Posted on 08/28/2011 7:12:21 AM PDT by Pharmboy
It is not a mirage or a miracle; it is a fact. Nearly half of all net jobs created in the United States since 2009 have been in Texas.
It is also a fact that Texas’ unemployment rate, currently at 8.4 percent, is the highest it has been since 1987, even though it is below the national rate of 9.1 percent.
As Gov. Rick Perry continues to tout Texas’ low-tax, low-regulation business climate as the secret to the state’s relative economic strength, critics have pointed to Texas’ unemployment rate and low-wage jobs, noting that Texas ties Mississippi for the highest percentage of minimum wage workers.
The debate raises several questions: What jobs do Texans commonly hold right now? How much do those jobs pay? And what jobs is Texas creating?
According to statistics from the Texas Workforce Commission, the annual median wage in 2010 for all occupations in Texas was $31,500, or 7 percent less than the national median.
The most common occupation sectors in Texas were office and administrative service,
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“Ya think?” or perhaps “You can’t make this stuff up” ping...
I had to read the headline twice and squint my eyes to be sure I was not misreading this. Hard to believe, eh?
They never stop lying, never.
hold onto your wallet.
...and the thing they don’t mention is that all these entry-level jobs often lead to advancement. Gawd how I hate these commies...
NY Times! The MSM is itching to announce Rick Perry’s coronation. Things that make you go Hmmmm.
The retards need to study the evolution and growth of the American economy.... it started at the farm, pharmbuoy! Look at the history of the mercantile exchange and then the stock markets!
And those jobs produce enough for taxes, fees, profits, etc. Entry level jobs probably net 2-3 times as much wealth for society as the labor cost. Gov make-work jobs do little better than break even.
That’s the comparison they’re hiding.
Good point from the blog author:
One can argue that Perry had very little to do with the job situation in Texas, but such a person should be probably prepare themselves for the consequences of that line of reasoning. If Rick Perry had nothing to do with creating jobs in Texas, than why does Obama have something to do with creating jobs anywhere? And why would someone advocate any sort of “job creating” policies if policies don’t seem to matter when it comes to the decade long governor of Texas? In short, it seems to me that this line of reasoning, in addition to sounding desperate and partisan, hogties its adherents into a position where they are simultaneously saying that government doesn’t create jobs while arguing for a set of policies where government will create jobs.
Since you clearly didn't read the article, let me sum it up for you.
In finding a cloud behind every silver lining, the New York Times basically informs its readers that all the jobs created under Perry's tenure are low-paying entry level jobs. The jobs that aren't low-paying are in the mining and gas industries that Perry can't take credit for because he didn't put the gas in the ground and finally, Perry's low-tax and low-regulatory policies "poached" (i.e. stole) jobs from high-tax and regulatory states!
Do you really think the Times is going to endorse Rick Perry?
Government jobs consume wealth. Breaking even would be a bonus.
It ranks with the famous Fox Butterworth gem:
Every now and then a headline gives you a glimpse inside the mind of the media to compare with the classic of 1997, to a New York Times story, subsequently repeated with variations, by Fox Butterfield: "Crime Rates are Falling, but Prisons Keep on Filling." This gave rise to what the great James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal continues to call the Fox Butterfield fallacy — a form of obtuseness caused by liberal assumptions about the world. In this case it is the assumption that falling crime rates and rising rates of incarceration could have nothing to do with one another.
http://www.jamesbowman.net/diaryDetail.asp?hpID=326
Funny you mention Taranto. I am a follower of his “Best of the Web” columns and already sent the headline into his mailbox. I occasionally contribute items to his column...perhaps 6-8 times/year.
Two thoughts come to mind.
First (as regards title): No s$$t, Sherlock.
Second (as regards jobs): Some jobs is better than no jobs. Or negative jobs.
How many jobs has the NYT created? (Hint: they are on the Dinosaur Media Deathwatch (R) list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
