Rick Perry’s ‘Miracle’ That Isn’t

Perry falsely conflates population growth with job growth
Opinion • Views: 29,261

As he dives into the Presidential race, creationist Texas governor Rick Perry is trumpeting the alleged economic “miracle” in his state and claiming it as a victory for conservative policies. But are Perry’s claims honest? Of course not: The Texas Unmiracle.

What you need to know is that the Texas miracle is a myth, and more broadly that Texan experience offers no useful lessons on how to restore national full employment.

It’s true that Texas entered recession a bit later than the rest of America, mainly because the state’s still energy-heavy economy was buoyed by high oil prices through the first half of 2008. Also, Texas was spared the worst of the housing crisis, partly because it turns out to have surprisingly strict regulation of mortgage lending.

Despite all that, however, from mid-2008 onward unemployment soared in Texas, just as it did almost everywhere else.

In June 2011, the Texas unemployment rate was 8.2 percent. That was less than unemployment in collapsed-bubble states like California and Florida, but it was slightly higher than the unemployment rate in New York, and significantly higher than the rate in Massachusetts. By the way, one in four Texans lacks health insurance, the highest proportion in the nation, thanks largely to the state’s small-government approach. Meanwhile, Massachusetts has near-universal coverage thanks to health reform very similar to the “job-killing” Affordable Care Act.

So where does the notion of a Texas miracle come from? Mainly from widespread misunderstanding of the economic effects of population growth.

Also see

Jump to bottom

127 comments
1 iossarian  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:34:35am

All aboard the GOP non-jobs train!

2 Kragar  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:36:38am
3 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:42:26am

It'll be interesting to see if the media lets this myth go unchallenged.

The line on Perry is that he's good at downplaying things that could negatively impact his campaign. I'd like to think that his Creationist/Dominionist background and connections and the 'miracle' myth will gain greater scrutiny once he becomes a national candidate - but I'm not optimistic about it, given the supine nature of the media nowadays.

4 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:43:19am

Of course, since it's Paul Krugman making this argument, the right wing howler monkeys will just dismiss it out of hand.

5 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:45:30am

From the linked article, with emphasis added:

Many of the people moving to Texas — retirees in search of warm winters, middle-class Mexicans in search of a safer life — bring purchasing power that leads to greater local employment.

Many of those are upper-class Mexicans. And don't forget all the drug money that is laundered and sometimes retained in Texas.

[...]

How much does all of this add to Texas’s economy? It’s hard to come up with an exact number, especially when it’s so easy to look the other way. “Our politicians don’t want to acknowledge the pivotal and central role Texas plays in drug trafficking,” says Tony Payan, a ­political-science professor at the University of Texas at El Paso. “Those are not comfortable questions to ask.”

6 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:47:03am

re: #4 Lidane

Of course, since it's Paul Krugman making this argument, the right wing howler monkeys will just dismiss it out of hand.

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

7 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:48:29am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Except that in this case, that "hack" happens to be right.

Perry deserves to have his record run down. He hasn't done shit in ten years except drive this state down the rabbit hole of failure.

8 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:49:27am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Care to address any of his points in this particular piece of hackery?

9 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:49:36am

Someone on the previous thread brought up the fact that professional lunatic Pam "The Shrieking Harpy" Geller is now even accusing Rick Perry of being a dupe for Islam. She drops this turd of a idea in her lastest "American Thinker" column. An excerpt:

Perry promises to fix all that: "We'll create jobs. We'll get America working again. We'll create jobs and we'll build wealth, we'll truly educate and innovate in science, and in technology, engineering and math. We'll create the jobs and the progress needed to get America working again."

Sounds good. But Perry has been sucked into the propaganda vortex, and is now wielding his enormous power to influence changes in the schoolrooms and in the curricula to reflect a sharia compliant version of Islam. He is a friend of the Aga Khan, the multimillionaire head of the Ismailis, a Shi'ite sect of Islam that today proclaims its nonviolence but in ages past was the sect that gave rise to the Assassins. Perry has concluded at least two cooperation agreements between the state of Texas and the Ismailis, including a comprehensive program to feed children in Texas public schools and taqiyya nonsense about how Islam is a religion of peace. Another agreement stipulates that Texas officials will work with the Ismailis in the "fields of education, health sciences, natural disaster preparedness and recovery, culture and the environment." Perry let on that this was all about whitewashing Islam's bloody historical and modern-day record: "traditional Western education speaks little of the influence of Muslim scientists, scholars, throughout history, and for that matter the cultural treasures that stand today in testament to their wisdom."

10 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:50:10am

re: #8 wrenchwench

Care to address any of his points in this particular piece of hackery?

No. I'm leaving in about 10 minutes.

11 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:50:49am

re: #10 Dark_Falcon

No. I'm leaving in about 10 minutes.

Have a nice afternoon.

12 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:53:00am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

So it's your position that Krugman's column is in some way not true?

13 William Barnett-Lewis  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:53:11am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Unfortunately, DF, he actually _knows_ economics - and has in fact written a very good Econ 101 text book that should be required reading by every member of congress. The Republican party tries to ignore economic reality just as they try to ignore AGW reality and with equally damaging results.

14 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:53:30am

I am not sure the population growth argument really holds. So a lot of jobs were created through population growth. That's supposed to be an argument against Perry? There still was incentive to move to Texas to begin with.

The most meaningful point in that argument is the comparison of the current unemployment rate in Texas to those of California, Florida, New York, and Massachusetts, showing that texas isn't as special as it's made out to be.

What Texas shows is that a state offering cheap labor and, less important, weak regulation can attract jobs from other states. I believe that the appropriate response to this insight is “Well, duh.” The point is that arguing from this experience that depressing wages and dismantling regulation in America as a whole would create more jobs — which is, whatever Mr. Perry may say, what Perrynomics amounts to in practice — involves a fallacy of composition: every state can’t lure jobs away from every other state.

I think what Perry is implying is that he could lure back the jobs from other nations that got transferred there through outsourcing to begin with. This is not really as fallacious as Krugman makes it out to be.

15 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:55:14am

re: #11 wrenchwench

Have a nice afternoon.

Thanks. This is just a follow-up visit, but hopefully it'll get me back to work on Friday or Monday.

I'll be back late tonight.

16 iossarian  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:56:12am

re: #14 000G


I think what Perry is implying is that he could lure back the jobs from other nations that got transferred there through outsourcing to begin with. This is not really as fallacious as Krugman makes it out to be.

As I've said before on LGF, I am greatly looking forward to my $1/hour, 16-hour days in the unventilated heavy metal smelting plant.

17 Charles Johnson  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:56:17am

Another good piece on the same theme:

Breaking down Rick Perry’s ‘Texas miracle’

18 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:56:26am

re: #8 wrenchwench

Care to address any of his points in this particular piece of hackery?

re: #10 Dark_Falcon

No. I'm leaving in about 10 minutes.

19 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:57:43am

re: #16 iossarian

As I've said before on LGF, I am greatly looking forward to my $1/hour, 16-hour days in the unventilated heavy metal smelting plant.

That's just a missing point in a lot of arguments about job creation: What kind of jobs?

20 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:57:43am

OK, to hell with Perry's miracles. Which Aga Khan married Rita Hayworth? And should Pam be warning her followers not to watch any Rita Hayworth movies?

21 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:58:05am

re: #14 000G

I think what Perry is implying is that he could lure back the jobs from other nations that got transferred there through outsourcing to begin with. This is not really as fallacious as Krugman makes it out to be.

Sure it is. And it proves Perry's full of shit.

The only way to bring back jobs that are outsourced and offshored is to make wages and benefits so low for Americans that they wouldn't take those jobs anyway. Or by completely eliminating every single tax on business while increasing the tariffs that other countries pay to the point where it's unattractive for them to be here.

22 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:58:28am

re: #16 iossarian

As I've said before on LGF, I am greatly looking forward to my $1/hour, 16-hour days in the unventilated heavy metal smelting plant.

And your kids can work there, too, as soon as President Perry declares child labor laws unconstitutional.

Fun for the whole family!
/

23 garhighway  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:59:05am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is a Nobel winner hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans when they do economically stupid shit.

FTFY

24 Merkin  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 10:59:52am

re: #4 Lidane
Yes, as I have been reminded recently on another site by a winger, Krugman is a third rate economist that hasn't accomplished anything of note in his career. Which I suppose is why he has been forced to hang his Nobel prize for economics on a wall in a third rate university and has to supplement his income writing a column for a third rate newspaper.

25 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:00:02am

re: #21 Lidane

Sure it is. And it proves Perry's full of shit.

The only way to bring back jobs that are outsourced and offshored is to make wages and benefits so low for Americans that they wouldn't take those jobs anyway. Or by completely eliminating every single tax on business while increasing the tariffs that other countries pay to the point where it's unattractive for them to be here.

Which should be all the more obvious to all by the state's location on the border with Mexico. Mexico can now out-compete China for some jobs. That's not a contest we really want to enter.

26 Interesting Times  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:00:17am

re: #14 000G

I think what Perry is implying is that he could lure back the jobs from other nations that got transferred there through outsourcing to begin with.

Getting rid of environmental protection laws, workplace safety laws, and the minimum wage could do just that :)

Let's bring this to America! Fuck Yeah!

27 blueraven  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:00:51am

A lot of jobs are due to the shale oil boom in the Eagle Ford Shales in South TX. The fracking is creating a lot of jobs, not only in the oil fields but building apartments, motels and restaurants to service all the workers

These are jobs created because the oil shale is there and the fact that TX has always been a big oil state. Not particularly related to anything Rick Perry did.


Last year, the Eagle Ford shale generated 6,800 full-time jobs and paid $311 million in salaries and benefits, according to a study completed in February by the University of Texas at San Antonio's Center for Community and Business Research.

When spinoff jobs are included — from wholesalers to waiters - the study found the development in the shale play supported 12,600 jobs and paid $512 million in salaries.

Because development is just beginning, the UTSA study estimates that by 2020, 5,000 new wells will be drilled, and the Eagle Ford will support almost 68,000 full-time jobs, account for almost $21.5 billion in total annual economic output, and add almost $1.2 billion to Texas' revenues.

There's buzz that drilling in the Eagle Ford shale could continue for 20 or even 30 years.

Read more: [Link: www.chron.com...]

28 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:01:03am

re: #23 garhighway

FTFY

Impossible!

Republicans are innocents who are incapable of doing anything wrong! Republicans are victims of the media. Republicans are victims of Paul Krugman! Republicans are victims when they are critiqued; you're not supposed to criticize the only people capable of ruling you!!!

29 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:01:33am

re: #21 Lidane

Sure it is.

No, it's not: As POTUS, Perry would not compete with other US States for jobs, but with other nations. Thus, the argument about luring being a zero-sum fallacy is not sound.

The only way to bring back jobs that are outsourced and offshored is to make wages and benefits so low for Americans that they wouldn't take those jobs anyway.

Oh, they would take them, if you cut social services enough.

30 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:01:51am

re: #26 publicityStunted

Getting rid of environmental protection laws, workplace safety laws, and the minimum wage could do just that :)

Don't forget eliminating child labor laws, all business taxes, and all pensions and benefits or retirement plans.

Get rid of them all and we might stand a chance of getting back all those jobs that have gone overseas.

31 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:02:21am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

What's hackish about him?

32 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:02:25am

re: #26 publicityStunted

Getting rid of environmental protection laws, workplace safety laws, and the minimum wage could do just that :)

Let's bring this to America! Fuck Yeah!

I never said that this was desirable.

33 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:02:40am

re: #31 recusancy

What's hackish about him?

He's a Democrat, of course.

34 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:02:44am

re: #10 Dark_Falcon

No. I'm leaving in about 10 minutes.

Ahh.. Per usual.

35 lawhawk  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:03:33am
36 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:04:59am

re: #29 000G

No, it's not: As POTUS, Perry would not compete with other US States for jobs, but with other nations. Thus, the argument about luring being a zero-sum fallacy is not sound.

Oh, they would take them, if you cut social services enough.


Like I said, that's not a contest we want to enter. We'd have to go a LONG way down to be competitive with Mexico and China.

re: #32 000G

I never said that this was desirable.


Oh, nevermind then. A fantasy exercise.

37 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:05:48am

re: #31 recusancy

What's hackish about him?

For me, his dismissal of a central bank's own capital as an important figure was what did it.

38 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:06:05am

Tough post-How do I separate the true fact of Gov. Perry deserving no credit for the Texas economic advantages, and still write well showing how Krugman is underplaying it to undermine Perry?

Well if we set aside the Governors rhetoric, and look at Texas without saying "miracle"-We see an economy Los Angeles and California would love to have instead of what we do have. And BTW it's worth remembering what party has been in charge here in the legislature for more than a decade. Hint-Not the GOP. Strict mortgage rules would have helped here in my state a great deal.

39 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:06:18am

re: #29 000G

No, it's not: As POTUS, Perry would not compete with other US States for jobs, but with other nations.

Of course it's fallacious. There's no way for him to compete with other nations to bring back all those jobs without completely destroying American business in the process.

40 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:06:25am

re: #37 000G

For me, his dismissal of a central bank's own capital as an important figure was what did it.

Have a little more context?

41 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:06:30am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Show us, with accompanying figures, where Krugman is wrong.

42 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:07:38am

re: #36 wrenchwench

Like I said, that's not a contest we want to enter. We'd have to go a LONG way down to be competitive with Mexico and China.

Whether you are going to enter some contests or not is really not a question of whether you want to…

Oh, nevermind then. A fantasy exercise.

It's not a fantasy exercise. Not by a long shot. If the economic situation gets worse, a lot of things will become desirable that haven't been previously.

43 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:08:01am

re: #41 b_sharp

Show us, with accompanying figures, where Krugman is wrong.

Good luck with that. DF likes calling Krugman a hack, apparently because he just is one and that's that.

44 BlazerBeav  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:08:08am

Krugman is indeed a hack, so pardon some of us for not placing much stock in any of his columns. He is very adverse to being challenged - which is why the commenting on his columns ended up becoming restrictred after commenters fully trounced one of his theories.

45 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:08:37am

re: #44 BlazerBeav

Krugman is indeed a hack, so pardon some of us for not placing much stock in any of his columns. He is very adverse to being challenged - which is why the commenting on his columns ended up becoming restrictred after commenters fully trounced one of his theories.

Linky?

46 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:08:53am

re: #40 recusancy

Have a little more context?

Krugman/Obstfeld: International Economics: Theory and Policy – Sixth Edition, Boston, et al.: Addison Wesley (2003), p. 486f.

47 engineer cat  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:09:01am

robust growth in poorly paid jobs with no benefits or bargaining rights is the long term gop plan for the economy

48 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:09:25am

re: #44 BlazerBeav

Krugman is indeed a hack, so pardon some of us for not placing much stock in any of his columns.

So prove him wrong. Show the numbers and show where he's full of it.

49 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:09:43am

re: #42 000G

Whether you are going to enter some contests or not is really not a question of whether you want to…

It's not a fantasy exercise. Not by a long shot. If the economic situation gets worse, a lot of things will become desirable that haven't been previously.

The doomsday scenarios, IMHO, would be more likely under a Perry presidency than under a continuing Obama presidency.

50 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:09:46am

re: #39 Lidane

Of course it's fallacious. There's no way for him to compete with other nations to bring back all those jobs without completely destroying American business in the process.

American business as it is now, maybe. Anyhow, that's not the argument that Krugman is making nor the one that he says it's fallacious. You are talking about something else now.

51 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:11:00am

re: #49 wrenchwench

The doomsday scenarios, IMHO, would be more likely under a Perry presidency than under a continuing Obama presidency.

I don't think it is really going to matter one way or the other. There's only so much politics can achieve.

52 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:12:11am

re: #47 engineer dog

robust growth in poorly paid jobs with no benefits or bargaining rights is the long term gop plan for the economy

Exactly.

53 Varek Raith  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:12:50am

re: #44 BlazerBeav

And yet, none of you here have been commenting on Krugman's point about Texas.

54 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:13:57am

re: #53 Varek Raith

And yet, none of you here have been commenting on Krugman's point about Texas.

Of course not. It's much easier to shoot the messenger than it is to defend the indefensible.

55 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:14:33am

re: #52 000G

Exactly.

You should do campaign ads for the GOP.

56 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:15:52am

re: #31 recusancy

What's hackish about him?

He picks on Repub economic policies.

I guess that makes him a hack.

57 Spocomptonite  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:15:57am

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans economic ignorance.

It's not Krugman's fault that nearly all Republicans are economically ignorant.

58 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:16:06am

re: #44 BlazerBeav

Krugman is wrong often enough and deeply partisan often enough reading him is like reading any other "partisan" specialized field expert. You are left wondering which is the stronger influence in the articles? I refer to his opinion pieces, his punditry, not his formal economic papers.

Here is the part I disagree with most-

""In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem. ""

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

59 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:16:11am

re: #55 recusancy

You should do campaign ads for the GOP.

Because I understand their logic?

Sorry, not a GOP fan here.

60 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:17:33am
61 Targetpractice  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:18:34am

Perrynomics, aka "Taking America Back...to the 1850s."

"You want to be a scientist, an astronaut, or perhaps even president? That's cute, now back to the coal mine with you, boy. Don't look so glum, coal mining is a respectable profession! Take pride in engaging in back-breaking, hazardous work for $1.50 a day, at least you've got a job!"

///

62 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:18:45am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

Here is the part I disagree with most-

""In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem. ""

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

That's funny, the bolded part is the one I agreed with the most and was astonished that Krugman would acknowledge the debt problem as central to the economic crisis.

63 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:19:18am

re: #48 Lidane

So prove him wrong. Show the numbers and show where he's full of it.

Krugman is wrong, because a couple conservatives have asserted it's so.

Why is that not good enough for you!!! Elitist!

64 engineer cat  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:19:26am

krugman is a hack

i long ago got used to these rebuttals of detailed arguments by a dismissive ad hominem

65 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:19:54am

re: #48 Lidane

So prove him wrong. Show the numbers and show where he's full of it.

Could I get the same review of this from CATO-Forget the source and just look at the numbers?

Paul Krugman on Carter and Reagan: Wrong Again

Posted by Alan Reynolds

Measured in constant 2005 dollars, real federal revenues rose from $968.4 billion in 1970 to $1,197.6 billion in 1980 and to $1508.7 billion in 1990. In other words, the cumulative real revenue gain was 23.7% under the high and rising tax rates of the 1970s, and 26% under the dramatic reduction in tax rates of the 1980s.

Paul Krugman recently looked at these same figures through his logarithmic Kaleidoscope, and concluded that “the revenue track under Reagan . . . is exactly what you would expect to see if supply-side economics were just plain wrong: revenues are permanently reduced relative to what they would otherwise have been.”

Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf was so awed by Krugman’s creative artwork that he imagined “the theory that cuts would pay for themselves has proved altogether wrong.”

Notice that Krugman starts his trend with 1970, which was a year of recession and falling revenue. If he had instead measured real revenue growth between the cyclical peaks of 1969 and 1979, the overall increase would have dropped to 19.5%. Note too that Krugman ends his trend with 1981 rather than 1980, while suggesting 1981 was part of the glorious Carter years:

The Carter years, contrary to legend, were not a period of economic stagnation and falling revenue because high tax rates were strangling the economy; there was a nasty recession starting in 1979, largely thanks to an oil shock, but overall growth was respectable.

The comment is strange. There was no recession in 1979, nasty or otherwise. And non-energy inflation topped 11 percent that year – before oil prices peaked in early 1980.

The continually accelerating inflation during the Carter years, 1977 to 1980, pushed more and more families into higher and higher tax brackets. It also resulted in brutal taxation of illusory, nominal capital gains and ephemeral inventory profits. As a percentage of GDP, federal taxes soared from 17.1% of GDP in 1976 to 19% in 1980 and 19.6% in 1981. Does that really look like a sustainable trend that President Reagan interrupted for no good reason?

66 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:20:12am

Perry's strength is that he can package his message in sound bytes, bullet points and 30-second spots: namely low taxes + loosened regulations = jobs, jobs, jobs.

Any attempt to pick that argument apart requires whole paragraphs and people get bored with that.

67 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:20:18am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

Krugman is wrong often enough and deeply partisan often enough reading him is like reading any other "partisan" specialized field expert. You are left wondering which is the stronger influence in the articles? I refer to his opinion pieces, his punditry, not his formal economic papers.

Here is the part I disagree with most-

""In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem. ""

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

You don't think that debt, therefore inability to buy more things and create demand, is at the heart of our economic problems? Unemployment is a lagging indicator. It's an effect that exacerbates the problem but it's not the root cause.

68 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:20:49am

Hey garhighway, any particular reason you downdinged my #46?

69 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:22:18am

re: #60 Lidane

This should be fun:

Ron Paul Breaks With Mitt Romney: ‘People Are Individuals…Not Companies’

Glibertarian fight ahoy!

Luap Nor says:

Rights and obligations should be always back to the individual.

"Unless she's pregnant." He left that part off.

70 dragonfire1981  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:22:21am

It amazes me how a person can run for an important political office without taking educational courses on well...anything.

No economics, no social issues, nothing that might be of relevance to their job. I wonder how different states would be managed if Gubernatorial candidates were required to take at least an economics class as a condition of eligibility.

I know there's no chance in hell of this actually happening, but hey I can dream right?

71 blueraven  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:23:11am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

Krugman is wrong often enough and deeply partisan often enough reading him is like reading any other "partisan" specialized field expert. You are left wondering which is the stronger influence in the articles? I refer to his opinion pieces, his punditry, not his formal economic papers.

Here is the part I disagree with most-

""In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem. ""

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

Really? You dont think that the housing problem has added big time to unemployment? The building trade has been devastated. These are good paying middle class jobs.

72 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:23:29am

re: #70 dragonfire1981

I wonder how different states would be managed if Gubernatorial candidates were required to take at least an economics class as a condition of eligibility.


Then you would have to start demanding the same of voters, and that would get hairy...

73 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:23:38am

re: #23 garhighway

FTFY

Milton Friedman got the Nobel Prize, too. His and Krugman's economics vastly differ. So what?

74 brennant  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:23:56am

re: #72 ralphieboy

Then you would have to start demanding the same of voters, and that would get hairy...

I demand hairy voters!

75 Spocomptonite  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:24:18am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

Neither do any of your sentences. But I digress. The point Krugman is making, IMO, and I could be wrong, is that a lowering of wages makes any and all debts relatively greater in comparison, not lessen the burden so the economy can escape recession quicker.

76 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:24:55am

Perry breaks out the dog-whistle, right on cue.

Just minutes earlier, while delivering remarks at the Des Moines Register Soapbox here, Perry focused his fire on President Obama, who will be in a different part of the state later Monday.

“He says he’s on a listening tour,” Perry said, “so I’m going to talk to him.” … Perry warned that a “big black cloud” hangs over the country.

“I think you want a president who is passionate about America — that’s in love with America.”

Here we go. Only 15 more months of this crap.

77 Kragar  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:26:07am

re: #76 makeitstop

“I think you want a president who is passionate about America — that’s in love with America.”

And Newt starts screwing an intern...

78 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:26:43am

re: #67 recusancy

If you mean consumer debt, that was plummeting, to the extent of over a trillion dollars as Americans felt the consequences of reduced income in the recession. Maybe it spiked lately not sure. If you mean federal debt, well federal revenues track pretty well with employment. Revenues solves deficits. If and only if (Reagans fail, then Bush 41 reality to Clinton's successes) you keep a lid on spending growth as measured by revenue growth.

79 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:27:20am

re: #70 dragonfire1981

Poll tax, Jim Crow laws… don't think you want to go there. It's good that voting/eleciton rights (passive and active) are egalitarian.

80 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:28:20am

re: #76 makeitstop

Here we go. Only 15 more months of this crap.

*sigh*

81 HAL2010  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:28:44am

Well, I for one am shocked, SHOCKED, I tells yah, to hear about such a thing as a lying politician!

Man the pitchforks!

/

82 Varek Raith  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:28:55am

re: #76 makeitstop

Perry breaks out the dog-whistle, right on cue.

Here we go. Only 15 more months of this crap.

I got this time machine...

83 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:29:59am

re: #71 blueraven

A big bubble made for a lot of jobs that really should have not been there to begin with. Bubble jobs are gone for good, just like the tech bubble.
housing
Housing growth is good, bubbles are bad for all.

84 HappyWarrior  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:30:22am

re: #76 makeitstop

Perry breaks out the dog-whistle, right on cue.

Here we go. Only 15 more months of this crap.

That crap again. Seriously, I am so sick of this right wing meme that Obama doesn't love this country. It's not only downright insulting, it's patently absurd too.

85 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:30:52am

re: #17 Charles

Another good piece on the same theme:

Breaking down Rick Perry’s ‘Texas miracle’

That one is a lot better, because it's a comprehensive overview.

86 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:31:16am

re: #75 Spocomptonite

Would you need supporting data for the idea unemployment is at the heart of the problem? Ask our President for it then. He at least claims to understand that much.

87 Varek Raith  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:31:21am

re: #83 Rightwingconspirator

A big bubble made for a lot of jobs that really should have not been there to begin with. Bubble jobs are gone for good, just like the tech bubble.
housing
Housing growth is good, bubbles are bad for all.

Gold, imo, is the most epic of bubbles.

88 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:31:59am

re: #65 Rightwingconspirator

You should include a link for something like that, because that would make it easier to see that your formatting is off, and one of those paragraphs is a quote within the larger quotation.

Also, why forget the source? Be aware of the source. You can't look only at the numbers, you need to look at how they are arranged. That's why Reynolds can criticize Krugman's numbers. And I could criticize Reynolds's, if I had time...

89 Lidane  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:32:16am

re: #84 HappyWarrior

That crap again. Seriously, I am so sick of this right wing meme that Obama doesn't love this country. It's not only downright insulting, it's patently absurd too.

Didn't you know? Only Republicans love America and can be patriots. Everyone else is an evil librul traitor.

90 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:32:34am

Of all the places in North America there is only one that suffered basically nothing; Saskatchewan. Sask far out performed Texas in terms of economic growth and employment. Although you'll hear it was due to policies from the right-wing Saskatchewan Party, that isn't the truth. The left-wing NDP dropped business taxes before the Sask Party came into power and it did very little until one important thing happened - crude oil prices hit $140.00/barrel and potash prices hit an all time high.

The oil and potash prices made exploration and extraction incredibly profitable, so profitable taxes were irrelevant. New jobs in the oil/gas and potash sectors inflated the population and drove up housing costs, which made many speculators very rich. In 2000 a friend bought a house for $60,000.00. It is now worth $300,000.00.

It wasn't the magic of low taxes, or minimal regulations, or cheap housing that made Sask the place to be, it was stupidly high commodity prices and the lucky timing.

Right now Sask's economy is running on an influx of skilled workers (other than construction workers) finding entry level jobs at fast food restaurants.

91 Obdicut  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:32:46am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator


IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.

Even if you disagree with that, why on earth do you see that as partisan?

92 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:32:46am

re: #75 Spocomptonite

Neither do any of your sentences. But I digress. The point Krugman is making, IMO, and I could be wrong, is that a lowering of wages makes any and all debts relatively greater in comparison, not lessen the burden so the economy can escape recession quicker.

That's true. Inflation lessens debt burden. Deflation increases it.

93 albusteve  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:33:30am

re: #87 Varek Raith

Gold, imo, is the most epic of bubbles.

and I made an epic profit last month

94 engineer cat  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:33:35am

re: #65 Rightwingconspirator

Could I get the same review of this from CATO-Forget the source and just look at the numbers?

Paul Krugman on Carter and Reagan: Wrong Again

Posted by Alan Reynolds

Measured in constant 2005 dollars, real federal revenues rose from $968.4 billion in 1970 to $1,197.6 billion in 1980 and to $1508.7 billion in 1990. In other words, the cumulative real revenue gain was 23.7% under the high and rising tax rates of the 1970s, and 26% under the dramatic reduction in tax rates of the 1980s.

Paul Krugman recently looked at these same figures through his logarithmic Kaleidoscope, and concluded that “the revenue track under Reagan . . . is exactly what you would expect to see if supply-side economics were just plain wrong: revenues are permanently reduced relative to what they would otherwise have been.”

Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf was so awed by Krugman’s creative artwork that he imagined “the theory that cuts would pay for themselves has proved altogether wrong.”

Notice that Krugman starts his trend with 1970, which was a year of recession and falling revenue. If he had instead measured real revenue growth between the cyclical peaks of 1969 and 1979, the overall increase would have dropped to 19.5%. Note too that Krugman ends his trend with 1981 rather than 1980, while suggesting 1981 was part of the glorious Carter years:

The Carter years, contrary to legend, were not a period of economic stagnation and falling revenue because high tax rates were strangling the economy; there was a nasty recession starting in 1979, largely thanks to an oil shock, but overall growth was respectable.

The comment is strange. There was no recession in 1979, nasty or otherwise. And non-energy inflation topped 11 percent that year – before oil prices peaked in early 1980.

The continually accelerating inflation during the Carter years, 1977 to 1980, pushed more and more families into higher and higher tax brackets. It also resulted in brutal taxation of illusory, nominal capital gains and ephemeral inventory profits. As a percentage of GDP, federal taxes soared from 17.1% of GDP in 1976 to 19% in 1980 and 19.6% in 1981. Does that really look like a sustainable trend that President Reagan interrupted for no good reason?

the argument here looks first at raw numbers of total revenue gain with no context of growth in the gdp or inflation. then, at the end is looks at taxes as percentage of gdp, stronly biasing the numbers quoted with the word "soared". this pre-interpretation reminds me of the scene in annie hall when the therapists asks the couple "how often do you have sex?", and the man says "hardly ever - twice a week" and the woman says "all the time! twice a week!"

the fact is, back in the 80s i did a little back of the envelope calculation of the difference in tax reciepts before and after the reagain tax cuts. what i did was to look at the percentage of gdp taken in taxes in 1980 and extrapolated that rate out to 1988. the article above says the rate "soared" to 19.6 in 1981 but curiously fails to omit that it was considerably lower after the cuts

however, what is the real "proof", if we can ever have any, really, that tax cuts will always stimulate an economy, and, correspondingly, that tax increases will always retard economic growth?

the fact that in the 90s we had robust growth after a large tax increase and that in the 00s we had weak growth after large tax cuts. the strenuous efforts of the gop to explain away this empirical proof that their precious theory doesn't work are amusing at best

95 Varek Raith  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:33:47am

re: #93 albusteve

and I made an epic profit last month

Nice.
:)

96 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:33:49am

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

You really need to take an economics course maybe.

97 Atlas Fails  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:35:51am

Another agreement stipulates that Texas officials will work with the Ismailis in the "fields of education, health sciences, natural disaster preparedness and recovery, culture and the environment."

My goodness! Scandal!

98 lawhawk  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:36:38am

re: #90 b_sharp

We're seeing mini-boomlets in parts of WY, NY, PA, and a couple other states as a result of energy prospecting (Marcellus shale in NY/PA etc). A similar mini-boomlet as a result of some areas pushing for wind farms. End result is the same, some higher real estate prices, some new jobs, and new revenues.

99 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:36:57am

re: #68 000G

Hey garhighway, any particular reason you downdinged my #46?

Because the post number is an even number that when divided by two results in an odd number.

100 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:37:46am

re: #92 recusancy

That's true. Inflation lessens debt burden. Deflation increases it.

Errr. That's true for the government and corporations and people who are able to rack up giant debts only to pay them off easily through inflation. The little guy on the street will just see his savings and wages melt away without much of a chance to transform any of that into assets or get a good loan.

101 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:38:19am

re: #76 makeitstop

Perry breaks out the dog-whistle, right on cue.

Here we go. Only 15 more months of this crap.

Hey, he's just saying he wants to hump the leg of America.

102 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:39:22am

Gotta run. L8r

103 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:39:40am

re: #83 Rightwingconspirator

A big bubble made for a lot of jobs that really should have not been there to begin with. Bubble jobs are gone for good, just like the tech bubble.
housing
Housing growth is good, bubbles are bad for all.

Except bubble manufacturers.

104 recusancy  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:40:26am

re: #100 000G

Errr. That's true for the government and corporations and people who are able to rack up giant debts only to pay them off easily through inflation. The little guy on the street will just see his savings and wages melt away without much of a chance to transform any of that into assets or get a good loan.

I'm not saying lets inflate our way out of debt. I was just saying he was right.

105 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:44:04am

re: #101 b_sharp

Hey, he's just saying he wants to hump the leg of America.

Steve Bene has a good take on that quote:

If voters want a president who is “passionate about America” and who is “in love with America,” they may think twice about electing someone who flirted with seceding from America.

Sounds about right. If you love this country so much, governor, why would you ever consider breaking away from it?

106 makeitstop  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:44:38am

re: #105 makeitstop

Steve Benen has a good take on that quote:

Sounds about right. If you love this country so much, governor, why would you ever consider breaking away from it?

PIMF. Sorry.

107 Summer Seale  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:44:46am

A miracle! A miracle! He has made the bush fruitful by his word!


108 blueraven  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:47:05am

re: #83 Rightwingconspirator

A big bubble made for a lot of jobs that really should have not been there to begin with. Bubble jobs are gone for good, just like the tech bubble.
housing
Housing growth is good, bubbles are bad for all.

Who said bubbles were good? I am not arguing the fact that there was a housing bubble. I am saying that when the bubble busted, a lot of jobs were ultimately lost. I dont think what Krugman said is wrong at all. The housing bubble led to all sorts of mayhem.
It would have been much better to have a normal housing market all along. But the fact that probably millions of jobs within a very short period didn't help.

109 blueraven  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:48:41am

re: #108 blueraven

Who said bubbles were good? I am not arguing the fact that there was a housing bubble. I am saying that when the bubble busted, a lot of jobs were ultimately lost. I dont think what Krugman said is wrong at all. The housing bubble led to all sorts of mayhem.
It would have been much better to have a normal housing market all along. But the fact that probably millions of jobs were lost within a very short period didn't help.

PIMF

110 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:55:54am

re: #88 wrenchwench

I guess I should have linked. But still are his numbers wrong? Then we can discuss conclusions of the confirmed numbers. Or ship it if the numbers are trash.

If we forget the source and analyze objectively fine. But that only works if you do that with the sources you like. I did not link CATO for two reasons-It's wildly unwelcome around here so I was reluctant to link, I mean not like stormfront but still... And its easy to find anyway.

Alan Reynolds if just like Krugman in the sense of partisan writings & economics. Each needs a substantial grain of salt unless you are inclined to indulge a confirmation bias moment.

111 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 11:56:10am

re: #103 b_sharp

Except bubble manufacturers.

LOL
(Needed that)

112 Obdicut  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 12:08:25pm

re: #110 Rightwingconspirator

how is Krugman's belief that personal debt and leftovers from the housing bubble are a big problem, partisan, though?

113 blueraven  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 12:12:14pm

re: #110 Rightwingconspirator

I guess I should have linked. But still are his numbers wrong? Then we can discuss conclusions of the confirmed numbers. Or ship it if the numbers are trash.

If we forget the source and analyze objectively fine. But that only works if you do that with the sources you like. I did not link CATO for two reasons-It's wildly unwelcome around here so I was reluctant to link, I mean not like stormfront but still... And its easy to find anyway.

Alan Reynolds if just like Krugman in the sense of partisan writings & economics. Each needs a substantial grain of salt unless you are inclined to indulge a confirmation bias moment.

OK here is a difference. Krugman completely disses Obama all the time, for not pushing for more stimulus. Cato on the other hand, virtually passes by the Bush years and his and the republican party's major contribution to our debt and deficit. They go back to the Reagan years over and over.

The situation was different then. Inflation was the major issue of the day. The top tax income tax rate was 70%. The tax rate now is the lowest that it has been for decades. The problem today is very different, but the republicans always stick to the same cookie cutter solution. Cut taxes!
It is not logical.

114 Eventual Carrion  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 1:28:14pm

re: #58 Rightwingconspirator

Here is the part I disagree with most-

""In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs — because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem. ""

IMO in the bold I added he is dead wrong backwards. Unemployment is the heart of our crisis. Fixing retail housing alone provides few jobs if any. Just needed relief to mortgage holders and banks. And that is the partisan influence he shows.The first sentence is supposition as written since no support is given.


Ok, thought experiment for "first sentence":

In real life (not banking sector), what do people with a job do? Create goods, give a service?

So you lower wages and what do people do with less money? Cut out buying so many goods, make do or do the needed service themselves?

People cut out buying so many goods, or start doing those services themselves. Then what happens?

Do we need to employ as many people creating those goods or giving those services? No, since the people that don't have the money are doing it themselves or or just not having it done, and are not buying the goods. Unemployment goes up because those workers are not needed to produce/service for a market that can't afford them.


Your thoughts?

115 Political Atheist  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 1:32:38pm

re: #87 Varek Raith

Sure is, and in this case the high price is costing the jewelry industry jobs.

116 jvic  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 2:49:31pm

Interesting column by Krugman.

1. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Job growth or population growth? If the distinction is meaningful, is there data that resolves it?

2. Krugman's assertion that many jobs relocate to TX instead of being created there is an adroit way of turning Perry's boast against itself. But surely some jobs are being created as well. I'm no econometrician, but presumably in this Age of the Database one can determine how many, and what kind of, jobs are respectively relocated to and created in Texas. Until it is supported by such an analysis, Krugman's point is plausible rather than compelling.

117 Obdicut  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 2:50:48pm

re: #116 jvic

Until it is supported by such an analysis, Krugman's point is plausible rather than compelling.

Vice-versa. And the larger takedown cited in the thread-- did you read that?

118 garhighway  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 2:52:06pm

re: #68 000G

Hey garhighway, any particular reason you downdinged my #46?

Because citing to an entire textbook in response to some granular point is a bullshit way to argue. It is deliberately non-responsive.

119 garhighway  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 2:57:43pm

re: #73 000G

Milton Friedman got the Nobel Prize, too. His and Krugman's economics vastly differ. So what?

Do you see anyone here calling Friedman a partisan hack?

He's a Nobel prize winner deserving of having his ideas viewed on their merits.

We're not talking about Tobacco Institute "scientists" here.

120 jamesfirecat  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 3:10:11pm

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Dark the man has a noble prize in eocnomics, calling him a Hack in that field is the equivalent of me saying General David Petraeus is a hack who doesn't know a tank from a humvee... the man has been judged by greater minds than yours and not found wanting in the process.

121 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 8:27:34pm

re: #6 Dark_Falcon

I do indeed dismiss it out of hand. Krugman is hack who has long devoted his column to running down Republicans.

Fuck the Republican Party

122 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Aug 15, 2011 9:50:35pm

re: #44 BlazerBeav

Krugman is indeed a hack, so pardon some of us for not placing much stock in any of his columns. He is very adverse to being challenged - which is why the commenting on his columns ended up becoming restrictred after commenters fully trounced one of his theories.

I think you mean "averse" and "restricted"

also, you're full of shit

123 [deleted]  Tue, Aug 16, 2011 2:22:31am
124 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Aug 16, 2011 2:35:13am

re: #118 garhighway

Because citing to an entire textbook in response to some granular point is a bullshit way to argue. It is deliberately non-responsive.

I wasn't citing "an entire textbook", I specifically gave the page that Krugman made the preposterous statement on. If anything, it was a highly specific answer. Your downding and your explanation for it was bullshit.

125 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Aug 16, 2011 2:36:55am

re: #119 garhighway

Do you see anyone here calling Friedman a partisan hack?

No, but that was not the point I was making, which is that the Nobel prize in Economics is not a meaningful way to assess the truthfulness of a recipient's theories.

He's a Nobel prize winner deserving of having his ideas viewed on their merits.

Nobel prize is one thing, merits is another.

126 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Aug 16, 2011 2:39:53am

garhighway, jamesfirecat, mdey, SteelPH: You should have argued with my #29. I don't see any reasoned disagreement from any of yours. My points still stand.

127 Island_Dave  Tue, Aug 16, 2011 7:04:42pm

Interesting in depth analysis at a great blog --Political Math - which I just discovered.

Money quote: "“My advice to anti-Perry advocates is this: Give up talking about Texas jobs. Texas is an incredible outlier among the states when it comes to jobs. Not only are they creating them, they’re creating ones with higher wages.”

[Link: www.politicalmathblog.com...]


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 79 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 253 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1