According to CNBC

If you pay close attention, there is a pattern

By: Austin Abbring

July 21, 2026

CNBC recently released its ten worst states to live in America in 2026 based on a comprehensive study that pulled together various variables to compile its list. To be clear, this is not based on cost of living, weather and climate, or taxes, but rather on socially progressive and quality-of-life metrics. The quality-of-life metrics were measured on FBI data and statistics, violent crime rates, environmental quality, childcare and healthcare access, reproductive rights, worker protections, inclusivity, and drug-death numbers. 

The ten worst states according to this compilation are: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah. Tennessee took home the dubious honor of being the worst state to live in on this list, according to the CNBC study. You may notice that all ten states are Republican, and that is for obvious reasons. GOP-led state legislatures simply perform very poorly under all of these metrics. You are not going to see access to abortion, low crime rates, racial and gender inclusion, environmental protections, affordable child care, or worker protections at the top of the list for Republicans to instill in their legislation. These states have also been under either Republican supermajorities or under Republican Governorship for at least a decade, or even longer in some instances. In fact, Texas has had a Republican governor for three decades. 

Before anyone attacks this list, CNBC is pretty centrist. On its best day, it has a slightly left-leaning bias in its coverage, but on a standard day covering economics, business, and global affairs, it leans conservative. Now this study is all subjective, of course. There are many people who may be excited by more conservative social values and a lower cost of living, but that is their prerogative. That lower cost of living often comes with a price, however. In terms of expanded health care options, infrastructure, well-funded education, quality schools, access to childcare, workers' rights and competitive pay, and quality job opportunities, there will be a noticeable difference compared to bluer cities and areas where economic output is much higher. Personally, I am more drawn to inclusion, a protected environment, civil rights, and strong social safety nets to help keep people on as equal and equitable a playing field as possible. 

Many MAGA commentators and GOP pundits were naturally up in arms over the list. Many cited a political divide and a penalizing of red-state policies over true livability. I am really not sure how else to measure a state’s livability based on its legislature than with quality-of-life indices based on actual metrics that it provides to its constituents. It seems pretty self-explanatory that when a state grades low on workers protections, inclusion, healthcare and childcare access, drug-related deaths, air quality, pollution, violent crime, economic opportunity, and social safety nets, that it may not be the best place to pack up yourself or your family and take up camp in. Laura Ingram, a Fox News host, almost gets it here. She says the quiet part out loud. She says that these same states are very business-friendly. She does not realize she is advertising the drain corporate America has on the working class, and these states coincidentally being very pro-business and on the worst states to live list demonstrates this perfectly.

Which, on the surface, being a pro-business state sounds great. I would love to see sustainable business growth and development that rewards its employees and local communities, but we do not see that anywhere near enough. What is incentivizing these businesses to move to these states? What is the disconnect driving inequities in these states despite the business-friendly environment? It is tax subsidies, stipends, and tax breaks luring these businesses and corporations to set up shop. This creates a heavy drain on public resources at the state level and down to the local municipality level. These public resources, like emergency funds, infrastructure funds, education, and social safety nets like state-level Medicaid programs, are often cut to pay for these tax incentives to attract a business that may not permanently set up residency. Even worse yet, a large business may move or create a factory, headquarters, plant, whatever, without the tax break anyway. For example, in 2019 Amazon set up a massive office presence in New York without large tax incentives being offered, despite the initial backlash against politicians like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who would not give in to Amazon’s demands. Corporations, large businesses, and even medium-sized businesses, for that matter, are, for the most part, going to locate wherever makes sense to them anyhow. 

Again, all of this list is subjective in terms of what type of environment most excites you. I guess we will have to see how many people line up to move to Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana from places like New York, California, and Illinois in search of lower quality-of-life-indexed states in the coming years.