U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Kansas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2016, 09:42 AM
 
60,033 posts, read 46,737,580 times
Reputation: 37218

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
The most valid metric to use is non-farm employment change. Kansas saw a 0.1% change in total non-farm employment between January 2015 to January 2016.
it's only a valid metric if you are saying, "hey look who is having the most\least change".

It's not valid if you are saying "KS is doing bad\good because of the amount of change".

This is why the topic is so funny because this is literally a parody thread of other threads saying KS is doing bad because of change rates.

Just shows how politicians and others mangle measures or how to draw conclusions from them because of politics and not solid analytics.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2016, 09:44 AM
 
60,033 posts, read 46,737,580 times
Reputation: 37218
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
That's certainly a fair assessment of Colorado Springs. Who do you think services all those morally superior preachers down there?? Hint: it's not their wives

In my defense, the "Bible Belt" feeling does slap you upside the head when you drive from Colorado into Kansas... what with all the "white Jesus" billboards and such. You get the same thing in Colo. Springs as well (Focus on the Gays, etc.) Overall, Colorado isn't that religious of a state, but many would probably be surprised that KS (according to this PEW research) is less than 50%. (Don't tell Brownback!)
It's easy to stereotype groups you don't agree with.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2016, 02:43 PM
 
Location: IN
22,410 posts, read 39,035,476 times
Reputation: 14938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
it's only a valid metric if you are saying, "hey look who is having the most\least change".

It's not valid if you are saying "KS is doing bad\good because of the amount of change".

This is why the topic is so funny because this is literally a parody thread of other threads saying KS is doing bad because of change rates.

Just shows how politicians and others mangle measures or how to draw conclusions from them because of politics and not solid analytics.
So how would an 8% differential between the best and worst performing state bare absolutely no significance in terms of economic trends, then? I think new job growth in percentage terms is a good way to measure economic performance because it has a strong correlation with positive in-migration numbers related to states growing jobs at a faster rate than others.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2016, 07:53 PM
 
Location: KC
396 posts, read 895,531 times
Reputation: 409
Just Curious. Why is non-farm employment the only one that should be measured? Some states have a higher agricultural economy than others. Isn't it still part of the equation? Just trying to understand where you're coming from.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2016, 08:52 PM
 
60,033 posts, read 46,737,580 times
Reputation: 37218
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
So how would an 8% differential between the best and worst performing state bare absolutely no significance in terms of economic trends, then? I think new job growth in percentage terms is a good way to measure economic performance because it has a strong correlation with positive in-migration numbers related to states growing jobs at a faster rate than others.
I didn't say that it has absolutely no significance.

It would be part of a broad array of metrics required to paint a fuller picture of a states economic health.

The more specific the item, the fewer metrics you need to flesh out the topic.

When it's something robust like an states economic outlook or the impact of it's tax policies.....people grabbing single metrics as proof are in most cases pushing some agenda and frankly don't even have the education etc. to even understand what they're doing wrong if it were explained to them.

As such, I kinda played along with this thread in the hopes that this awful analysis would be almost like a parody to the similar threads and maybe open some eyes.

Let's face it, proper analysis of really complex topics is so heavily abused because only a tiny % of the US population really understands how to do it correctly.

To me, it's like watching someone come in and type....
"Well Brownback is awesome because of his falutometrical symstemicals and corn dogs."

People recognize that's non-sensical because they have a good grasp of vocabulary and grammar except for illiterates which likely aren't posting here. The problem is that when people do the mathematical equivalent of the above.....zoooooom......flys right on by. They don't know it, most readers don't know it and let's be honest, as long as the reader wants to believe it or not that's largely all it takes to be accepted.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2016, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Syracuse, New York
3,114 posts, read 2,720,654 times
Reputation: 2289
This whole thread is subterfuge designed to obscure the properly drawn conclusion that the Kansas economy is dying and that its supposedly stellar unemployment rates are propped up by young worker exodus, one giant military base, an old but substantial workforce of primarily self-employed farmers who work until they die, and one county that got a boatload of corporate welfare to steal jobs from the eastern part of its metro.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:18 AM
 
60,033 posts, read 46,737,580 times
Reputation: 37218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyraBrian View Post
This whole thread is subterfuge designed to obscure the properly drawn conclusion that the Kansas economy is dying and that its supposedly stellar unemployment rates are propped up by young worker exodus, one giant military base, an old but substantial workforce of primarily self-employed farmers who work until they die, and one county that got a boatload of corporate welfare to steal jobs from the eastern part of its metro.
Thanks for making my point. I'd appreciate it that you add a disclaimer that I am in no way paying you etc. to come in and post that right after my comments about partisanship and improper analytics etc.

P.S. I REALLY liked the part how you explained that the unemployment rate is in part "propped up" by employment. That was pure gold.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Syracuse, New York
3,114 posts, read 2,720,654 times
Reputation: 2289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Thanks for making my point. I'd appreciate it that you add a disclaimer that I am in no way paying you etc. to come in and post that right after my comments about partisanship and improper analytics etc.

P.S. I REALLY liked the part how you explained that the unemployment rate is in part "propped up" by employment. That was pure gold.

It's not partisan analysis. It's just research on the subject. The fact that Kansas has the eighth oldest workforce in the country does not bode well for Kansas' future. It's basically a bunch of farmers tending to their farms long after another state's older workers would have retired. Their continued self-described "employment" skews Kansas' unemployment rate downward and makes the state look more appealing than it actually is. This is happening with all the agricultural states in the midwest and is the reason I don't tale the region's low unemployment rate seriously.

Young worker migration doesn't help. Eventually, there's going to be heck to pay.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 09:56 AM
 
60,033 posts, read 46,737,580 times
Reputation: 37218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyraBrian View Post
It's not partisan analysis.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 10:15 AM
 
Location: IN
22,410 posts, read 39,035,476 times
Reputation: 14938
Quote:
Originally Posted by pioneer88 View Post
Just Curious. Why is non-farm employment the only one that should be measured? Some states have a higher agricultural economy than others. Isn't it still part of the equation? Just trying to understand where you're coming from.
In terms of GDP for changes in percentage terms for rural ag regions, those areas count for a larger percentage of economic activity in rural states, but not in terms of large numerical changes in total numbers of jobs that are classified as "farm employment" compared to "non-farm employment." The total percentage of the population that lives in rural areas is the lowest it has ever been due to ongoing farm consolidations, mechanization, efficiencies, and economies of scale for better or worse. As per usual, some people find fault in the BLS data, but that is widely used to measure changes in employment.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Kansas

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top