Rick Perry’s Job Creation Miracle

-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.

H/T: The American Independent, AlterNet, Swamlalnd.

366 thoughts on “Rick Perry’s Job Creation Miracle”

  1. @Spindell, I was going to explain things to you right up until you stopped acting like the courtesy young boy we know you can be. Politeness has its benefits.

  2. “This is known as the love it or leave it theory of consent, I will show you how this is wrong as well and not a proper basis for consent.”

    As kderosa did on another thread more than a week ago he makes an extravagant promise he then doesn’t deliver. So much verbiage, so little substance. He just keeps writing and yet proves little. I’ve become quite bored by his endless posturing, but yet again he’s hijacked another thread. I think Puzzling made an interesting suggestion that has been lost in the overwhelming spate of comments. Perhaps like other blogs we should institute a “like”/”dislike” button that will help separate thoughtful posters, like Ekeyra and Puzzling, who I enjoy disagreeing with, from those like specifically kderosa who is a clown in search of gratifying his urges towards disruption and disinformation. kderosa’s endless whining about being attacked has no factual basis because as I and others have shown he is the initiator in all instances.

  3. This is OT, but so is a lot on this thread. I tried to find an original story on this by using Search, but apparently it was not blogged here.

    The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has overturned the 2007 criminal convictions of anti-war protesters arrested outside the Bush White House. The protesters had a valid permit to gather. A police officer, on the night of the arrests, claimed he could revoke the permit because participants had violated a regulation prohibiting stationary signs and because they failed to “continue to move along the sidewalk.”

    The appellate court found that prosecutors failed to present any witnesses who could identify any of the protesters. Also, the prosecution failed to produce any evidence that the defendants were carrying signs the night of their arrest. They also could not show that anyone had crossed a police line.

    The defendants were convicted of either failure to obey a lawful order of a police officer to disperse or of crossing a police line. They had been holding a peaceful prayer vigil against the Iraq War, an exercise of their First Amendment rights, as allowed by their permit.

    The appellate court said prosecutors had presented “no evidence whatsoever” at the original trial that any regulation was violated. The court further noted that U.S. Park Police improperly revoked the demonstrators’ permit allowing assembly on the public sidewalk outside the White House.

    I remember reading about the arrests four years ago, but did not realize they were convicted with no evidence. One of those things that make you scratch your head and respond, “Say what?”

    Justice delayed, but better late than never.

    http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/demonstration.pdf

  4. He and Palin stole the thunder from the Republican debate in Iowa – he by announcing he’s running for President – she by announcing she’s visiting the Iowa State Fair.

  5. OS,

    I agree that her talent is remarkable … given the right piece Charlotte Church soars

  6. My post at 5:00 mentioning the cello work was in reference to “The Flower Duet”

  7. Gene,

    Sharping is usually due to nerves … stage fright is good up to a point … too much can cause a singer to over reach, going sharp. Not enough can often cause a singer to flat … gotta find the middle ground.

  8. Ahh, Gene … beautiful … hear all that cello work in the orchestration? Yeah, baby …

  9. Here’s Sarah Brightman’s offering .. she swallows her notes and all that breathing you hear is because her dress is too tight and she’s breathing from her chest rather than her diaphragm.

  10. I’ll see your Ave Maria and raise you Erika Miklosa and Bernadett Wiedemann singing “The Flower Duet” from Delibes’ Lakme.

Comments are closed.