[Angelic_Avalon]

Death penalties can be mistaken for someone who being accuse... I'm sure we all hear people being innocent of murder. In Texas maybe there has been innocents that been killed, ever thought of that?

Death penalties to me is not always justice... I would rather see the person suffered in prison because when you killed the person the person is free, he/she no longer suffered...People who move on from death are free. It is and people ego want death on a criminal. And these people dont see that the dead-person has no justice, but themselves (love-ones) because the dead person is free of the Earth realm.

Death penalties just show that murdering is still okay and sure is okay in Texas but not okay in Connecticut.

[basehead617]

Originally Posted by blakesq

not that interesting. most people recognize that cherry picking statistics is really another way of trying to hide the truth. The truth being that Texas has done very well, people are FLOCKING to texas for the opportunity there, just as they are leaving Connecticut and the NE.

Not sure I get this -- as another example, people often flock to cheaper towns when their old one gets too rich for their blood, can't afford the property taxes or town taxes there anymore, etc. Does that mean the old town is worse than the new one or that the new one is just cheaper?

I guess it all depends on how much cheap cost of living weighs into your personal sliding scales.. I have no doubt that for some people it's far and away the most important thing.

Just saying somewhere costs a lot to live is not in and of itself a negative about the place in my book - it implies you can't comfortably afford to live there, but if you still wish you could live there, is it really worse than where you currently live?

I'm not saying that's the similar basis by which people left manhattan, or boston, or connecticut, but it's a big reason.

[basehead617]

Originally Posted by Angelic_Avalon

Death penalties to me is not always justice... I would rather see the person suffered in prison because when you killed the person the person is free, he/she no longer suffered...People who move on from death are free.

I have always agreed with this. To me, giving them death is the easy way out for them to avoid struggling through living the rest of their life thinking about what they've done. Unfortunately, most believers in the death penalty are also Christian and like to assume the person will go to hell for a future of eternal tormenting. Of course, maybe they forgot about the fact that the person can atone for their sins, and end up alright in the afterlife too.

But that's way off topic.

[CTbrooktrout]

The new towns can be cheaper and better. A lot of the developing cities in the south and west have lower cost of living and more modern infrastructure. Denver is a very fine city, has job growth, well laid out city infrastructure, low cost of living, green initiatives. Hard to say anything bad about the place except possibly the housing market.

I have a few friends in San Antonio and Austin. They love it down there, great culture, food, they have their pick of jobs out of college, low cost of living. Their biggest complaint is the heat of course.

Texas has a lot of good things going for it and so do many of the Western and Southern states. The American population is moving out of the Northeast corridor and headed South and West. It's like gold rush part 2. I've personally observed that it's among two main age groups, the younger crowd, 20-30yr. olds that haven't started a family yet and can afford the move south as well as retirees. Those 30-55 that I know have families and are content with staying here in CT.

I stated in a previous post that cost of living will drive the young generation out of this state. The state is losing a tax base and it will have to be made up by those left behind. I think this will be a growing trend in years to come as workplaces embrace remote technologies so that employees won't need to come to a central office anymore.

To change the subject a bit, I think we should be focusing on being competitive globally vs. other countries rather than state vs. state. We're just fighting against other Americans right now, we should be fighting for foreign businesses to hire American workers.

I would like to see every state look like the best state there is in it's own right.

[Angelic_Avalon]

Originally Posted by basehead617

I have always agreed with this. To me, giving them death is the easy way out for them to avoid struggling through living the rest of their life thinking about what they've done. Unfortunately, most believers in the death penalty are also Christian and like to assume the person will go to hell for a future of eternal tormenting. Of course, maybe they forgot about the fact that the person can atone for their sins, and end up alright in the afterlife too.

But that's way off topic.

Not only that it cost so much money just killed a person, I thought killing a person was free but actually what a waste of money.

Killing a person for justice just shows society that it's still okay to murder and at the same time, it's another cycle of murdering... it's no better what the murderer did while having large crowd of people pushing for death. To me that is a scary thing.

PS I'm sure there has been preachers come in for the person to repent of his/her sin before they die. Oh how nice of you TEXAS

[bobtn]

Originally Posted by bobtn
Texas has gained an oversized share of the 2011 US job growth, and that is truly the most important accomplishment any state can attain. W/O job growth, states will falter economically again and again, and worse each time.

mlassoff: (Regarding Tx job growth)"Good thing they created those 115,000 government jobs in Texas to facilitate that growth then."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us...gewanted=print

(From that article) "What sets Texas apart is that it is “the only large labor market state in the nation that’s shown a positive growth in private-sector jobs,” said Tom Pauken, chairman of the Texas Workforce Commission. Mr. Perry took office at the end of 2000, and since 2001 the nation as a whole has had a net loss of private-sector jobs, while Texas had a net gain of 825,400 private-sector jobs."

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by bobtn

Originally Posted by bobtn
Texas has gained an oversized share of the 2011 US job growth, and that is truly the most important accomplishment any state can attain. W/O job growth, states will falter economically again and again, and worse each time.

mlassoff: (Regarding Tx job growth)"Good thing they created those 115,000 government jobs in Texas to facilitate that growth then."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us...gewanted=print

(From that article) "What sets Texas apart is that it is “the only large labor market state in the nation that’s shown a positive growth in private-sector jobs,” said Tom Pauken, chairman of the Texas Workforce Commission. Mr. Perry took office at the end of 2000, and since 2001 the nation as a whole has had a net loss of private-sector jobs, while Texas had a net gain of 825,400 private-sector jobs."

Also from the very article you cite:

While Mr. Perry’s tax and regulatory policies have “improved the business climate,” Mr. Perryman said, the governor cannot take credit for recent discoveries of shale formations, the price of oil or “many other factors that have provided Texas with a competitive advantage in recent years.”

So in other words, a Democrat, or Bozo could have been governor and the same growth would have occurred. So while I am sure the tea party types would LOVE to give Perry credit, it is undeserved.

[bobtn]

Baloney, mlassoff, unless you have data showing shale and oil added 825,400 jobs in Texas in 8 years. Your error is in the words "same growth". Had you said some of the growth ( you did get 3 letters of 4 correct-75%) , that would be valid, but one does not gain 825,400 jobs in 8 years via any single sector.

While Mr. Perry’s tax and regulatory policies have “improved the business climate" is the key. Corp relos occur almost exclusively in states with better than average business climates. Notice how much DM had to pay to reduce job losses at UBS to 1,500 (they have close to 3,500 and the deal hinges on retaining 2,000). How many -1,500s does it take to get to PLUS 825,400 (LOL)?

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by bobtn

Baloney, mlassoff, unless you have data showing shale and oil added 825,400 jobs in Texas in 8 years. Your error is in the words "same growth". Had you said some of the growth ( you did get 3 letters of 4 correct-75%) , that would be valid, but one does not gain 825,400 jobs in 8 years via any single sector.

While Mr. Perry’s tax and regulatory policies have “improved the business climate" is the key.

Baloney. Where is your proof as to what industries the jobs were in and what drove the growth?

Since you have NO explanation for the growth except some vague notion of a business friendly client which is impossible to back by empirical data, I'll go with an ACTUAL explanation of the growth.

And since 125,000 of the jobs were government jobs, we're talking about 700,000 jobs. I'm sure many of the jobs were service sector jobs to service the people moving to Texas for oil, shale and mining jobs. Probably some professional jobs too...

But make no mistake, what drove growth in Texas was no special sauce delivered by Rick Perry. It was natural resources and strong entrepreneurial infrastructure (that drove growth and innovation in Austin).

[bobtn]

Oil would never employ 825,000 in one state. Shale likewise. If we assume they grew 20% each, they might add 50k or so MAX to Texas. That leaves 775k to explain, mlassoff. BLS data on total sector employment is very useful here. They are big industries, but if Wal Mart USA added 20%, that would just be 240k nationally, and they dwarf all other private sector employers manyfold (headcount).

And you are grasping at straws instead of simply admitting Texas has been a bastion of private sector job growth in the USA. I know you hate his politics, but take the emotion out of it. This is objective data gathered by the BLS, a gov't agency, who ultimately reports via chain of command to Obama. Be glad that at least 1 state has a handle on growing jobs. i wish we had 49 more to crow about!

PS, It said 825,400 PRIVATE sector jobs, so how do you subtract gov't jobs-LOL? Did you not read the words? Texas had a net gain of 825,400 private-sector jobs.". That means with gov't, they addded 940K!

PS, "Actual explanation"-you provided squat to back it up in terms of source data , not even an article linked. If you need help knowing how to link stuff in, just DM me. I'll be glad to help. The article did not jump to a conclusion that oil and shale equaled all job growth. It stayed 100% objective!! Great reporting!!