-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
According to a Wall Street Journal article, Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, found that since June 2009 37% of all net new jobs in America were created in Texas. Even though Texas is an energy state benefitting from high oil and natural gas prices, Fisher touts Texas’ business friendly environment, its right-to-work laws, and its “tort reform”– a $250,000 cap on punitive damages.
The WSJ article even calls Texas “fiscally responsible.” That’s the same Texas with a $27 billion budget shortfall. The WSJ article also uncritically cites Texas’ statutory limits on mortgage borrowing, a regulation of the financial industry they would decry if Obama proposed it.
While the 37% figure is accurate, the details are what’s interesting. Texas has the highest percentage of minimum wage worker in the country. As the chart below shows, the level of minimum wage jobs has increased during Perry’s reign.
The median hourly earnings for all hourly-paid wage and salary workers in Texas stood at $11.20 per hour in 2010; nationally, the median was $12.50.
Texas also ranks number one in the percentage of residents without health insurance. Texas’ percentage is almost 28%. Massachusetts, with Romneycare, has the lowest at 4.7%.
According to The Economist, the state-level Gross Domestic Product of Texas grew by 2.6% last year, equal to the national average. New York grew by 5.1% and California by 1.8%.
Here is a listing of the Perry economic portfolio touted as a model for the whole country:
- Highest percentage of minimum wage jobs.
- Highest percentage of residents with no health insurance.
- A budget deficit of $27 billion.
- Lower than average wages.
- Average growth in GDP.
So, if you want a low paying job with no health insurance, Texas is your choice.
Xenicus,
You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Listen up Pyle, this is Sgt Carter. Do you HEAR ME? I CAN’T HEAR YOU? I am the United States Marine. You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Do YOU hear me, Pyle?
mespo727272 \ Kds Over the Edge \ I. M. So Sorry \ Mike Esposito
Give up before you extinguish any professionalism you have left. Sign off and go on vacation for a few weeks. Six feet is deep enough.
That reply was weaker than Howington’s rejection of being B.I.L.
I regret to inform you Xenicus, who posted on August 10, 2011 at 9:53 pm, which was directed to “2 Nal” –. Regarding Mark Esposito (as) is posting as I.M. So Sorry. Tonight the man has jumped the shark with a set of obnoxious posts. You are so full of bull, this was and is not Mark E.
Your evaluation of the English language components is in absoluteness incorrect. Just because Obscure wording and phrases are used they can never be a (are like) DNA fingerprint. When some people reach a certain degree of education they can and do write to the audience that they are addressing rather than being self absorbed in self importance. I will repeat that (of) the offender [and with such an extensive written record] is NOT mespo727272. Your program needs dramatic debugging it it was able to have [was] identified in nanoseconds from matching uncommon wording in I.M.’s posts, as it was then and is presently incorrect. Much like a forensic examiner will never or should never say with absolute certainty either the positive or negative in any matter. But it is more likely than not that, however in the case it is more likely than NOT that you are incorrect
I do believe that Nal has stated that he would not look at or [I would ask you to] gather IP, ISP, even if he did it would not change the outcome as mespo or Mark is not responsible for the postings, so please gather any and all evidence (and other evidence and be open about the) to figure out the outcome, no hard no foul.
Professor Turley should NOT abandon the guestbloggers as [until] they have the requisite maturity and integrity to deal with any and all [adult] intellectual challenges presented here, they prove it on a daily basis by dealing with the likes of you.
The program is destroying the forum. I know you are an honest person and ask for your help. It is readily apparent that you are in need of help.
2 Nal – Mark Esposito is posting as I.M. So Sorry. Tonight the man has jumped the shark with a set of obnoxious posts.
Obscure wording and phrases are like a DNA fingerprint of the offender and with such an extensive written record mespo727272 was identified in nanoseconds from matching uncommon wording in I.M.’s posts. I would ask you to gather IP, ISP, and other evidence and be open about the outcome.
Turley should abandon the guestbloggers until they have the maturity to deal adult intellectual challenges presented here. The program is destroying the forum. I know you are an honest person and ask for your help.
Mespo:
see below:
Mespo:
I have tried to be civil. It doesnt work. So I just give what I get.
But some how I dont think accusing someone of screwing a goat is what the professor had in mind when he calls for civility.
eniobob and SwM,
Decided to post the following OT on this thread since everything but the kitchen sink is here … hope you see it.
Left for the Jobs not Cuts Event in Cleveland heading for Portman’s office. What a morning/afternoon. They’re shooting a movie, The Avengers, and streets are closed off etc. We finally got close to his office and parked and as we were walking some guy with a clipboard showed us some movie credentials he had around his neck and wanted to talk about the need for women of our age group … we stopped him right there and told him to move as we were heading down to teabagger Portman’s office to protest and didn’t have time for him. Then he waned to talk politics … we finally broke it off and went on our way. Naturally we were too late to get into the building so we stood outside and talked to all kinds of people who were searching for Jackson and Downey Jr. A couple teabaggers tried to argue with us but we told them we had seen Downey Jr. over on East Fourth eating and they took off to see if they could find him. (suckers) Finally met up with other Eventors … all was well. Probably no news coverage as the movie shoot was the only thing anyone was interested in. Met up with two U S Atty friends for a late lunch and caught up on all the federal dirt. Strange day but I did my best. Can’t believe Reid put that guy on the committee … guess he’ll finally have to start doing some work.
kderosa,
You must have missed this part of JT’s comment:
What part of it did you absorb in that wop skull? Are you feeling vindicated? Victimized? Damn, now you know how we have all felt when you have delightedly abused each and everyone of the regular posters on here. You are a disgrace to the human race much like Nancy Grace is to the legal profession. Damn, Leroy, you’re batting a pretty good average.
Let me end this with this: You are like a skunk in a humid room, you know its there, you can’t see it and the odor is more than one can bare but you just can’t get the stench off. Is that ad hominem? You betcha, now drop your drawer, bend over, grab your ankles Dabneys calling.
@mespo,
You must have missed this part of JT’s comment:
“The line is crossed when it becomes a personal attack.”
And, this part:
“… but I hope that we can move forward and focus on our various issues rather than personalities on the blog.”
And, this part:
“I would love to move forward without rancor …”
You’ve just condoned a personal attack, made one yourself, and you clearly aren’t moving forward without rancor, or focusing on the issues, rather than personalities.
Weren’t you the one doing the most complaining of and trumping up the “uncivil” behavior and “disruptions” just a few days ago?
Roco:
“please refrain from gratuitous ad hominem attacks. This blog is devoted to civility.”
*********************
Come now Roco. You’ve been so reflexively attacking anyone who disagrees with you as uncivil, that you now do it for your “friend” kderosa. I think Redneck Atty is a welcome addition to the blog and defend his right to bawdy free speech. KD does have that carnival barker sound to him and I applaud RA’s ability to draw out that mental image. Our is a discussion among strong minds not a tea and crumpet affair for the prim and proper crowd who say little and mean even less. A little blue adds some nice contrast to all the red spewed by your ilk.
No Way:
Still waiting for the answer to my question about what a man of principle would do when dismayed and “pissed off” by a blog host’s alleged breach of confidentiality. Methinks the blogger doth whine too much, rant too insincerely, and his “dismay” is about as solid as the mist. The proof is in his presence … or dearth of principle. Welcome back. We know you much better now.
Redneck Attorney:
please refrain from gratuitous ad hominem attacks. This blog is devoted to civility.
Who said Kderosa was male? I would say that I thought he/she/it was the advance man for the circus-circus. And that one of the acts that he/seh/it performed was sodomy on goats. Do you me I am wrong in this instance?
With his icon [kderosa] would anyone, not knowing he was male, hesitate before calling him a misogynist for instance.
“Do you have any respect for those who disagree with you, Mike? Or, to you, are they just playing some sort of game? After all, to you, if they really were as intelligent as they seem to be; wouldn’t they be agreeing with you?”
NoWay,
I do have respect for those who disagree with me and I am always willing to listen and to learn. If age has taught me anything is that I’m not quite as smart as I thought I was. I try to learn from my own errors and I am quite willing to admit my mistakes, when I’m shown they were mistakes. When I’m wrong I admit it publicly and when I attack someone I admit I am attacking them. I have said that although we disagree on much I nevertheless respect you. This is because you have shown yourself to be a thoughtful person, one not blinded or limited by ideology. I believe that you are not playing a game, neither is Roco or Grossman for that matter, though I personally think they are more doctrinaire then you are.
Kderosa, on the other hand I do strongly believe is here playing a game and is not an honest participant in the general discussions. my evidence is based on the sum of his writing. We have had people like that in the past as you are well aware and there is a qualitative difference between them, you Roco, Grossman and Bdaman.
As to your critique I have never explored the possibilities access gives me.
Frankly, I’m not interested, I have more than enough to do in my life to be interested in who someone is. Do I know the names of some of those who anonymously comment here, absolutely, but that is because they first contacted me. I honestly was surprised that some of them knew my E Mail address, these contacts occurred long before anyone guest blogged, but I believe there is nothing private about the internet.
My concern with Kderosa, incidentally, was not about his personal identity, but about the fact that part of his tactics included hiding his own beliefs, while attacking in a broad-based manner the beliefs of those he disagreed with. This bothered me because it is a dishonest debating tactic. For instance Grossman and Roco call me a “collectivist” and I can reply in kind knowing they follow Rand’s teachings. If Kderosa calls me an “collectivist” and I reply in kind responding with, let us say, that he is a teabagger, he can “plausibly” deny it by asking me where did he ever admit to it. Bdaman for instance is Black and has let us know it. It would be stupid for me to accuse Bdaman of racism, or even Clarence Thomas/Michael Steele, for that matter. With his icon would anyone, not knowing he was male, hesitate before calling him a misogynist for instance.
Now returning to you and to your anonymity. I really don’t know if you are male or female; Black, White, Asian, etc.; That knowledge of you is really immaterial. The difference is you generally and forcefully state your opinion, in doing so don’t play games. Besides that you are generally civil and are generally responded to civilly because of that. Puzzling is someone else who also I know nothing about, but who has gained my respect for his writing and lack of duplicity.
As for the right of privacy here, knowing Professor Turley’s predilections, I think you can be certain that no one who guest blogs, in his opinion, would violate confidentiality. You have the right to feel differently.
“How did that fake GPS link that he sent you work? It used your ip address. Funny how you don’t recognize the same when the shoe is on the other foot.”
It initially alarmed me, but it also taught me something. That lesson was that anyone with excellent internet skills, as Bdaman has, can find out anything they want about me. you’ll note that despite an inane epithet Bdaman used against me and that incident, our relationship these days is pretty cordial. This is not because I think myself a saint, but because he has shown himself to be a decent human being and apologized for the epithet. One of my closest friends for more than 40 years is a conservative that would be to the right of most conservatives here, yet
he is a kind empathetic human being and has fought racism all his life. I judge people on their humanity not their “Isms”, except where pertinent.
I’m glad you are not leaving but I do disagree with your take on this whole issue.
I’m going to say something as a guest blogger. When Professor Turley asked if I’d be interested in being a guest blogger, I felt honored. I also felt a responsibility. I can assure you that I have never checked the email addresses of any individuals who have commented at this blog. I don’t even know how I’d go about checking out someone’s IP address. I assume those who post here anonymously do so for a reason. I respect their desire to remain anonymous. The only thing I’m interested in doing at the Turley Blawg is to write up posts that I think will be of interest to people who visit this law blog and to participate in discussions on the topics of the blog posts. In addition, I find that we have some interesting exchanges even when we go off topic.
Mike,
I didn’t say I was going anywhere.
“However, to me the entire discussion about our having the keys to the kingdom is irrelevant.”
You communicate with Buddha/Gene via email. Of course you don’t feel violated.
Look. You have chosen to post using your real name. You have no professional reasons to want to be able to voice your opinions without professional backlash. Others have chosen to post anonymously. I don’t care about the reason(s) they post using a pseudonym. I respect their choice to do so, just as I respect Alexander Hamilton’s, James Madison’s, John Jay’s, Oliver Ellsworth’s, Samuel Clemens’ reasons to do so.
Do you have any respect for those who disagree with you, Mike? Or, to you, are they just playing some sort of game? After all, to you, if they really were as intelligent as they seem to be; wouldn’t they be agreeing with you?
“Anyone who comments here, or any other place on the internet can be identified, despite pseudonyms.”
You’re correct, to a point. I can post using a pseudonym without anyone being able to identify me. You may not know how to do it, but many others do. It all comes down to need. When posting comments at the blog of a Professor of Law; one who believes in free speech, and has written a number of articles demonstrating his respect for those who choose anonymity, most people don’t think of that as a place where they need to take extra steps to ensure their choice to remain anonymous is protected.
Do you know what it feels like to be violated, Mike? I know you do. I read your reaction when you thought that bdaman knew where you lived. How did that fake GPS link that he sent you work? It used your ip address. Funny how you don’t recognize the same when the shoe is on the other foot.
Mike, I am part of a professional email list that is supposed to be confidential. There was a discussion about privacy and the emails being confidential in nature. There are ways to find stuff on the internet, and Google is one of the best sources because of its search algorithm structure. I have a couple of reference books sitting on my desk on the subject of “hacking Google.”
Getting back to my professional list. After a couple of comments that I thought were just a bit too self-confident on the part of a couple of colleagues, I logged off and conducted a search of the internet. I then copied and blockquoted a couple of their own emails and posted them to the discussion list. I was careful to use nothing that would embarrass them but made a point. As you might surmise, there was considerable consternation about the “leaks.” No leaks, it is all out there. Way more stuff than people would expect. Kevin is much more of an expert on this stuff than I am and can find stuff I cannot.
There are really good reasons I do not have a social networking page and would not consider starting one.