It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Red States, Including the ‘Newly-Reds,’ Excel at Job Growth

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Well, this is certainly no surprise at all. After all, fiscal conservatism and a belief in smaller govt will always win out over liberal tax and spend madness.

It's a new twist on the old axiom, Be Red or Be Dead!



Now that state employment information for the first half of 2011 is available, one can’t help but notice which states are up, as well as a particularly telling example of one which is down.

Though admittedly the comparison isn’t apples to apples, it’s worth noting that of the 757,000 seasonally adjusted jobs added in the overall economy this year from January through June, the ten states with the highest percentage employment growth were responsible for well over half, or 390,000 of them, even though they only have about 20% of the nation’s population:


What’s more, as the economy by all accounts decelerated in May and June, the ten states above stayed relatively strong. While the country as a whole gained only 43,000 seasonally adjusted jobs in those two months, they added over 90. Democrats who accuse Republicans of wanting the economy to tank, please note: If it weren’t for these ten states, we might already be in the midst of another recession instead of possibly heading towards one, as Goldman Sachs and others have recently asserted.

Jobs
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
What republicans creating jobs? The party will not stand for this because it doesn't fit in with the plan.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Sorry Mashigas, but this is complete and utter BULL CRAP.

My state (Ohio) is about as red as it can get (and we're the ones that assured W got "elected"). Our job growth is in serious decline and is at abysmal levels. Ohio is one of the worst right now in terms of job growth.

There is job growth though, especially in Michigan and other manufacturing states, especially those tied to the auto industry. These are hardly red states though. All industry took a serious nose dive in 2007 with the start of the recession and most (but not all) are springing back now.

What's Driving US Manufacturing Growth?



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Do you have anything a little more reliable and less biased than a blog post by Tom Blumer? For a site all about denying ignorance, this is quite the sourceless little editorial and nothing else.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
One could easily argue that, for the most part, being the poorest states in the country, the red states were bound to be the ones creating jobs. It has little to nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. I would bet that most of the jobs created in red states were low paying service jobs. Not all jobs are created equal.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by strings0305
One could easily argue that, for the most part, being the poorest states in the country, the red states were bound to be the ones creating jobs. It has little to nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. I would bet that most of the jobs created in red states were low paying service jobs. Not all jobs are created equal.


Look no further than Bachmann to understand that mentality. She actually said (out loud!) to get rid of minimum wage and then we'd have less unemployment. I think many of those guys would have considered slaves on the plantation as "gainfully employed".



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 



Sorry Mashigas, but this is complete and utter BULL CRAP.

My state (Ohio) is about as red as it can get (and we're the ones that assured W got "elected"). Our job growth is in serious decline and is at abysmal levels. Ohio is one of the worst right now in terms of job growth.


Ohio is NOT "about as red as it can get". It IS getting redder now that you have a decent governor, but it has always been an unpredictable state, but mostly BLUE:


Six of the ten (Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming) have been conservative strongholds for decades. Montana, though its governor and two senators are currently Democrats, has been a red state in all but one presidential election since 1972. The final three highlighted above — Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin — were previously governed by Democrats who were replaced with GOP governors this year. All three are in the early stages of what may be remarkable turnarounds. I call them “the newly-reds.”

Led by Governor John Kasich, Ohio’s January-June seasonally adjusted jobs pickup is the Buckeye State’s best performance since 1994. Not coincidentally, that’s about when then-Governor George Voinovich stopped being even sort of conservative. Regardless of the party in charge, Ohio was governed like a blue state until Kasich came along. Even more impressive, in terms of what has actually occurred (i.e., the not seasonally adjusted figures), the state has added just over 200,000 private-sector jobs in the past five months, the best February-June total since 1999, when the national economy, largely due to Kasich’s previous work on the federal budget as a congressman, was far stronger.


I'm very surprised you didn't know that, being a Buckeye and all....



There is job growth though, especially in Michigan and other manufacturing states, especially those tied to the auto industry. These are hardly red states though. All industry took a serious nose dive in 2007 with the start of the recession and most (but not all) are springing back now.


All industry took a nosedive when Obama slimed his way into the WH.

As for the rest, perhaps you should read the article before you say things that aren't true.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by strings0305
 



One could easily argue that, for the most part, being the poorest states in the country, the red states were bound to be the ones creating jobs. It has little to nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. I would bet that most of the jobs created in red states were low paying service jobs. Not all jobs are created equal.


Bullcrap. Show me stats that support what you say or it's an empty claim.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Crapspackle
 



Do you have anything a little more reliable and less biased than a blog post by Tom Blumer? For a site all about denying ignorance, this is quite the sourceless little editorial and nothing else.


Nah, that's your 'want', so it's your job to find such sources. all sources are welcome, thos that support as well as those that disprove.

Google is your friend. Get to it!

edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 




Look no further than Bachmann to understand that mentality. She actually said (out loud!) to get rid of minimum wage and then we'd have less unemployment. I think many of those guys would have considered slaves on the plantation as "gainfully employed".


Tsk tsk...:shk: This is not a thread on Bachmann, so please do not derail.
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   
heres the thing about job creation

jobs go to where the need is and money is that is condusive with less governmental restrictions that let business do its thing

and that is make money and that is achieve by two ways infusing capital that creates jobs and those people who are working now have money that they can pump back into local economies that produce other jobs that produces more jobs that end up and federal and state tax revenue,

the simple fact is that private business has raise more people out of poverty than any government program to date

and it is a self sustaining means of wealth and job creation that begets more and more and snowballs.

then the government gets the big idea hey lets stick rules and regulations on em thus destroying wealth creation and generation and say hey lets tax the hell out of them they are successful wheres are share?

that is the red blue paradigm and thats why you see success there vs stagnation and destruction in blue states.
edit on 30-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Cuervo
 




Look no further than Bachmann to understand that mentality. She actually said (out loud!) to get rid of minimum wage and then we'd have less unemployment. I think many of those guys would have considered slaves on the plantation as "gainfully employed".


Tsk tsk...:shk: This is not a thread on Bachmann, so please do not derail.
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)


To espouse the wisdom of Red-State-Job-Creation through the wisdom of Bachmann is NOT derailing, my friend. Unless you wish to denounce her from being right-winged completely... then I'll digress.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 



Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Cuervo



Look no further than Bachmann to understand that mentality. She actually said (out loud!) to get rid of minimum wage and then we'd have less unemployment. I think many of those guys would have considered slaves on the plantation as "gainfully employed".




Tsk tsk... This is not a thread on Bachmann, so please do not derail.
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)




To espouse the wisdom of Red-State-Job-Creation through the wisdom of Bachmann is NOT derailing, my friend. Unless you wish to denounce her from being right-winged completely... then I'll digress.


The problem is, you start off with a very biased statement. It's obvious that what Bachmann meant is true ( less govt involvement in wage and price setting is a good thing ), but you immediately turn it into a partisan "That idiot Bachmann did it again" slam without stating why it is such a bad thing by your account.

The way you injected it into the thread is nothing but anti-Bachmann rhetoric. Her name was not brought up before your childish slam.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Cuervo
 



Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Cuervo



Look no further than Bachmann to understand that mentality. She actually said (out loud!) to get rid of minimum wage and then we'd have less unemployment. I think many of those guys would have considered slaves on the plantation as "gainfully employed".




Tsk tsk... This is not a thread on Bachmann, so please do not derail.
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)




To espouse the wisdom of Red-State-Job-Creation through the wisdom of Bachmann is NOT derailing, my friend. Unless you wish to denounce her from being right-winged completely... then I'll digress.


The problem is, you start off with a very biased statement. It's obvious that what Bachmann meant is true ( less govt involvement in wage and price setting is a good thing ), but you immediately turn it into a partisan "That idiot Bachmann did it again" slam without stating why it is such a bad thing by your account.

The way you injected it into the thread is nothing but anti-Bachmann rhetoric. Her name was not brought up before your childish slam.


No... she did NOT mean it as smaller government. She meant it as anti-laborer. The trick is that she knew that people would take it as "smaller government".

Look... I'm small government. You know why? Because I love the people in my state. I know the people in my state love me. Same as you and your state. Bachmann? She's not small-government... she's big corporations.

She'd turn us into a giant Walmart, if she could.

Why you don't see how that's relevant to the thread and, instead, find it to be trolling is beyond me.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   
i suck at geography but texas is leading job creation in this country and dont think bachmann has anything to do with texas a red state



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 




No... she did NOT mean it as smaller government. She meant it as anti-laborer. The trick is that she knew that people would take it as "smaller government".


That is insane. Absurd. How do you come up with this crap? Why on God's Green Earth would ANYBODY be "anti-laborer"?



Look... I'm small government. You know why? Because I love the people in my state. I know the people in my state love me. Same as you and your state. Bachmann? She's not small-government... she's big corporations.


That's sweet. Everybody loves somebody sometime. Show me how Bachmann is anti-laborer and big corporations or it's nothing but bullcrap.


Why you don't see how that's relevant to the thread and, instead, find it to be trolling is beyond me.


Because there is no other sane interpretation for your ramblings.
edit on 30-7-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


Obviously, I've hit a hot button with you and Michelle. I'll back off. But first answer this:

How is eliminating minimum wage PRO labor?!



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
hey i got a question what is minmum wage these days?

my first job was $3.25 an hour hmmmm



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 




Obviously, I've hit a hot button with you and Michelle. I'll back off.


No need to back off. The button you pushed is character assassination without reason. Pure meanness. Liberals attacked Sarah Palin the same way, even attacking her Down's Syndrome baby. That's totally disgusting and uncalled for. That's what your post does, imo.


But first answer this:

How is eliminating minimum wage PRO labor?!


Because it would put the decision on how much to pay and whether someone is willing to work for that wage in the hands of the people, not the hands of the govt. It puts a fixed cost on small business that forces them to employ less people. It raises prices on a pizza and a haircut and every other place it is used.

And worst of all, it gives false expectations to the working class that somehow it will allow them to survive on the minimum wage. They take it to mean a living wage when it isn't.

Why is there a minimum wage? Why not just make it $20/hr so it means something, and people can live on it?

Because it's just a lie used by libs to grab votes from the poor, is why.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas


Because it would put the decision on how much to pay and whether someone is willing to work for that wage in the hands of the people, not the hands of the govt. It puts a fixed cost on small business that forces them to employ less people. It raises prices on a pizza and a haircut and every other place it is used.

And worst of all, it gives false expectations to the working class that somehow it will allow them to survive on the minimum wage. They take it to mean a living wage when it isn't.

Why is there a minimum wage? Why not just make it $20/hr so it means something, and people can live on it?

Because it's just a lie used by libs to grab votes from the poor, is why.


Holy crap...

I can't even speak to that. It's like you and I are saying the same things but you say they are good and I'm saying they are bad. At that point, it's just shoulder-angels waxing philosophy. I can't speak to your morals. Sorry.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join