New Republican Governors Bring Unemployment Down 50% Faster Than New Democratic Gover

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Mercor, Jul 8, 2012.

  1. In November 2010, 17 states voted in Republican Governors and 8 states voted in Democratic Governors, those Governors took office in early 2011 and the unemployment numbers tell the tale of how Republican models brought unemployment down 50 percent faster than Democratic models.

    States that voted in Republican Governors in November 2010:

    Every single one of these 17 states has seen its unemployment rate decline since January 2011. Three of them have had unemployment drop by more than 2% (Michigan, Florida, and Nevada). The average drop in the unemployment rate in these states was 1.35%......

    States that voted in Democratic Governors in November 2010:

    The average drop in the unemployment rate in these states was 0.95%, approximately the same as the drop seen nationally. It's interesting to note than one of these states (New York) has actually experienced an increase in its unemployment rate since January 2011....
    _______________
    Obama is out their taking credit for this.....
    It will be sad if these republician swing states vote Obama because of the work of the Republicians
     
  2. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

    Sorry, the numbers don't add up. The way the unemployment rate is calculated is the most likely suspect here. Check persons in the labor force instead and you'll find the situation is just as dire as it was before, if not worse.
     
  3. "Republican models brought unemployment down 50 percent faster than Democratic models"

    It can only mean,

    Republicans are cheating.

    Republicans are just trying to make Democrats look bad.

    Republicans are distracting with job creation from the real issues of fairness and wealth redistribution.
     
  4. There is nothing "fair" about wealth redistribution. In fact, it's unconstitutional!

    (How is it that I can respond directly to your post? How did you get off of my IGNORE list??)
     
  5. It was sarcasm.

    Those were the responses i would expect from those on your ignore list.
     
  6. pspr

    pspr

    Same here but I'm going to correct it immediately. Some drivel isn't worth my time reading.
     
  7. Kansas – 6.9% to 6.1% = a decline of 0.8%

    Maine – 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

    Michigan – 10.9% to 8.5% = a decline of 2.4%

    New Mexico – 7.7% to 6.7% = a decline of 1.0%

    Oklahoma – 6.2% to 4.8% = a decline of 1.4%

    Pennsylvania – 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

    Tennessee – 9.5% to 7.9% = a decline of 1.6%

    Wisconsin – 7.7% to 6.8% = a decline of 0.9%

    Wyoming – 6.3% to 5.2% = a decline of 1.1%

    Alabama – 9.3% to 7.4% = a decline of 1.9%

    Georgia – 10.1% to 8.9% = a decline of 1.2%

    South Carolina – 10.6% to 9.1% = a decline of 1.5%

    South Dakota – 5.0% to 4.3% = a decline of 0.7%

    Florida – 10.9% to 8.6% = a decline of 2.3%

    Nevada – 13.8% to 11.6% = a decline of 2.2%

    Iowa – 6.1% to 5.1% = a decline of 1.0%

    Ohio – 9.0% to 7.3% = a decline of 1.7%
     
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    The link:
    http://www.examiner.com/article/new...pidly-bringing-down-unemployment-their-states

    Federal taxes minus spending as percent of 2009 state GDP:

    The 17 "high performance" newrepgov states...

    Kansas, -20
    Maine, -151
    Michigan, 53
    New Mexico, -261
    Oklahoma, -35
    Pennsylvania, 0
    Tennessee, -33
    Wisconsin, 36
    Wyoming, -52
    Alabama, -174
    Georgia, 25
    South Carolina, -121
    South Dakota, -118
    Florida, -41
    Nevada, 18
    Iowa, -47
    Ohio, 66

    The eight "low performance" newdemgov states:

    Colorado, 40
    New York, 87
    Oregon, -7
    California, 18
    Connecticut, 106
    Hawaii, -134
    Minnesota, 199
    Vermont, -78

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union