Kansas Job Losses (Kansas City, Washington: costs, gas, health)

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by American Expat

Kansas unemployment rate is 4.2%, they can't have had that many job losses. Perhaps they should try to be more like the great state of Cali which has unemployment rate of 5.2%. To be honest, unless someone is from around there, there is no reason for anyone to go to Kansas.

See, this is where you learn the difference between real analysts and political (or paid) analysts.

Real analysts have to actually support their findings using logic. If they change their measures like shifting from unemployment rate to "job losses" they have to still show both and explain why they are changing.

For analysts that either don't know what they are doing or are trying to manipulate data to prove whatever agenda they prefer then jumping around to whichever way they can present things is not something they worry about.

*shrug*, some don't even realize the bias....they just move the goal posts.

Ironically, you can even catch them using one measure if it supports their views while refuting the same measurement if it helps elsewhere.

I occasionally see it in my line of work but generally, we're after the truth so getting all shifty would likely get you fired.

[American Expat]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

See, this is where you learn the difference between real analysts and political (or paid) analysts.

Real analysts have to actually support their findings using logic. If they change their measures like shifting from unemployment rate to "job losses" they have to still show both and explain why they are changing.

For analysts that either don't know what they are doing or are trying to manipulate data to prove whatever agenda they prefer then jumping around to whichever way they can present things is not something they worry about.

*shrug*, some don't even realize the bias....they just move the goal posts.

Ironically, you can even catch them using one measure if it supports their views while refuting the same measurement if it helps elsewhere.

I occasionally see it in my line of work but generally, we're after the truth so getting all shifty would likely get you fired.

Right, all this effort to try to make it look like there's a crisis in Kansas for job losses when their unemployment rate is 4.2% is just political wah wah....my state (Washington) think we're doing great with 5.2% unemployment rate.

[atler8]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

You should read the book. It's sold overseas as "What's the matter with America".

Here is one good excerpt that most people citing the book (but haven't read it) don't know about.

I'm actually sitting here chuckling because you really thought it was just about Kansas.

The Democratic Leadership Council, the organization that produced such figures as Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joe Lieberman and Terry McAuliffe, has long been pushing the party to forget blue-collar voters and concentrate instead on recruiting affluent, white-collar professionals who are liberal on social issues. The larger interests that the DLC wants desperately to court are corporations, capable of generating campaign contributions far outweighing anything raised by organized labor. The way to collect the votes and -- more important -- the money of these coveted constituencies, "New Democrats" think, is to stand rock-solid on, say, the pro-choice position while making endless concessions on economic issues, on welfare, NAFTA, Social Security, labor law, privatization, deregulation and the rest of it.

(Frank, T. 2004 "What's the Matter with Kansas?", pp. 243)

Chuckle away if it makes you feel good, my friend.
I wouldn't have cited the book if I hadn't read it. It's sitting on my shelf & I can send it to you.
The broader point of what the author says can be directed at any number of states that have a history of voting against their economic self interests.
Kansas just happens to be the state selected for the title to personify it.
See how that sort of thing works?

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by American Expat

Kansas unemployment rate is 4.2%, they can't have had that many job losses. Perhaps they should try to be more like the great state of Cali which has unemployment rate of 5.2%. To be honest, unless someone is from around there, there is no reason for anyone to go to Kansas.

The factor is out-migration out of the state in increasing numbers over the last year, a big reason why the total number of people in the workforce within the state went down over the course of last year. The state population also barely changed over the course of 2016 while neighboring Colorado saw a huge increase in population with stronger job growth. People can draw different conclusions from the data, but those are the facts.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by atler8

Chuckle away if it makes you feel good, my friend.
I wouldn't have cited the book if I hadn't read it. It's sitting on my shelf & I can send it to you.
The broader point of what the author says can be directed at any number of states that have a history of voting against their economic self interests.
Kansas just happens to be the state selected for the title to personify it.
See how that sort of thing works?

Um, it was selected to sell the book to the desired target marketing group.

They could have picked on Michigan for all the off-shored jobs via NAFTA but that wasn't the targeted slant.

What you and many others don't realize is that the off-shoring of jobs (via NAFTA) and on-shoring of cheap labor has been a corporate endeavor for decades now and involves BOTH parties.

So, while it might make you feel like you're all good and cozy on the right side of this thing when they go after a "red state", it's universal.

Heck, name the book what's wrong with Michigan and cite the unions and leagues of democratic voters supporting the very people that off-shored and on-shored them.

That's the ugly truth, both parties bent over the American workers and went cheap and global.

Any questions?

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

The factor is out-migration out of the state in increasing numbers over the last year, a big reason why the total number of people in the workforce within the state went down over the course of last year. The state population also barely changed over the course of 2016 while neighboring Colorado saw a huge increase in population with stronger job growth. People can draw different conclusions from the data, but those are the facts.

Yay....Pot!

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by American Expat

Right, all this effort to try to make it look like there's a crisis in Kansas for job losses when their unemployment rate is 4.2% is just political wah wah....my state (Washington) think we're doing great with 5.2% unemployment rate.

Hey, I hate Brownback but yeah...it's a ridiculous theme.

When KS has positive job growth under the nutjob, they ignored the stats.

Also, historically, they like to cite NUMBERS of jobs when it goes down and PERCENTAGES when it goes up.

More, "fair and unbalanced" reporting.

[atler8]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

Um, it was selected to sell the book to the desired target marketing group.

They could have picked on Michigan for all the off-shored jobs via NAFTA but that wasn't the targeted slant.

What you and many others don't realize is that the off-shoring of jobs (via NAFTA) and on-shoring of cheap labor has been a corporate endeavor for decades now and involves BOTH parties.

So, while it might make you feel like you're all good and cozy on the right side of this thing when they go after a "red state", it's universal.

Heck, name the book what's wrong with Michigan and cite the unions and leagues of democratic voters supporting the very people that off-shored and on-shored them.

That's the ugly truth, both parties bent over the American workers and went cheap and global.

Any questions?

It would be pointless to ask questions of you. Were you intending to send a reply that dripped with arrogance? With your "Any questions?", your response came across as if you were having a "teaching" moment here & that I should respond as a pupil who has been schooled by you. I assure you that that is hardly the case, my friend.
Kansas was chosen for the state in the book title because it has a LONG history of voting against it's economic self interest.. way longer than Michigan, to use the example you tossed out here as a rebuttal. Whether or not Michigan is indeed a correct example is another story but that's for another thread topic.
The thrust of this thread topic still lies with the disastrous job growth record of the Brownback Administration in Kansas.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

Yay....Pot!

Colorado attracts well educated people in great numbers, it now has one of the highest percentages of its total population with a four year degree, and much stronger economic growth. Brownback is doing a good job of feeding the neighboring states population growth rate, though.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

Hey, I hate Brownback but yeah...it's a ridiculous theme.

When KS has positive job growth under the nutjob, they ignored the stats.

Also, historically, they like to cite NUMBERS of jobs when it goes down and PERCENTAGES when it goes up.

More, "fair and unbalanced" reporting.

Maybe because Brownback promised an absurd total number new jobs would be created under his "grand experiment" economic plan, and none of that has materialized at all? He stated it, not anyone else.