CuriousOneMi2

How's real income per capita doing in the Obama era?

Not too good. Maybe we can get back to the terrible experience of 2008 under Bush.

2000 2008 2009 2010
28,886 33,197 32,141 32,446
Source: BEA

C1

How's the economy doing under Obama?

Jobless rates are up since Dec 2008; payroll employment is down; real GDP per capita is down; the discomfort index is up; the budget deficit as a % of GDP is up.

C1

P.S. Just ask libs whether taxes should be raised in this environment.
-- Sanityman says “tax increases will slow down an overheated ecomomy rather than fed rate increases that are very bad for business and will also impare service the debt servicing.” NO CORRECTIONS HERE. THE COMMENTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. VOTE OBAMA IF YOU UNDERSTAND THIS GIBBERISH.

drwaver:

All my arguments are backed with facts and/or links. Truthfulness is a problem for you.

C1

drwaver:

I see you are doing your cyber stalking with erroneousness again.

Let's tackle the miscues:
-- Michigan was plagued by a one-state recession from 2002-2007. While other states including Michigan faced recessionary conditions in 2007-2010, Michigan represents the sole state to see an economic decline from 2002-2010. Bad Granholm.
-- Michigan's payroll employment fell for 8 straight years from 2002-2010. The most pronounced decline occurred in 2009. However, payroll employment fell in 2010 also. Michigan's household employment also fell sharply from 2008-2010. Bad Granholm and Obama.
-- The rise in Michigan's payroll employment in 2011 has dramatically outpaced the national rise in payroll jobs. Some people such as drwaver claim otherwise.

In conclusion, there are signs of a turnaround in Michigan in 2011. The ability to continue this turnaround requires national economic growth as well as Michigan's commitment to a better business climate. Beware of posters who consistently fail to tell the truth.

C1

Liberal lies, deceptions and erroneousness (Sept 2011):
- Drwaver says “Table C shows decreases in MI payroll employment each of the last three months.” CORRECTION: MICHIGAN’S PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT ROSE FROM 3.9 MILLION TO 3.93 MILLION IN RECENT MONTHS, PER BLS.
- Drwaver says “Table C shows that MI is one of 24 states with statistically significant job growth, Aug 2010 to Aug 2011, hardly making MI outstanding.” CORRECTION: MICHIGAN IS OUTSTANDING SINCE IT SHOWS STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EMPLOYMENT GROWTH VERSUS LAST YEAR UNDER GRANHOLM. IT ALSO ADDRESSES THE LIBS COMMENTS ABOUT "WHERE ARE THE JOBS?" IN ADDITION, THIS EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IS ROUGHLY TWICE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS. MICHIGAN’S JOB GROWTH WAS 6TH FASTEST IN THE NATION. Each Month of Jan-August 2011 versus the prior year: % Ch in MI Jobs 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.9 1.3 1.5 2.1 % Ch in US Jobs 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
- Drwaver says in a stunning display of shooting himself in the foot, head and elsewhere that “Michigan’s employment rose throughout 2010.” CORRECTIONS: MICHIGAN’S HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT FELL FROM 4.22 MILLION IN 2009 TO 4.19 IN 2010. IMPROVEMENT IN THE CHERRYPICKED MONTHS OF 2010, WHEN GM WAS COMING OUT OF BANKRUPTCY, FAILED TO IMPROVE VERSUS THE PRIOR YEAR. (2) HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT WAS EVEN HIGHER IN 2008 AT 4.55 MILLION. THE 2008-2010 PLUNGE IN HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT REINFORCES THE 2008-2010 PLUNGE IN PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT UNDER GRANHOLM AND OBAMA.
- Tahoe says “there were NOT 8 straight years of job reductions.” CORRECTION: YES, THERE WERE. THE GRANHOLM ERA INCLUDED 8 STRAIGHT YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT DECLINES SINCE 2002. THE FIGURES FOR PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT BY YEAR FOR 2002-2010 ARE 4.49, 4.42, 4.4, 4.39, 4.33, 4.27, 4.16, 3.87, AND 3.86. SOURCE: BLS (MILLIONS)

Since Obama became President, Michigan's payroll employment has declined from 4.05 million in Dec 2008 to 3.93 million last month. It was even lower in August 2010 at 3.85 million.

The Michigan economy is showing improvement versus the year-ago experience. This good news needs to be put in perspective since we had 8 consecutive years of falling payroll employment in the Granholm era. The 2009-2010 era of Obama and Granholm included mammoth job losses. Just the facts from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

C1

Libs really can't stand the fact that Michigan is improving in 2011 under Snyder. The Brookings Institute says so; BLS says so; I say so.

Libs give us BLS without the "L."

Liberal lies, deceptions and erroneousness (August 2011):
- Adam says “you are just making it (declining joblessness) up.” CORRECTIONS: MICHIGAN DID EXPERIENCE ONE OF THE MOST PRONOUNCED PLUNGES IN JOBLESSNESS FROM 2010-2011, PER BLS. (2) ADAM AND OTHER LIBS DISAPPEARED WHEN OFFERED TO STAND BEHIND THEIR RHETORIC WITH A $100,000 WAGER THAT I WAS JUST MAKING IT UP. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_06172011.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_07222011.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
- Mizzy says “He's (Gov Snyder’s) cutting and slashing and hurting people right and left but still no jobs, jobs, jobs.” CORRECTION: MICHIGAN IS EXPERIENCING STRONG JOB GROWTH, PER BLS. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_06172011.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_07222011.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm

JC:

The key issue is jobs. The discomfort index, which is the sum of the jobless rate and the inflation rate, has surged under Obama. It plunged under Reagan. Raising taxes now will contribute to ongoing economic stagnation. It will also contribute to bigger government which is quite inefficient already.

C1

- Charboneau says "only 1.44 trillion of our 14 trillion dollar deficit (sic as it should be "debt") was a result of Obama's actions." CORRECTION: I SAY JC HAS AN ONGOING CREDIBILITY PROBLEM. BUDGET DEFICITS HAVE BEEN AROUND 10% OF GDP FOR THE LAST 3 FISCAL YEARS. WITH AN ECONOMY OF AROUND $14-15 TRILLION, THIS MEANS ANNUAL BUDGET DEFICITS OF AROUND $1.4-1.5 TRILLION EACH YEAR. OBAMA GETS 8/12 OF THE FIRST FY; 12/12 OF THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR; 10/12 OF THE CURRENT FY. THAT'S WAY MORE THAN $1.4 TRILLION IN TOTAL AS PROCLAIMED BY JC.

rtp:

It's hardly irresponsible to make a no-lose wager. In this case, I knew that employment expanded during the terms of recent governors. Consequently, I felt no risk.

The employment figures imply the standard of living rose except during the Granholm era. Bad Granholm.

C1

drwaver:

Your latest miscues are:
- The 3 percentage point plunge in the jobless rate was for the year ending in January 2011; it was not for 2010. the 2010 jobless rate for Michigan was 12.5%.
- The idea that Granholm gets credit for 2010 is preposterous since employment in the household survey fell from 2009 to 2010 (see yesterday's post on p.1). It is also preposterous since employment fell in the payroll survey for 8 straight years from 2002-2010 (see yesterday's post on p.1).
- You say "It doesn't matter what happened a year ago." LOL!! Economic and political reality suggest the failure to improve hurts re-election prospects. The Nov 2010 elections provide recent proof.
- You also say "We are dealing with time series of data." It is time-series data.

C1

drwaver:

Shall I report you to yahoo for stalking, deceitful and antagonistic behavior?

Corp. Tax Ranking (2010)
Michigan 48 (improves to low 20s now due to recent legislation)

Joblessness Ranking (2010)
Michigan near 50 (one of most pronounced yearly declines in jobless rate now)

Economic Growth Ranking (2002-2010)
Michigan 50, only state in the nation to decline (growing now)

Population Growth Ranking (2000-2010)
Michigan 50, only state in the nation to lose population (stabilized now)

Sources: Tax Foundation; BLS; BEA; Census Bureau

C1

drwaver:

Thank you for reinforcing the accuracy of my calculations. You just showed the 3 percentage point plunge in the Michigan jobless rate in the first month of 2011 versus the year-ago expereince (see my above post at 8:45AM). Unlike you, I did not stop with Jan, but added the Feb-August year-over-year comparisons. Remember no cherry picking. As shown below, these jobless rates fell for each month of Jan-August 2011 versus 2010.

MI's Jobless Rate Change (Jan-August 2011 versus prior year): -3 -3.1 -3 -2.9 -2.5 -2.1 -1.5 -1

Perhaps you need the year-over-year improvement from Jan-Aug 2010 to Jan-Aug 2011 summarized for you:
The jobless rate is down by 2.4 percentage points.
Employment is up by 1%.
Unemployment is down by 20%.
The labor force is down by 2%.

My information shows improvement from 2010 to 2011. It is consistent with the information from the liberal Brookings Institute. Comments from drwaver are inconsistent with the Brooking Institute's report.

Thank you again for showing your deceptiveness.

C1

P.S. Now do something positive and go collect the $150,000 that tahoe owes me on each of the 3 bullet points (I'll give you a 10% commission).

Where's drwaver with his claim that payroll employment is down? I showed the year-over-year growth previously.

On a sequential basis from Dec 2010 at 3.87 million to 3.90 million in May 2011 and 3.93 million last month, it certainly appears the BLS is also showing sequential payroll employment growth in MIchigan versus last year.

Where's tahoe?

Where's the commitment to truth from libs?

C1

rtp:

FYI. Granholm is the failure!!!!!

MI. Payroll Employment Gov
1979 3637 Milliken
1990 3946 Blanchard
2002 4487 Engler
2010 3861 Granholm
Source: BLS; thousands

Now were you serious about the $200,000 wager?

C1

Look at all the libs erroneously claiming there is no job growth in Michigan during Snyder's first year in office. It is driving them to near insanity as they post erroneous comments. Granholm was 0 for 8 in terms of experiencing payroll employment growth and now we are seeing relatively strong payroll employment growth in Michigan.

Liberal lies, deceptions and erroneousness (Sept 2011):
- At least 10 libs ask “where are the Michigan jobs?” after the August 2011 unemployment report is released by BLS. CORRECTION: AS SHOWN ABOVE, MICHIGAN’S EMPLOYMENT GROWTH WAS ROUGHLY TWICE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. MICHIGAN’S JOBLESS RATE PLUNGED BY MUCH MORE THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE DURING JAN-AUG 2011 VERSUS THE YEAR-AGO EXPERIENCE UNDER GRANHOLM. NOT A SINGLE LIB STOOD BEHIND THEIR RHETORIC. http://www.mlive.com/jobs/index.ssf/2011/09/state_unemployment_rises_to_112_percent.html#comments
- Tahoe questions whether “payroll employment surged in Michigan relative to the US experience during the last year." CORRECTION: MICHIGAN’S PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT GREW AT TWICE THE NATIONAL RATE. % Ch in MI Jobs 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.9 1.3 1.5 2.1 % Ch in US Jobs 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Source: BLS http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
- Tahoe says “there were NOT 8 straight years of job reductions.” CORRECTION: YES, THERE WERE. THE GRANHOLM ERA INCLUDED 8 STRAIGHT YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT DECLINES SINCE 2002. THE FIGURES FOR PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT BY YEAR FOR 2002-2010 ARE 4.49, 4.42, 4.4, 4.39, 4.33, 4.27, 4.16, 3.87, AND 3.86. SOURCE: BLS (MILLIONS)
- Tahoe questions whether “Michigan's jobless rate in 2011 is much lower than the 2010 experience under Granholm using year-over-year comparisons.” He says Michigan’s jobless rate is 13% in 2011. CORRECTION: HE’S WRONG AGAIN. MICHIGAN'S JOBLESS RATE IN JAN-AUGUST 2011 HAS PLUNGED BY MUCH MORE THAN THE NATIONAL EXPERIENCE DURING THE LAST YEAR. MICHIGAN’S PEAK JOBLESS RATE OF 11.2% IN AUGUST 2011 IS 1 PERCENTAGE POINT LOWER THAN THE AUGUST 2010 LEVEL. MICHIGAN'S JOBLESS RATE PLUNGED FROM 2010 TO 2011. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_05202011.htm MI's Change -3 -3.1 -3 -2.9 -2.5 -2.1 -1.5 -1 US's Change -0.7 -0.8 -0.9 -0.8 -0.5 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5
- Tahoe says "I stop responding to politics when my conversation partner fails to back up claims with facts." CORRECTIONS: A PLETHORA OF FACTUAL DATA AND LINKS ARE PROVIDED REFUTING EACH AND EVERY STATEMENT FROM TAHOE.

It appears drwaver has lots of deceitful, erroneous and antagonistic comrades.

C1

rtp:

I do believe you are correct about the Bush/Granholm dynamic. She blasted him; he retaliated. tit-for-tat. Juvenile on both of their parts.

As for the Michigan depression since the 1970s, I'm good for $100,000 that says employment and real GDP expanded, on balance, during the Blanchard years. Ditto for the Engler years for another $100,000.

I can pick up a cashier's check any time tomorrow. :)

C1

Michigan was the sole state to see an economic decline from 2002-2010. The other 49 states saw higher (or essentially unchanged in the case of Ohio) levels of economic activity in 2010 than 2002.

Boyd's comment that Michigan showed "the most improved jobs employment picture in the nation in 2010" appears misleading and erroneous. While the jobless rate did fall in 2010 from 2009, it was due to a smaller labor force. Employment in the household survey fell from 2009-10. In fact, household employment plunged from 4.55 million in 2008 to 4.21 million in 2009 and just 4.19 million in 2010.

Michigan experienced 8 straight years of declines in payroll employment from 2002-2010.

This blatant attempt at deception, along with a disastrous economic record, is partly why there was a mammoth change in the composition of state representation in Michigan's 2010 elections.

C1

rtp:

Don't let the economic reality of a one-state recession over the 2002-2010 period affect your opinion!!

C1

Ouch!! Number 1 for being the sole state to see an economic decline from 2002-2010. Just the facts.

MI's Annualized Real GDP Growth US's Annualized Real GDP Growth
2002-2010 -1.0% 1.6%
Source: BEA

C1

Everybody now: "We're number 1"
"We're number 1"
"We're number 1"

Number 1 for being the sole state to see an economic decline from 2002-2010. Just the facts.

# of States w/Declining Economies # of States w/Unchanged or Growing Economies
2002-2010 1 (Michigan) 49
Source: BEA

C1

drwaver:

Wrong example. You are now shifiting over to an income issue.

Assume drwaver and 4.22 million people had a job in 2009. When 2010 comes around, there are 4.08 million employed in Jan 2010 on an actual basis. Is the employment picture improving relative to the prior year? Clearly not. Feb arrives and there are 4.10 million people employed.. You are still worse off than the prior year. Not as bad off as Jan 2010, but still worse than 2009. Repeat this process for all 12 months and if you have 4.19 million people employed on average during Jan-Dec 2010, you are worse off than in 2009. This is true even though by the time you get to the second half of 2010 you are experiencing employment levels greater than 4.22 million.

This information reinforces the need to look at all 12 months of one year relative to all 12 months in the prior year.

C1

P.S. Strictly speaking, you would calculate the year-over-year % change for all 12 months of a year. An average of these 12 monthly % changes will give you roughly the same % change as using the annual employment levels. You can check this approach by using BLS data and you end up with the 0.4% decline in household employment from 2009-2010.

drwaver:

I see you are back to cherry picking again. It is the year-over-year trend that is most relevant. You get bogged down in month-to-month changes and fail to see whether there is improvement from one year to the next. Most of us like to focus on living in 12 months of each year and thus annual numbers are superior to monthly figures.

C1

P.S. The rebound in household employment from Jan 2010 to Jan 2011 is good news for 2011.

drwaver:

Who's right? Who's deceptive? Readers can decide.

Year Period MI labor force MI Employ. MI Unemploy. MI U Rate
2009 Annual 4859260(D) 4210871(D) 648389(D) 13.3(D)
2010 Annual 4789652(D) 4192819(D) 596833(D) 12.5(D)
Source: BLS

The decline in the jobless rate in 2010 reflected a declining labor force, not more employment.

C1

drwaver:

Please re-read the article. It says employment started rising in the 3rd quarter of 2010. This employment growth in late 2010 was so subdued it failed to result in a job gain from 2009-2010.

Jobs fell in Michigan from 2009-2010 using the household survey and the payroll survey. The rebound in 2011 is something drwaver denied over the last 3 months and he misleadingly claimed the 2011 job growth was "not noteworthy."

Drwaver's views are inconsistent with the Brookings Institute report and reality.

C1

P.S. The plunging jobless rate refutes another lib's comment that Michigan faced a rising jobless rate in 2011 versus 2010. Why do libs (and conservatives) lie? It seems self-defeating to me. Why vote for a liberal if their supporters can not tell the truth?

- Tahoe questions whether “Michigan's jobless rate in 2011 is much lower than the 2010 experience under Granholm using year-over-year comparisons.” He says Michigan’s jobless rate is 13% in 2011. CORRECTION: HE’S WRONG AGAIN. MICHIGAN'S JOBLESS RATE IN JAN-AUGUST 2011 HAS PLUNGED BY MUCH MORE THAN THE NATIONAL EXPERIENCE DURING THE LAST YEAR. MICHIGAN’S PEAK JOBLESS RATE OF 11.2% IN AUGUST 2011 IS 1 PERCENTAGE POINT LOWER THAN THE AUGUST 2010 LEVEL. MICHIGAN'S JOBLESS RATE PLUNGED FROM 2010 TO 2011. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/laus_05202011.htm MI's Change -3 -3.1 -3 -2.9 -2.5 -2.1 -1.5 -1 US's Change -0.7 -0.8 -0.9 -0.8 -0.5 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5
- Tahoe says "I stop responding to politics when my conversation partner fails to back up claims with facts." CORRECTIONS: A PLETHORA OF FACTUAL DATA AND LINKS ARE PROVIDED REFUTING EACH AND EVERY STATEMENT FROM TAHOE.

Maybe the MPSC needs to investigate why electric rates in Michigan exceed charges in the region and the nation. This situation developed under Granholm; Snyder can correct it.

This growth is noteworthy after the 2002-2010 plunge in Michigan's employment.

- Drwaver says in a stunning display of shooting himself in the foot, head and elsewhere that “Michigan’s employment rose throughout 2010.” CORRECTIONS: MICHIGAN’S HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT FELL FROM 4.22 MILLION IN 2009 TO 4.19 IN 2010. IMPROVEMENT IN THE CHERRYPICKED MONTHS OF 2010, WHEN GM WAS COMING OUT OF BANKRUPTCY, FAILED TO IMPROVE VERSUS THE PRIOR YEAR. (2) HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT WAS EVEN HIGHER IN 2008 AT 4.55 MILLION. THE 2008-2010 PLUNGE IN HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT REINFORCES THE 2008-2010 PLUNGE IN PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT UNDER GRANHOLM AND OBAMA.
- Tahoe says “there were NOT 8 straight years of job reductions.” CORRECTION: YES, THERE WERE. THE GRANHOLM ERA INCLUDED 8 STRAIGHT YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT DECLINES SINCE 2002. THE FIGURES FOR PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT BY YEAR FOR 2002-2010 ARE 4.49, 4.42, 4.4, 4.39, 4.33, 4.27, 4.16, 3.87, AND 3.86. SOURCE: BLS (MILLIONS)

The blatant inability of libs to get their facts correct speaks volumes about their truthfulness.

C1

Now I have the liberal Brookings Institute validating my claims about job growth in Michigan in 2011.

Liberal lies, deceptions and erroneousness (Sept 2011):
- Drwaver says “Table C shows decreases in MI payroll employment each of the last three months.” CORRECTION: MICHIGAN’S PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT ROSE FROM 3.9 MILLION TO 3.93 MILLION IN RECENT MONTHS, PER BLS.
- Drwaver says “Table C shows that MI is one of 24 states with statistically significant job growth, Aug 2010 to Aug 2011, hardly making MI outstanding.” CORRECTION: MICHIGAN IS OUTSTANDING SINCE IT SHOWS STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EMPLOYMENT GROWTH VERSUS LAST YEAR UNDER GRANHOLM. IT ALSO ADDRESSES THE LIBS COMMENTS ABOUT "WHERE ARE THE JOBS?" IN ADDITION, THIS EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IS ROUGHLY TWICE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS. MICHIGAN’S JOB GROWTH WAS 6TH FASTEST IN THE NATION. Each Month of Jan-August 2011 versus the prior year: % Ch in MI Jobs 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.9 1.3 1.5 2.1 % Ch in US Jobs 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

It appears libs like drwaver are contradicting the liberal Brooking Institute. Too funny.

C1

drwaver:

Blatant buffoonery. Looking at monthly numbers fails to identify the underlying trend in the economy. You are the one who has beat the drums for trend analysis. Yet, you contradict yourself when I present trends over a multi-year period and then you criticize me. I thank you again for more deception and erroneousness.

You simply look silly tring to claim 2010 was a growth year for employment in Michigan when it was below the 2009 level and mammothly below the 2008 level.

C1

P.S. What happened to the other stooge, tahoe? Still lying about whether facts and links are provided? Maybe he's you in another name?

drwaver:

Another deception. We measure progress by whether the economic environment is improving versus the prior year(s). Clinton said this; Reagan said this.

C1

Regarding jobs in Michigan, Michigan's payroll employment expanded in each month of Jan-August 2011 versus last year. As you can see, we had 8 months of year-over-year employment growth.

% Ch in MI Jobs: 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.9 1.3 1.5 2.1

Regarding jobs in Jackson County, Jackson County's payroll employment has increased in each month on Jan-Aug 2011 versus last year.

% Ch in Jackson Co. Jobs: 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.6 1.5 0.6 1.3

Regarding jobless rates, Michigan's jobless rate in Jan-August 2011 has declined by much more than the national experience during the last year.

MI's Change -3 -3.1 -3 -2.9 -2.5 -2.1 -1.5 -1

US's Change -0.7 -0.8 -0.9 -0.8 -0.5 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5

In conclusion, the Michigan and Jackson economies are showing improvement versus the year-ago experience under Granholm and Schauer. This good news needs to be put in perspective since we had 8 consecutive years of falling payroll employment in the Granholm era. The 2009-2010 era of Obama, Schauer and Granholm included mammoth job losses. Just the facts from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

C1

tis:

You must be one of those profilers who asks white grandmas to pass a cavity test at the airport while ignoring the jihadist chanting "down with the infidels."

C1