Since 2005, 80% of the new private sector jobs were created in Texas? TX FTW?

[DesiPower]

Or another false campaign advertising? This is according to a campaign ad by the Governor's campaign ad (glad to see a positive ad). It provides the sources for the claim too. Looks pretty legit to me! If its right, isn't it pretty mind boggling? 80%, that's a pretty high percentage.. CA, NY, IL MO, FL and all the other states created only 20% of the jobs in the past 5 years??? That should place TX at the top and ppl who keep bashing TX as a dimwit redneck state should think twice. Last time I checked TX was the 2nd biggest contributor to the GDP, perhaps it will be the top soon, or amy be already is!

watch the ad here

Gov. Rick Perry has released a new television ad, "Right Track," that argues Texas is, well, on the right track.
In the spot, Perry says that job creation is his top priority and that, since 2005, most of America's private sector jobs since have been created in Texas.

 

[Slew Foot]

Make it easy for businesses to hire and theyll hire. Only a moron liberal wouldnt understand that.

BOOOOOOOOSH LIED TRILLION DIEDDDEDEDEDE!!!!111!!!1

 

[Amused]

Business will prosper where it is FREE to do so.

CA bleeds jobs while TX gains them. Gee. Couldn't have ANYTHING to do with CA being one of the most oppressive and punitive states to do business in, could it? NAW!!!

Makes my economic freedom thread all the more relevant, despite the ravings and poisoning of the wells by the authoritarian anti-business leftists.

 

[Hacp]

Maybe because Texas is a right to work state and NY/California isn't? FUCK the unions!

 

[PrinceofWands]

What's the payscale on that 80%? Better to have 1 person in a good career earning $80,000 than 4 people enslaved at 20k each.

 

[rpanic]

What's the payscale on that 80%? Better to have 1 person in a good career earning $80,000 than 4 people enslaved at 20k each.

I’m thinking CA has TX beat by a long ways when it comes to having a bunch of slave laborers, and wage extremes.

 

[techs]

Uh, I checked out the link. It is from this website:
www.scribd.com

Apparently it is a website that lets you upload documents. NOT the actual source, which Perry is claiming is the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. I am wondering why he doesn't link to the website itself?

Apparently you can also read this on the website:
Green Anarchy is a radical anti-civilization anarchist magazine produced by an anarchist collective in Oregon and is published twice a year

Need more evidence to back this up.

 

[her209]

I checked out the actual numbers from the monthly BLS reports and here's what I came up with:

I used the Table 6 in both reports.

For the 2005 numbers, I looked at the 2006 report which would have the 2005 numbers adjusted and corrected.
August 2005 report

For the 2010 numbers, I used the preliminary numbers.
August 2010 report

I further broke it down into the different industry sectors to see where jobs were gained and lost in each sector. I believe the numbers are in thousands.

Industry Sector, 2005, 2010(p), delta
Mining and Logging, 168.7, 221.7, 53.0
Construction, 573.4, 575.4, 2.0
Manufacturing, 904.9, 840.2, -64.7
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities", 2005.5, 2045.7, 40.2
Information, 223.6, 189.9, -33.7
Financial Activities, 615.4, 630.8, 15.4
Professional and Business Services, 1166.2, 1280.6, 114.4
Education and Health Services, 1185.4, 1393.8, 208.4
Leisure and Hospitality, 927.7, 1036.0, 108.3
Other Services, 351.7, 366.5, 14.8
Government, 1614.9, 1744.8, 129.9
Total, 9737.4, 10325.4, 588.0
Total minus Government, 8122.5, 8580.6, 458.1

Same numbers sorted in order of most jobs gained by industry sector
Industry Sector,2005,2010(p),delta
Education and Health Services,1185.4,1393.8,208.4
Government,1614.9,1744.8,129.9
Professional and Business Services,1166.2,1280.6,114.4
Leisure and Hospitality,927.7,1036.0,108.3
Mining and Logging,168.7,221.7,53.0
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities",2005.5,2045.7,40.2
Financial Activities,615.4,630.8,15.4
Other Services,351.7,366.5,14.8
Construction,573.4,575.4,2.0
Information,223.6,189.9,-33.7
Manufacturing,904.9,840.2,-64.7
Total,9737.4,10325.4,588.0
Total minus Government,8832.5,9485.2,652.7

 

[lothar]

I checked out the actual numbers from the monthly BLS reports and here's what I came up with:

I used the Table 6 in both reports.

For the 2005 numbers, I looked at the 2006 report which would have the 2005 numbers adjusted and corrected.
August 2005 report

For the 2010 numbers, I used the preliminary numbers.
August 2010 report

I further broke it down into the different industry sectors to see where jobs were gained and lost in each sector. I believe the numbers are in thousands.

Industry Sector, 2005, 2010(p), delta
Mining and Logging, 168.7, 221.7, 53.0
Construction, 573.4, 575.4, 2.0
Manufacturing, 904.9, 840.2, -64.7
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities", 2005.5, 2045.7, 40.2
Information, 223.6, 189.9, -33.7
Financial Activities, 615.4, 630.8, 15.4
Professional and Business Services, 1166.2, 1280.6, 114.4
Education and Health Services, 1185.4, 1393.8, 208.4
Leisure and Hospitality, 927.7, 1036.0, 108.3
Other Services, 351.7, 366.5, 14.8
Government, 1614.9, 1744.8, 129.9
Total, 9737.4, 10325.4, 588.0
Total minus Government, 8122.5, 8580.6, 458.1

Same numbers sorted in order of most jobs gained by industry sector
Industry Sector,2005,2010(p),delta
Education and Health Services,1185.4,1393.8,208.4
Government,1614.9,1744.8,129.9
Professional and Business Services,1166.2,1280.6,114.4
Leisure and Hospitality,927.7,1036.0,108.3
Mining and Logging,168.7,221.7,53.0
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities",2005.5,2045.7,40.2
Financial Activities,615.4,630.8,15.4
Other Services,351.7,366.5,14.8
Construction,573.4,575.4,2.0
Information,223.6,189.9,-33.7
Manufacturing,904.9,840.2,-64.7
Total,9737.4,10325.4,588.0
Total minus Government,8832.5,9485.2,652.7

Cliffs?
Basically, was he telling the truth or not?

 

[her209]

Cliffs?
Basically, was he telling the truth or not?

Basically, he didn't lie, but he didn't tell the whole truth either.

 

[Jhhnn]

Even if Perry is right, Texas unemployment figures aren't that hot, at least they weren't in June-

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...oject%3DJOBSMAP09&articleTabs=interactive

about the same as New York...

A big part of why Texas is doing as well as they are is that strong consumer protection laws prevented much of the abuses of predatory lending and therefore the manic peak/ dismal trough of states like Nevada...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/04/29/business/2009-wide-housing-graphic.html

They weren't part of the great ownership society flimflam...

 

[her209]

As a comparison to the Texas numbers I provided above, here are the California numbers from the same reports, sorted in order of most jobs gained by industry sector:

Industry Sector,2005,2010(p),delta
Educational and Health Services,1553.0,1725.3,172.3
Government,2317.8,2354.1,36.3
Mining and Logging,24.4,26.4,2.0
Leisure and Hospitality,1508.1,1509.9,1.8
Other Services,512.2,479.6,-32.6
Information,480.8,444.6,-36.2
Professional and Business Services,2167.6,2059.9,-107.7
Financial Activities,934.9,776.9,-158.0
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities",2817.0,2572.0,-245.0
Manufacturing,1528.3,1250.8,-277.5
Construction,936.3,567.2,-369.1
Total,14780.4,13766.7,-1013.7
Total minus Government,12462.6,11412.6,-1050.0

EDIT: Fixed the numbers

 

[wirelessenabled]

Business will prosper where it is FREE to do so.

CA bleeds jobs while TX gains them. Gee. Couldn't have ANYTHING to do with CA being one of the most oppressive and punitive states to do business in, could it? NAW!!!

Makes my economic freedom thread all the more relevant, despite the ravings and poisoning of the wells by the authoritarian anti-business leftists.

Yup Kalifornia is so "oppressive and punitive" to business that its GDP only leads Texas by about 70%. No business prospering in Kalifornia, only just enough to make it the 10th largest economy in the world. Just think if they could adopt smart Rubublican business practices like Alabama or Mississippi. Maybe Kalifornia could aspire to the top 50 in the world.

Texas' GDP per capita (nominally) is ranked 29th in the nation, which is below the national average.

 

[simpletron]

Uh, I checked out the link. It is from this website:
www.scribd.com

Apparently it is a website that lets you upload documents. NOT the actual source, which Perry is claiming is the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. I am wondering why he doesn't link to the website itself?

Apparently you can also read this on the website:
Green Anarchy is a radical anti-civilization anarchist magazine produced by an anarchist collective in Oregon and is published twice a year

Need more evidence to back this up.

because its the results from a database query or there would be 102 links...

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate
put all the Series Id in the box

data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX&data_tool=XGtable
replace the Xs with the Series Id

As for 80% new jobs created statistics, it is misleading but he isn't exactly lying . The other 8 states with positive job growth are AK, NB, ND, OK, SD, UT, WA, WY and DC. Texas has ~55% of the jobs between these states and if you removed Washington state, which only added 500 jobs, then Texas has ~65% of the jobs.

In opinion, the percentage change is better measure. Texas has increases its private jobs by 5.5% over the last 5 years. This is second highest behind North Dakota, and compares to the US change of -3.5%

 

[Amused]

Yup Kalifornia is so "oppressive and punitive" to business that its GDP only leads Texas by about 70%. No business prospering in Kalifornia, only just enough to make it the 10th largest economy in the world. Just think if they could adopt smart Rubublican business practices like Alabama or Mississippi. Maybe Kalifornia could aspire to the top 50 in the world.

http://www.olympiabusinesswatch.com/2010/09/california-bleeding-jobs-costs-too-high.html

California is bleeding jobs. Just because it's big just means it's farther to fall, that's all.

 

[wirelessenabled]

http://www.olympiabusinesswatch.com/2010/09/california-bleeding-jobs-costs-too-high.html

California is bleeding jobs. Just because it's big just means it's farther to fall, that's all.

My point was that for many years there has been this BS about how anti-business Kalifornia is. If it was so bad for so many years, how did it get where it is economically?

Texas has a greater proportion of low paying jobs. Is that where you aspire? If you do then by all means move to Texas.

 

[ElFenix]

A big part of why Texas is doing as well as they are is that strong consumer protection laws prevented much of the abuses of predatory lending and therefore the manic peak/ dismal trough of states like Nevada...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/04/29/business/2009-wide-housing-graphic.html

They weren't part of the great ownership society flimflam...

texas is extremely debtor friendly. only recently could you get a heloc or a 2nd non-purchase money mortgage. heloc is limited to 50% of the value and i think the 2nd mortgage is limited to 80% (i.e. you have to keep 20% equity when you get the loan).

not to mention that houston in particular the house values do not go up. no zoning and a lot of flat land means there is always new housing available. most places with lots of flat land did not catch the bubble. vegas and phoenix (which have restrictive zoning laws) caught the bubble in part due to SoCalers cashing out in SoCal and bringing their mentality with them (which is remarkable considering how CA did this same thing ~15 years ago as well).

My point was that for many years there has been this BS about how anti-business Kalifornia is. If it was so bad for so many years, how did it get where it is economically?

apparently it used to not be as bad.
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_3_california-economy.html

 

[charrison]

Yup Kalifornia is so "oppressive and punitive" to business that its GDP only leads Texas by about 70%.

California still has quite a few more people so that is not surprising. However people are still moving to Texas in large numbers.

No business prospering in Kalifornia, only just enough to make it the 10th largest economy in the world. Just think if they could adopt smart Rubublican business practices like Alabama or Mississippi. Maybe Kalifornia could aspire to the top 50 in the world.

Actually california is 8th if it were a country, Texas would be 14th. According to 2006 data.

Texas' GDP per capita (nominally) is ranked 29th in the nation, which is below the national average.

And California is 10th. There is a 6k difference between them.

The differences are not nearly as large as you make them out to be.

 

[alphatarget1]

Even if Perry is right, Texas unemployment figures aren't that hot, at least they weren't in June-

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...oject%3DJOBSMAP09&articleTabs=interactive

about the same as New York...

A big part of why Texas is doing as well as they are is that strong consumer protection laws prevented much of the abuses of predatory lending and therefore the manic peak/ dismal trough of states like Nevada...

Well, most Texas suburbs/cities didn't experience a property bubble. There are foreclosures though.

Currently, Texas has a big state deficit under King Perry. Too bad he is going to win even though I'm voting against his ass.

 

[alphatarget1]

California still has quite a few more people so that is not surprising. However people are still moving to Texas in large numbers.

You have no idea how many California cars I have seen here. Not only in my college town but I spot at least 4 or 5 every time I go to Houston.

 

[charrison]

My point was that for many years there has been this BS about how anti-business Kalifornia is. If it was so bad for so many years, how did it get where it is economically?

Texas has a greater proportion of low paying jobs. Is that where you aspire? If you do then by all means move to Texas.

Actually people are voting with their feet and moving to texas, about 1000 per day.

 

[charrison]

Well, most Texas suburbs/cities didn't experience a property bubble. There are foreclosures though.

Currently, Texas has a big state deficit under King Perry. Too bad he is going to win even though I'm voting against his ass.

Damn near every state has a huge hole their budget right now due in large part to reduced tax receipts. Texas has actually done a decent job keeping govt spending down as compared to other states.

 

[charrison]

You have no idea how many California cars I have seen here. Not only in my college town but I spot at least 4 or 5 every time I go to Houston.

I have a good idea. I see out of state plates all the time.

 

[ElFenix]

Well, most Texas suburbs/cities didn't experience a property bubble. There are foreclosures though.

Currently, Texas has a big state deficit under King Perry. Too bad he is going to win even though I'm voting against his ass.

i'm probably going to vote for white but our new accountant-mayor has been blowing up white's houston budgets for the last few years.

perry isn't all that great but then again the governor isn't even the strongest position in state government with governor in the title. so unless he figures out some way to sell all our roads to the spanish (highways bypassing city centers, good idea, selling the franchise to operate them to the spanish, meh, refusing to expand parallel freeways, bad), he really can't do much of anything.

And California is 10th. There is a 6k difference between them.

The differences are not nearly as large as you make them out to be.

and i wonder how much of that GDP is eaten up by their mortgage payments? heck, how much of it is just selling overinflated real estate back and forth between each other?

 

[alphatarget1]

Damn near every state has a huge hole their budget right now due in large part to reduced tax receipts. Texas has actually done a decent job keeping govt spending down as compared to other states.

It was just one of the many reasons I can come up with to vote against Rick Perry. The guy is such a tool, IMO.