In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On March 26 2014 12:38 IgnE wrote: You forgot to include the previous 80,000 years of human existence in your macroeconomic plots. The trendline that I posted is the linear regression from 2008. You know, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression that occurred a few years back?
Why don't you actually finish the trend line for your moving average plot? It looks like the trend line there will end up looking a lot like the trendline I posted. At least the derivative of the function for the foreseeable future seems to approximate the derivative of the trendline I posted.
Expand it for the next ten years please, so we can see what your more statistically sound trend line says. I would hate to lie to the people with statistics.
linear regression doesn't even work, even when you limit it to starting in 2008
Regression Analysis: civpart versus obs_date
The regression equation is civpart = 126 - 0.00152 obs_date
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P VIF Constant 126.118 1.352 93.29 0.000 obs_date -0.00151942 0.00003334 -45.57 0.000 1.000
S = 0.182696 R-Sq = 96.7% R-Sq(adj) = 96.6%
PRESS = 2.49518 R-Sq(pred) = 96.52%
Analysis of Variance
Source DF SS MS F P Regression 1 69.324 69.324 2076.93 0.000 Residual Error 71 2.370 0.033 Total 72 71.693
There are no replicates. Minitab cannot do the lack of fit test based on pure error.
On March 26 2014 12:38 IgnE wrote: You forgot to include the previous 80,000 years of human existence in your macroeconomic plots. The trendline that I posted is the linear regression from 2008. You know, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression that occurred a few years back?
Why don't you actually finish the trend line for your moving average plot? It looks like the trend line there will end up looking a lot like the trendline I posted. At least the derivative of the function for the foreseeable future seems to approximate the derivative of the trendline I posted.
Expand it for the next ten years please, so we can see what your more statistically sound trend line says. I would hate to lie to the people with statistics.
linear regression doesn't even work, even when you limit it to starting in 2008
Regression Analysis: civpart versus obs_date
The regression equation is civpart = 126 - 0.00152 obs_date
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P VIF Constant 126.118 1.352 93.29 0.000 obs_date -0.00151942 0.00003334 -45.57 0.000 1.000
S = 0.182696 R-Sq = 96.7% R-Sq(adj) = 96.6%
PRESS = 2.49518 R-Sq(pred) = 96.52%
Analysis of Variance
Source DF SS MS F P Regression 1 69.324 69.324 2076.93 0.000 Residual Error 71 2.370 0.033 Total 72 71.693
There are no replicates. Minitab cannot do the lack of fit test based on pure error.
On March 26 2014 08:34 RvB wrote: It wasn't useful because it doesn't give any indication of the problems relatively. For all I know it could've been better percentage wise but worse in absolute numbers. Now that graph you're posting actually does say something. Are we really going to follow the trend line though since the labor market has been slowly getting better.
If that were true it would be reflected in the graph. It is not much better and shows no signs of a sudden resurgence.
(Reuters) - The number of Americans filing for jobless benefits hovered near three-month lows last week and factory activity in the Mid-Atlantic region rebounded this month, suggesting the economy is regaining strength after being hobbled by severe weather.
While other data on Thursday showed home sales at a 1-1/2 year low in February, the tight stock of houses on the market that has constrained sales eased for a second straight month, opening the door wider to would-be homeowners.
"Much of the weakness that we have seen is weather-related and what we are seeing now as the impact dissipates is a much brighter outlook for the U.S. economy," said Millan Mulraine, deputy chief economist at TD Securities in New York.
Initial claims for state unemployment aid increased 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 320,000 last week, the Labor Department said. The rise, which was smaller than economists had expected, kept claims close to the three-month low hit in the prior week.
A four-week moving average of new claims, which cuts volatility to provide a better gauge of underlying conditions, hit its lowest level in more than three months.
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen on Wednesday said the unusually cold and snowy winter played a big role in disrupting economic activity, and she suggested a rebound was coming.
The latest batch of data added to a recent run that has hinted that a bounce back may be building.
Stocks on Wall Street pushed higher on the data, while prices for U.S. government debt fell marginally. The dollar rose against a basket of currencies.
Last week's claims data covered the period for the government's March nonfarm payrolls survey. Claims fell between the February and March survey periods, suggesting the survey will point to further improvement in job growth this month.
"The recent level of claims seems to be pointing to a reduction in layoffs and possibly a very strong March employment report. It also points to a decline in the unemployment rate," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania. The government will issue its March employment report on April 4.
(Reuters) - The U.S. unemployment rate will fall below 6 percent by the end of this year, a Federal Reserve official said on Wednesday, offering a bullish view on the country's economy after central bank comments sent shock waves through financial markets last week.
James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, said that the outlook for the U.S. economy is "quite good," despite data from early in the year.
"The biggest thing is that unemployment has come down more quickly than expected," said Bullard, speaking on a panel at the annual Credit Suisse investor conference in Hong Kong.
He added later during a question and answer session that more progress is needed in the labour market before U.S. policymakers can consider raising interest rates.
On March 26 2014 08:34 RvB wrote: It wasn't useful because it doesn't give any indication of the problems relatively. For all I know it could've been better percentage wise but worse in absolute numbers. Now that graph you're posting actually does say something. Are we really going to follow the trend line though since the labor market has been slowly getting better.
If that were true it would be reflected in the graph. It is not much better and shows no signs of a sudden resurgence.
(Reuters) - The number of Americans filing for jobless benefits hovered near three-month lows last week and factory activity in the Mid-Atlantic region rebounded this month, suggesting the economy is regaining strength after being hobbled by severe weather.
While other data on Thursday showed home sales at a 1-1/2 year low in February, the tight stock of houses on the market that has constrained sales eased for a second straight month, opening the door wider to would-be homeowners.
"Much of the weakness that we have seen is weather-related and what we are seeing now as the impact dissipates is a much brighter outlook for the U.S. economy," said Millan Mulraine, deputy chief economist at TD Securities in New York.
Initial claims for state unemployment aid increased 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 320,000 last week, the Labor Department said. The rise, which was smaller than economists had expected, kept claims close to the three-month low hit in the prior week.
A four-week moving average of new claims, which cuts volatility to provide a better gauge of underlying conditions, hit its lowest level in more than three months.
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen on Wednesday said the unusually cold and snowy winter played a big role in disrupting economic activity, and she suggested a rebound was coming.
The latest batch of data added to a recent run that has hinted that a bounce back may be building.
Stocks on Wall Street pushed higher on the data, while prices for U.S. government debt fell marginally. The dollar rose against a basket of currencies.
Last week's claims data covered the period for the government's March nonfarm payrolls survey. Claims fell between the February and March survey periods, suggesting the survey will point to further improvement in job growth this month.
"The recent level of claims seems to be pointing to a reduction in layoffs and possibly a very strong March employment report. It also points to a decline in the unemployment rate," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania. The government will issue its March employment report on April 4.
(Reuters) - The U.S. unemployment rate will fall below 6 percent by the end of this year, a Federal Reserve official said on Wednesday, offering a bullish view on the country's economy after central bank comments sent shock waves through financial markets last week.
James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, said that the outlook for the U.S. economy is "quite good," despite data from early in the year.
"The biggest thing is that unemployment has come down more quickly than expected," said Bullard, speaking on a panel at the annual Credit Suisse investor conference in Hong Kong.
He added later during a question and answer session that more progress is needed in the labour market before U.S. policymakers can consider raising interest rates.
It is getting better and it wouldn't be reflected in the graph since these articles are from the last few days.
He's tracking something separate from those reports. He's tracking the percentage of people in the workforce. The headline unemployment numbers can go down in 2 ways; either people find jobs, or they choose to no longer look for work. A very large portion of the drop in unemployment has been from the latter, where people are simply giving up looking for a job.
That being said, a sizable portion of those dropping out of the workforce are doing so only slightly ahead of schedule. We were expecting a downward trend, but admittedly, not nearly as downward as what is being observed.
On March 26 2014 08:34 RvB wrote: It wasn't useful because it doesn't give any indication of the problems relatively. For all I know it could've been better percentage wise but worse in absolute numbers. Now that graph you're posting actually does say something. Are we really going to follow the trend line though since the labor market has been slowly getting better.
If that were true it would be reflected in the graph. It is not much better and shows no signs of a sudden resurgence.
(Reuters) - The number of Americans filing for jobless benefits hovered near three-month lows last week and factory activity in the Mid-Atlantic region rebounded this month, suggesting the economy is regaining strength after being hobbled by severe weather.
While other data on Thursday showed home sales at a 1-1/2 year low in February, the tight stock of houses on the market that has constrained sales eased for a second straight month, opening the door wider to would-be homeowners.
"Much of the weakness that we have seen is weather-related and what we are seeing now as the impact dissipates is a much brighter outlook for the U.S. economy," said Millan Mulraine, deputy chief economist at TD Securities in New York.
Initial claims for state unemployment aid increased 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 320,000 last week, the Labor Department said. The rise, which was smaller than economists had expected, kept claims close to the three-month low hit in the prior week.
A four-week moving average of new claims, which cuts volatility to provide a better gauge of underlying conditions, hit its lowest level in more than three months.
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen on Wednesday said the unusually cold and snowy winter played a big role in disrupting economic activity, and she suggested a rebound was coming.
The latest batch of data added to a recent run that has hinted that a bounce back may be building.
Stocks on Wall Street pushed higher on the data, while prices for U.S. government debt fell marginally. The dollar rose against a basket of currencies.
Last week's claims data covered the period for the government's March nonfarm payrolls survey. Claims fell between the February and March survey periods, suggesting the survey will point to further improvement in job growth this month.
"The recent level of claims seems to be pointing to a reduction in layoffs and possibly a very strong March employment report. It also points to a decline in the unemployment rate," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania. The government will issue its March employment report on April 4.
(Reuters) - The U.S. unemployment rate will fall below 6 percent by the end of this year, a Federal Reserve official said on Wednesday, offering a bullish view on the country's economy after central bank comments sent shock waves through financial markets last week.
James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, said that the outlook for the U.S. economy is "quite good," despite data from early in the year.
"The biggest thing is that unemployment has come down more quickly than expected," said Bullard, speaking on a panel at the annual Credit Suisse investor conference in Hong Kong.
He added later during a question and answer session that more progress is needed in the labour market before U.S. policymakers can consider raising interest rates.
It is getting better and it wouldn't be reflected in the graph since these articles are from the last few days.
He's tracking something separate from those reports. He's tracking the percentage of people in the workforce. The headline unemployment numbers can go down in 2 ways; either people find jobs, or they choose to no longer look for work. A very large portion of the drop in unemployment has been from the latter, where people are simply giving up looking for a job.
That being said, a sizable portion of those dropping out of the workforce are doing so only slightly ahead of schedule. We were expecting a downward trend, but admittedly, not nearly as downward as what is being observed.
He's not tracking something seperate from the reports, the numbers are heavily correlated and this is in the 2nd article.
The unemployment rate for February rose to 6.7 percent from a five-year low of 6.6 percent as Americans flooded into the labor market to search for work.
On March 26 2014 08:34 RvB wrote: It wasn't useful because it doesn't give any indication of the problems relatively. For all I know it could've been better percentage wise but worse in absolute numbers. Now that graph you're posting actually does say something. Are we really going to follow the trend line though since the labor market has been slowly getting better.
If that were true it would be reflected in the graph. It is not much better and shows no signs of a sudden resurgence.
(Reuters) - The number of Americans filing for jobless benefits hovered near three-month lows last week and factory activity in the Mid-Atlantic region rebounded this month, suggesting the economy is regaining strength after being hobbled by severe weather.
While other data on Thursday showed home sales at a 1-1/2 year low in February, the tight stock of houses on the market that has constrained sales eased for a second straight month, opening the door wider to would-be homeowners.
"Much of the weakness that we have seen is weather-related and what we are seeing now as the impact dissipates is a much brighter outlook for the U.S. economy," said Millan Mulraine, deputy chief economist at TD Securities in New York.
Initial claims for state unemployment aid increased 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 320,000 last week, the Labor Department said. The rise, which was smaller than economists had expected, kept claims close to the three-month low hit in the prior week.
A four-week moving average of new claims, which cuts volatility to provide a better gauge of underlying conditions, hit its lowest level in more than three months.
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen on Wednesday said the unusually cold and snowy winter played a big role in disrupting economic activity, and she suggested a rebound was coming.
The latest batch of data added to a recent run that has hinted that a bounce back may be building.
Stocks on Wall Street pushed higher on the data, while prices for U.S. government debt fell marginally. The dollar rose against a basket of currencies.
Last week's claims data covered the period for the government's March nonfarm payrolls survey. Claims fell between the February and March survey periods, suggesting the survey will point to further improvement in job growth this month.
"The recent level of claims seems to be pointing to a reduction in layoffs and possibly a very strong March employment report. It also points to a decline in the unemployment rate," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania. The government will issue its March employment report on April 4.
(Reuters) - The U.S. unemployment rate will fall below 6 percent by the end of this year, a Federal Reserve official said on Wednesday, offering a bullish view on the country's economy after central bank comments sent shock waves through financial markets last week.
James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, said that the outlook for the U.S. economy is "quite good," despite data from early in the year.
"The biggest thing is that unemployment has come down more quickly than expected," said Bullard, speaking on a panel at the annual Credit Suisse investor conference in Hong Kong.
He added later during a question and answer session that more progress is needed in the labour market before U.S. policymakers can consider raising interest rates.
It is getting better and it wouldn't be reflected in the graph since these articles are from the last few days.
He's tracking something separate from those reports. He's tracking the percentage of people in the workforce. The headline unemployment numbers can go down in 2 ways; either people find jobs, or they choose to no longer look for work. A very large portion of the drop in unemployment has been from the latter, where people are simply giving up looking for a job.
That being said, a sizable portion of those dropping out of the workforce are doing so only slightly ahead of schedule. We were expecting a downward trend, but admittedly, not nearly as downward as what is being observed.
He's not tracking something seperate from the reports, the numbers are heavily correlated and this is in the 2nd article.
The unemployment rate for February rose to 6.7 percent from a five-year low of 6.6 percent as Americans flooded into the labor market to search for work.
Frankly, I don't have time to bring up the evidence, but the US has an issue with long term unemployed not coming back to work. Essentially, employers aren't considering people that have been out of work for some (long) amount of time (26 weeks iirc). The unemployment numbers have become decoupled from labor participation. If you want, you can go do some Google searches on the subject, or you can take my word for it, but it's happened.
Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
A study between states is hard due to some of the natural resource constraints. For example, while Texas has been doing alright through the crisis, a lot of that has to do with the expansion of shale drilling and the reliance on already established natural resources. Meanwhile, California has a lot more high tech industry and exports a lot of services. One basically has to look at similar industries between the states, but then you're only taking a slice of policies that affect different industries. It works for things like minimum wages (to an extent), but there's so much noise that you still have to find some really concrete examples within the data.
Also, it should be noted that in places in the Northwest (mainly North Dakota), you can not have a pulse and get 5 job offers due to oil/gas development out there.
Since September of last year, the unemployment rate in the United States has declined nearly a full percentage point, from 9 percent to 8.3 percent. On its face, this is an encouraging signal about the health of the labor market. But some of the change is due to a potentially troubling trend: a dramatic decline in the number of Americans who are part of the labor force. Prior to the recession, 66 percent of the population (not counting active duty military or people in a nursing home or in prison) over the age of 16 was in the labor force. Just four years later, this rate — known as the “labor force participation rate,” or LFPR — has fallen to 63.7 percent. While this might not sound like a large decline, it is unprecedented in the postwar era.
I think some of it could be from baby boomers entering into forced early retirement. Also a lot of the jobs that got cut in the 07/08 crisis are gone for good and existing employees have had to pick up the slack.
Also not enough Fibonacci in the charts at the top of this page. Needs more Fibonacci.
On March 27 2014 02:25 TheFish7 wrote: I think some of it could be from baby boomers entering into forced early retirement. Also a lot of the jobs that got cut in the 07/08 crisis are gone for good and existing employees have had to pick up the slack.
Also not enough Fibonacci in the charts at the top of this page. Needs more Fibonacci.
yeh, there's actually a blog on it on the washington post.
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
A study between states is hard due to some of the natural resource constraints. For example, while Texas has been doing alright through the crisis, a lot of that has to do with the expansion of shale drilling and the reliance on already established natural resources. Meanwhile, California has a lot more high tech industry and exports a lot of services. One basically has to look at similar industries between the states, but then you're only taking a slice of policies that affect different industries. It works for things like minimum wages (to an extent), but there's so much noise that you still have to find some really concrete examples within the data.
Also, it should be noted that in places in the Northwest (mainly North Dakota), you can not have a pulse and get 5 job offers due to oil/gas development out there.
It's also difficult finding places in the western world where one ideology is in power for more than 20 years to see those performances being wholly attributed to those parties in power.
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
A study between states is hard due to some of the natural resource constraints. For example, while Texas has been doing alright through the crisis, a lot of that has to do with the expansion of shale drilling and the reliance on already established natural resources. Meanwhile, California has a lot more high tech industry and exports a lot of services. One basically has to look at similar industries between the states, but then you're only taking a slice of policies that affect different industries. It works for things like minimum wages (to an extent), but there's so much noise that you still have to find some really concrete examples within the data.
Also, it should be noted that in places in the Northwest (mainly North Dakota), you can not have a pulse and get 5 job offers due to oil/gas development out there.
I don't know what they are teaching kids on the east coast but North Dakota hasn't been part of the 'Northwest' since around the 1890's
While I'm mentioning it, Chicago is not the 'Mid West' either. I think it is a little weird that people still use the regional groupings from the 1800's when talking about places like I mentioned.
It's like celebrating Columbus day. Some idiot sails to the Americas long after several cultures have come and inhabited them. Then we pretend he 'discovered' it even though the moron thinks he landed in India. To top it off, as a result some Natives still to this day refer to themselves as 'Indians'.
As for the jobs in the middle of the country one big issue is that many of those states don't have reasonable and sane protections for their citizens from the corporations moving in. Some of the problems you see as a result are, rent around these energy jobs in many places has gone through the roof. Towns where rent used to be about $300 the same place goes for about $2000. North Dakota ranks last on a recent nationwide survey of worker safety, with 12.4 fatalities per 100,000 workers in 2011, versus a national average of 3.5. Residents of these towns report that traffic has increased, along with air pollution, job-site accidents, highway accidents, sexual assaults, bar fights, prostitution, and drunken driving. Municipalities have more litter and garbage to haul away, and more sewage to treat.
"On January 9, 2014, a storage tank at a company called Freedom Industries holding 48,000-gal. of the coal-washing chemical 4-methylcyclohexene methanol, or MCHM, ruptured right next to the Elk River, less than two miles from the intake to the water treatment plant for Charleston, W.Va. Approximately 10,000-gal. of the chemical spilled into the river. The water supply for 300,000 people was put out of commission for everything except flushing toilets. West Virginia has regulations for chemical processing facilities but not for chemical storage facilities like the Freedom Industries facility. The storage site had reportedly not been inspected since 1991."
"A little more than a month later, on Feb. 11, 108,000-gal. of coal slurry spilled from a Patriot Coal processing facility into the Kanawha River"
"On Feb. 2, a pipe under a coal ash pond owned by Duke Energy ruptured, sending 82,000 tons of coal ash and 27 million gallons of tainted water into the Dan River, upstream from Danville, Va."
"Spills like this are not something new. In 2008, five million cubic yards of coal ash sludge buried hundreds of acres in eastern Tennessee from a Tennessee Valley Authority storage facility. What’s been done about that? Nada. It took until August of 2012 for a U.S. District Judge to rule that TVA was negligent and responsible for cleaning up its own mess. Not that it has. In December 2013 — two and a half months ago — USA Today ran a story headlined, “5 Years After Coal Ash Spill, Little has Changed.”
"The reason Duke Energy has done nothing is that the administration of North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, who worked for Duke Energy for 28 years, has been protecting Duke Energy. "
I mean with $2000 a month rent, 3x+ more of a likelihood to die on the job, and drinking water like this who wouldn't want to pack up their stuff and rush over...?
The death rate on the job is due to ND being the 48th in population....and farming (a job) being pretty dangerous.
More farmers per capita.
■In 2011, 570 agricultural workers died from work-related injuries.1 The fatality rate for agricultural workers was 7 times higher than the fatality rate for all workers in private industry; agricultural workers had a fatality rate of 24.9 deaths per 100,000, while the fatality rate for all workers was 3.5.3
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
A study between states is hard due to some of the natural resource constraints. For example, while Texas has been doing alright through the crisis, a lot of that has to do with the expansion of shale drilling and the reliance on already established natural resources. Meanwhile, California has a lot more high tech industry and exports a lot of services. One basically has to look at similar industries between the states, but then you're only taking a slice of policies that affect different industries. It works for things like minimum wages (to an extent), but there's so much noise that you still have to find some really concrete examples within the data.
Also, it should be noted that in places in the Northwest (mainly North Dakota), you can not have a pulse and get 5 job offers due to oil/gas development out there.
I don't know what they are teaching kids on the east coast but North Dakota hasn't been part of the 'Northwest' since around the 1890's
While I'm mentioning it, Chicago is not the 'Mid West' either. I think it is a little weird that people still use the regional groupings from the 1800's when talking about places like I mentioned.
ND is the mid west because the fed says so. Geography be damned.
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
Germany is super fiscally conservative. If they don't have enough work they actually make people work less so that everyone can continue working! Heavy restrictions on how and when companies can lay off workers! They have very generous unemployment benefits, including healthcare! Cheap to free education! So conservative.
Germany's GDP actually went down last winter, and has been slowing in 2013. Germany has been sharply antagonistic towards the rest of Europe. It has been exploiting a trade imbalance between itself and the rest of the world, relying on its sturdy welfare system to pay workers less relative to its peers, to keep prices down. They guarantee their work and wages for their laborers in exchange for keeping wages low. This allows them to keep their prices from rising, allowing German products to edge out products from other European countries. But by displacing the economic chances of producers in other Euro countries, Germany is adopting a short term strategy that relies on selling cheap, high quality goods to others while cannibalizing the market, by destroying the economies of their buyers.
So is Germany in a better position than their peers? Mixing sarcasm, fact, and opinion in the same post confuses me of what you think the problem and solution is. Is the reason Germany is doing well in your opinion because it has elected it's left leaning parties and those parties adopted more liberal policies than the rest of Europe?
On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote: Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area.
Germany is super fiscally conservative. If they don't have enough work they actually make people work less so that everyone can continue working! Heavy restrictions on how and when companies can lay off workers! They have very generous unemployment benefits, including healthcare! Cheap to free education! So conservative.
Germany's GDP actually went down last winter, and has been slowing in 2013. Germany has been sharply antagonistic towards the rest of Europe. It has been exploiting a trade imbalance between itself and the rest of the world, relying on its sturdy welfare system to pay workers less relative to its peers, to keep prices down. They guarantee their work and wages for their laborers in exchange for keeping wages low. This allows them to keep their prices from rising, allowing German products to edge out products from other European countries. But by displacing the economic chances of producers in other Euro countries, Germany is adopting a short term strategy that relies on selling cheap, high quality goods to others while cannibalizing the market, by destroying the economies of their buyers.
Please not the "Germany doesn't pay it's workers" stuff again. Our export goods aren't cheap. Ironically people employed in the industrial, export based industries are among the best earning employees. Who's suffering from low wages is our domestic service sector.(Which is pretty big as in most developed countries).
On March 27 2014 05:17 Wolfstan wrote: So is Germany in a better position than their peers? Mixing sarcasm, fact, and opinion in the same post confuses me of what you think the problem and solution is. Is the reason Germany is doing well in your opinion because it has elected it's left leaning parties and those parties adopted more liberal policies than the rest of Europe?
Our government is currently and has been run by conservatives for the last eight years. It just happens to be that Germany/Europe doesn't actually exploit it's workforce to the degree the US does. Our 'right' is still more left leaning than the United States left
We're still doing okay because we have a large industrial sector that is relatively crisis proof.Also we're profiting from the Euro. Also the country has been run in a reasonable fashion (which sadly is not true for certain countries in Europe) and there's not that much corruption here.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XgzEcPS.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YBdLBFQ.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NvaEJ5F.png)
