Says Harvard economics prof Edward Glaeser, who looks at the controversy between the Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers and the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development numbers, which are being used, respectively, by Tom Barrett and Scott Walker.
One way to judge between the numbers is to look at alternative data sources and see whether they tend towards gloom or growth. The BLS itself provides an alternative estimate of job growth from its household survey, which is generally less accurate than the employer survey and suggests strong job growth between 2011 and 2012. According to the household survey, Wisconsin’s unemployment rate has dropped significantly over the last year, and employment has increased by 22,000 between March 2011 and 2012, again not seasonally adjusted, which is closer to the figure Walker is promoting than the BLS’s own establishment survey.
The BLS Mass Layoff database also shows that between the first four months of 2011 and the first four months of 2012 the number of mass layoffs dropped by about 30 percent and the number of new unemployment insurance claims from those layoffs fell by 36 percent. Wisconsin’s total personal income grew by 4.5 percent nominally, or about 1 percent in real terms, between the fourth quarter of 2010 and the fourth quarter of 2011. Wisconsin’s rental vacancy rate was down to 6.6 percent in 2011, down from 8.6 percent in 2010.
My best guess is that the truth lies between the two figures, but closer to the upbeat Wisconsin state numbers than the BLS estimate.
Posts
38 comments:
"They should be making their choices based on the things the governor does control, not on short term economic data, which are neither perfectly measured nor under the governor’s control."
-- Solid, good advice.
You should only vote the economy if that means you vote democrat.
The good thing about having too many college graduates is that just about everyone understands what Professor Glaeser is talking about.
Alternatively, you could set aside the hypertechnical debates over job creation statistics, and cast you vote on the basis of one thing over which the Governor has great control, when both legislative bodies are controlled by his party: the state budget.
Which Scott Walker has balanced.
And as you do that, you could also contrast the governmental gridlock that would occur if, in a midterm recall, the governor were replaced with a member of the opposing party.
You really don't even need to support Scott Walker, to realize that if your greatest wish is to replace him, the better way to do it would be in the next general election.
This recall would be a farce, if the possible consequences weren't so serious.
The governor took control of the unions which evidently is good enough for the people of Wisconsin . . .
First we had "weather is not the climate"; now we have "jobs are not the economy".
Pretty soon it'll be "choice is not freedom", and shortly afterwards Oceania will always have been at war with Eurasia.
First we had "weather is not the climate"
This has always been true.
You need better introductory clauses in your sentences.
Why does this remind me of Heinlein? "Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."
Of course, California's government has nothing whatever to do with the fact that local entrepreneurs are leaving the state, and the "chance" deficits they have, either...
Critical thinking sounds like "divide and conquer" strategy. Better stop now cuz of the civil war and all that.
As if the average dolt voter understands that the President/Governor doesn't control the economy. It doesn't help when Scott Walker made a promise to create X amount of jobs or Romney talks about creating jobs. They just play into this stupid assfuckery of a concept.
Of course, the Governor (nor the President) can't CREATE good jobs. That is done by the private sector. The best that the government can do is GET OUT OF THE WAY. Reduce regulations, requirements - including UNION requirements - is the way to do that and what Walker has been doing.
'Creating jobs' - good jobs, that is - is not the function of government and never was.
Ah the Democrats--when bad things happen in an economy, it's the Republicans fault no matter who's in charge; if good things happen in an economy and a Republican is involved, he didn't have anything to do with; if good things happen in a economy and a Democrat is in charge why hell fire, hot damn he is personally responsible for it all.
I don't vote the economy as a general rule, I vote on the party (Republican) that executes the law of the state and works to change what needs to be changed while upholding the constitution. So the asshats advice is meaningless to me anyway.
He is both right and wrong. There is a delay before new enterprises will emerge due to policy changes. However, there will be an almost immediate response by existing enterprises to change in risk engendered by policy changes.
Also, Walker's claim to fame is not only in policy changes affecting the private sector, but in a reduction of deficit spending in the public sector. This marks an improvement for the outlook of both businesses and taxpayers.
Has anyone out there spotted Garbage Mahal swinging lifelessly from a tree?
They should be making their choices based on the things the governor does control, not on short term economic data
The Governor does have some control over the economic business climate. The short term economic data is directly related to the business climate.
High taxes, burdensome rules and regulations, difficult employee laws are just a part of what can make or break a business and make or break the decision to even do business in your State.
The fact that unemployment is down, taxes have not gone up are all directly related to the Governor's policies. Economically, Wisconsin is doing very well compared to many other States....California for example. I would say that the leader of the State is in a large part responsible for the positive news.
This guy is a economic professor? What Cracker Jack box did he get his diploma from.
Shorter Glaeser — just vote for Barrett, mkay?
"They should be making their choices based on the things the governor does control, not on short term economic data, which are neither perfectly measured nor under the governor’s control."
Well, perhaps a firmer basis would be to look at what Walker has done in the last 2 years, better to gauge what he is likely to do in the next 2 years. The recall began with a fuss over a very particular thing the Governor controlled -- the reforms he pushed and signed into law about collective bargaining by public employee unions. His pitch was that, by lowering the cost of doing business in Wisconsin directly (by rejecting tax increases to finance the deficit) and indirectly (by reducing the cost of government, and thus the amount the government had to raise to finance itself going forward), Walker created the conditions for an improved economic future for Wisconsin. That's all appropriately focused on mid and long-term incentives.
If I were voting in Wisconsin, that's what I'd be focused on, together with the preposterous precedent would be set by recalling Walker because he pursued the policies he had originally campaigned on.
But garage told me Walker was killing job creation.
Or something.
Ya mean the guy from Haavahd is...
WRONG?????
First we had "weather is not the climate"
This has always been true.
Not trying to derail the conversation, but as a wag put it, "Climate is the plural of weather."
Of course, the Governor (nor the President) can't CREATE good jobs. That is done by the private sector. The best that the government can do is GET OUT OF THE WAY. Reduce regulations, requirements - including UNION requirements - is the way to do that and what Walker has been doing.
'Creating jobs' - good jobs, that is - is not the function of government and never was.
It isn't possible for government to be a net producer of jobs. While some government program might appear to create jobs (the seen), what remains unseen is the number of jobs destroyed by taking the money out of the economy in the form of taxes and/or borrowing.
The single best thing the government can do to spur the economy is to reduce the burdens of business taxes and regulations, freeing money for growth. When the economy improves, so do tax revenues. On average, for every government employee, you need several people in the private sector working and paying taxes to provide the money for that government employee. If private employment is hurting and revenues fall, the government can no longer afford to employ as many people directly. In other words, to protect the public employees (if that's your aim), you must first build up the private sector. Getting the hell out of the way is a good start.
If Walker were ethical, as he claims, he simply would have walked twenty feet to tell his top aids to stop the illegal activity, but he didn't. If he supports deer hunting on public lands, he would not have hired a deer czar who is against our hunting tradition, but he didn't. if Walker were honest, he would admit the reason property taxes are less is because all our assessments have been lowered, but he doesn't. If Walker supports equal pay for women, he would not have eliminated their ability to appeal a case to the State courts, but he didn't. I guess I will base my decisions on those and other factors--
Sometimes I focus on headlines.
Glaeser's headline in "Bloomberg":
"In Wisconsin's Jobs Debate, Walker Has the Stronger Case"
"roesch/voltaire said...
If Walker were ethical, as he claims, he simply would have walked twenty feet to tell his top aids to stop the illegal activity, but he didn't. If he supports deer hunting on public lands, he would not have hired a deer czar who is against our hunting tradition, but he didn't. if Walker were honest, he would admit the reason property taxes are less is because all our assessments have been lowered, but he doesn't. If Walker supports equal pay for women, he would not have eliminated their ability to appeal a case to the State courts, but he didn't. I guess I will base my decisions on those and other factors LIKE ME HAVING TO PAY FOR MY LAVISH PENSION, HEALTH INSURANCE, AND BENEFITS."
Finished that up for ya asshat. If you were honest I wouldn't have had to.
First we had "weather is not the climate"
This has always been true.
Unless we have a hot summer. Or a cool summer. Or a warm winter. Or a cold winter. Or a few more hurricanes. At that point we're all told "See! Anthropogenic climate change is here!"
That guy must be a real Phd. He Piled it Higher and deeper than anyone else has about the Evil Walker Regimes failures.
"roesch/voltaire said...
If Walker were ethical, as he claims, he simply would have walked twenty feet to tell his top aids to stop the illegal activity, but he didn't.
There is no evidence, anywhere, at all, that Walker knew of "illegal activity"
If you weren't such a silly, dishonest hack, you wouldn't type stupid stuff on the Internet.
if Walker were honest, he would admit the reason property taxes are less is because all our assessments have been lowered,
If eveyone's assessment goes down the same percentage, their share of the net tax paid remains the same. If everyone's assessment goes up the same percentage, their share of the net tax remains the same. The only way the taxes change in those scenarios is the amount of the tax levy - if amount levied goes down, taxes go down; if amount levied goes up, taxes go up; if amount levied stays the same, taxes stay the same.
That's OK, R-V, could never get my 95 year old godmother to grasp that concept either.
"The single best thing the government can do to spur the economy is to reduce the burdens of business taxes and regulations, freeing money for growth. When the economy improves, so do tax revenues. "
I saw a study the other day comparing national economies and the size of government. Guess what it said. Small works better unless there was a hell of a coincidence involved. A bunch of coincidences.
roach voltage... spews such an unending stream of falsehoods..
....If he supports deer hunting on public lands, he would not have hired a deer czar who is against our hunting tradition
First, the anti-hunting libs should admit that Doyle's DNR did such a miserable job managing the herd, it must have been deliberate sabotage. Last time I went hunting, while at the watering hole at night I talked to Wisconsin hunters who have sworn off hunting in Wisconsin and will be hunting instead in Michigan.. Michigan!!! And lets not talk about DNR wardens throwing their weight around trying to fine the slightest infraction.
Kroll appointed Drs. David Guynn and Gary Alt to serve with him as the review committee. Collectively, these three men have more than 100 years of experience in whitetail science and management.
Kroll and his colleagues recently released a preliminary report on their findings, the results of which are expected to forever change the landscape of deer management in the Badger State.
Before discussing their preliminary findings, it’s important to note that Kroll’s team didn’t just assess the DNR.
“Our work is more an evaluation of the entire deer management process and how hunters have been marginalized,” explained Guynn.
Read more: http://www.newstalk1130.com/pages/common_sense_central.html#ixzz1wJSruBmV
..... if Walker were honest, he would admit the reason property taxes are less is because all our assessments have been lowered,
Mine went down because my School Taxes went down...Pretty simple. That billion dollars in savings had to trickle down somewhere.
If Walker supports equal pay for women, he would not have eliminated their ability to appeal a case to the State courts
Of course the Two Year Old law which was named "Equal Pay for Women" was a special gift to the trial lawyers. Why should anyone be able to sue for THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND IN excessive punitive damages if they were discriminated against in their pay? Why not just what they were owed and court costs? Are we looking for fairness or to put a bullet in the brain of small businesses?
For those who are uncertain, there is still federal law regarding equal pay and for egregious violators the State DOJ could impose fines. Equal pay complaints continue to be pursued
Even the left leaning Politifact debunked this crappy democrat talking point..
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/mar/12/cory-mason/wisconsin-gop-bill-would-repeal-law-ensuring-pay-e/
Roach Voltage is just mouthing that whacky war-on-woman meme Wisconsin edition. Hey, how about those Democratic Senators, when are they going to pay their women staffers what they are paying their male staffers??
But the Washington Free Beacon reported Thursday that Murray, Boxer and Feinstein all paid their female staffers less than their male counterparts in 2011.
"Murray, who has repeatedly accused Republicans of waging a 'war a women,' is one of the worst offenders," Andrew Stiles wrote
http://www.examiner.com/article/report-murray-feinstein-boxer-pay-female-staffers-less-than-male-staffers
"A bunch of coincidences"?
Let me guess?
No "bunch of coincidences" larger in number than the number of results for the Google search with the answer you "hoped" to find?
And to prove my point, Michael K, I just Googled "a bunch of flowers" and got 27 million results.
Anxiously awaiting a "bunch of" something...ANYTHING, that can top that 27 million mark. ;)
At least the guy's honest. Jobs have increased. To me, this guy has some cockamamie idea about economics, which is that number of jobs are some universal constant. I suppose he doesn't believe in stimulus. That can't create jobs. I suppose he doesn't believe that technology creates jobs. I suppose he doesn't believe in competition for jobs, since he said governors can't create jobs.
Either that, or the guy was hopelessly misquoted. I hope for the later.
kiss scotop
Well, we already knew Harvard professors know bugger-all about economics,
Many small businesses have been holding back on hiring and spending money. The politically correct reason for this is an uncertain economic climate. The politically incorrect reason is to send a message to the yahoos in charge of regulations, declining revenue, increased taxes instead of spending cuts, union loving politicians to take their jobs and shove it.
This is hard ball economics and a not so quiet revolution from the job creators and those who know who their customers are. Those who live off the taxpayer have no clue or respect for their customer. Time to send them out to experience real life where budgets matter, hard decisions are made, and a work ethic far removed from the dreamy world of academia, politics and lack of accountability.
Further, with no idea of how to deal with the reality the rest of us deal with on a daily basis, Obama and his minions double down on Hope and Change as the goal of their campaign for four more years of failed leadership. Pathetic.
What they should be focusing on is that is Walker rammed an unwanted piece of legislation down their throats despite public outcry. They should focus on Walker's kowtowing to corporate interest at the expense of workers for his own political gain. They should focus on his "divide and conquer" strategy that did indeed divide the state. They should focus on his all out assault on the teacher's profession, who didn't happen to support him, while exempting fire fighters and police who did happen to support him. Women should focus n Walker's legislative assault to them and they should focus on how the Equal Pay Act harms veterans. They should focus on Walker's voter suppression and how he pushed to close DVMs in Democratic precincts. They should focus on his outright lies about having campaigned on eliminating collective bargaining(one can only imagine what he can claim to have campaigned on again). They should focus on Walker being at the heart of a criminal corruption probe.
And yes, they should be basing their decisions on recent job growth as that is indeed the topic and main driver in today's political environment. The elimination of collective bargaining in order to balance the budget and to create jobs is the very issue of this recall. Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs from March 2011 to March 2012. To say that that shouldn't be looked at, shouldn't be a consideration, or something that shouldn't be used to base one's decisions on is just total blind partisan nonsense.
That's a hell of a screed, R.J. Now, with that off your chest, how are you going to justify voting for Obama?
Start with the rammed an unpopular piece of legislation down their throats despite public outcry as it applies to Obamacare and go from there.
Take your time. I've got all day.
n.b. - if you're not an Obamabot, then apologies. But you certainly give a good impression of one.
Christopher, you present the expected rebuttal which goes something like "uh, yeah,, well, Obama sucks too so take that". And of course, it's not unusual that empty arguments are spiced with condescending innuendos such as "screed" and "Obamabot", as if that somehow gives credence to your nonexistent argument.
It's beyond me how anyone of reasonable intellect can justify how the WI legislation was passed and then cry foul on the ACA, particularly in regards to the "rammed down our throats" mantra. ACA was debated for over a year while WI collective bargaining was given a couple of hours, at best. ACA was adopted on many GOP policies and input, Fitzgerald refused to give Dems the time of day. Obama and Dems ran on a campaign to repair healthcare so ACA as actually fulfilling their promise. Walker did not run on ending CB and even suggested otherwise on the trail.
Not meaning to be condencending but perhaps your confusion is from hearing Fox News refer to ACA as "rammed trough" a couple gazillion times while being a mouthpiece for Walker.
Post a Comment