The Minnesota Meltdown

I thought people only go to Minnesota to get cold and talk funny, turns out they also go there to employ diaper wearing comics.
 
I knew some Minnesotans. They all moved to southern California. Smart folks.

Then there's the story I've told before of the Minnesotan who grew tired of winter. He strapped a snowblower atop his car and drove south. When people started pointing and asking what it was, he knew he'd gone far enough.
 
A more up to date list, with methodology included.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-the-best-economies/21697/

Thanks for providing the methodology.

I note, in order to get the results they wanted, they had to add factors like "Average Educational Attainment of Recent Migrants from Abroad"; "Number of Independent Inventor Patents per 1,000 Working-Age Population" (emphasis added, any kook can file a patent); and "Quality of Legal System." In that last case, how do they judge "quality"? They apparently needed to add some qualitative, and thereby unavoidably subjective, metrics in order to avoid whatever results purely quantitative had given them.

More to the point, the overall theme of this thread is not which states are currently better economically. It is about the way they are trending under their current governments. The economic crises in Illinois and California show what happens when you have a regulate, tax, and spend approach. That is what is likewise happening, albeit at a slower pace and from a better starting place (thanks to the past Republican government) in Minnesota. Meanwhile, any quantitative set of metrics shows that Wisconsin, with its reduced regulation, lower taxes, and switch from Democrat Gov. Doyle's deficits to Republican Gov. Walker's consistent budget surpluses, is growing. Let's look at those numbers again in a few years, when the full impact of the fruits of Wisconsin's current governance, like the Foxconn development, start to really take effect.
 
I knew some Minnesotans. They all moved to southern California. Smart folks.

Then there's the story I've told before of the Minnesotan who grew tired of winter. He strapped a snowblower atop his car and drove south. When people started pointing and asking what it was, he knew he'd gone far enough.

Anyone who moves from an affordable water rich area to SoCal is a fucking moron with more dollars than sense.
 
Thanks for providing the methodology.

I note, in order to get the results they wanted, they had to add factors like "Average Educational Attainment of Recent Migrants from Abroad"; "Number of Independent Inventor Patents per 1,000 Working-Age Population" (emphasis added, any kook can file a patent); and "Quality of Legal System." In that last case, how do they judge "quality"? They apparently needed to add some qualitative, and thereby unavoidably subjective, metrics in order to avoid whatever results purely quantitative had given them.

More to the point, the overall theme of this thread is not which states are currently better economically. It is about the way they are trending under their current governments. The economic crises in Illinois and California show what happens when you have a regulate, tax, and spend approach. That is what is likewise happening, albeit at a slower pace and from a better starting place (thanks to the past Republican government) in Minnesota. Meanwhile, any quantitative set of metrics shows that Wisconsin, with its reduced regulation, lower taxes, and switch from Democrat Gov. Doyle's deficits to Republican Gov. Walker's consistent budget surpluses, is growing. Let's look at those numbers again in a few years, when the full impact of the fruits of Wisconsin's current governance, like the Foxconn development, start to really take effect.

Don't get too caught in minutiae without looking at the weight assigned. The immigrant education is weighted lightly and only accounts for 1.5 points on the scale. I honestly don't think you can look at a state's economy by just measuring GDP for example.

I don't know about Illinois, but there's no economic crisis in California. The estimate is that the state will overtake Britain to become fifth largest in the world. It grew 3% last year. Think about that mathematicslly: it's much easier for a small, struggling economy to move a percentage point than a large robust one.

The problem in California has been, and will continue to be, housing. This is where the liberals are screwing the pooch. They're championing rent control, when the problem is housing shortage. They need to promote housing development. There just is not enough to meet demand and you know what happens then: skyrocketing hiding costs and rent.

The problem is that the people who already own homes don't want fast development because it hurts their housing investment. Lol.
 
Interesting article (especially in that it agreed with what I said about California,):

From the Houston Cronicle

I was incorrect in my growth numbers. I said 3% and it looks like it was 2.9%. ;)
 
Minnesota Meltdown in Full Swing

Don't get too caught in minutiae without looking at the weight assigned. The immigrant education is weighted lightly and only accounts for 1.5 points on the scale. I honestly don't think you can look at a state's economy by just measuring GDP for example.

I don't know about Illinois, but there's no economic crisis in California....

I have to eat a bit of crow when it comes to Illinois, too, as these statistics show:

Wisconsin enjoyed increases in private-sector jobs across both months, and set new records for the number of private-sector jobs in the state in September and October.

October brought 9,500 private sector jobs to the state, according to preliminary estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics....

Surrounding states didn't fare as well in October. Illinois gained 5,200 private-sector jobs, but Iowa lost 1,100, Michigan lost 500 and Minnesota lost 5,000.​

L. Speckhard Pasque, Private-sector jobs in Wisconsin hit record high for second month in a row, October preliminary estimates show, Capital Times (Nov. 24, 2017). This map summarizes that data:


attachment.php



On the other hand, given the states' relative populations, Illinois's 5,200 new jobs pale in comparison with Wisconsin's 9,500 new jobs.

More to the point, this thread is about a comparison between Wisconsin and Minnesota. As the data above show, the Minnesota Meltdown continues while Wisconsin's economy soars under Walker and the Republicans.


 

Attachments

  • MinnMelt01.jpg
    MinnMelt01.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Interesting website. It explains the CES vs CPS methods of job tracking. CPS is the official numbers, CES is based on payroll ledgers.

Wisconsin

65,000 jobs in the last year. Which is pretty good for a state with 5.8 million people.

Minnesota

Similar population, similar numbers. Both States are doing okay. On the lower right you can click on each state. It's fascinating.
 
Interesting website.... It's fascinating.

Right... fascinating.

None the less:

Wisconsin enjoyed increases in private-sector jobs.... October brought 9,500 private sector jobs to the state, according to preliminary estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.... Minnesota lost 5,000.

Also, I was too kind to Illinois in the post I excerpt from above.

Illinois’ problem with wealth flight isn’t just persisting, it’s getting worse. That’s the takeaway from new data released by the Internal Revenue Service on Nov. 30. In terms of both people and income, the Land of Lincoln saw a record-breaking exodus in the 2015 tax year (2015-2016).

Illinois saw a net loss of nearly 42,000 tax returns to other states on the year, representing a net loss of more than 86,100 people (measured in exemptions), according to the IRS. That’s an all-time high.

And when people leave the state, they don’t just take their talent, drive and ingenuity. They take their wallets, too.

Illinois lost $4.75 billion in adjusted gross income, or AGI, on net to other states in tax year 2015. That’s also an all-time high. While residents saw $6.35 billion in adjusted gross income, or AGI, move into Illinois from other states, $11.10 billion moved out of Illinois to another state.​

A. Berg, New IRS Data: Illinois Sees Record Loss of People, Income to Other States, Illinois Policy (Dec.1, 2017). According to the article, a good chunk of these people moved to Wisconsin. I wonder what that will look like when Foxconn is up and running.

But, for now, this thread is about Minnesota's meltdown, so I reiterate:

Wisconsin enjoyed increases in private-sector jobs.... October brought 9,500 private sector jobs to the state, according to preliminary estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.... Minnesota lost 5,000.
 
Right... fascinating.

None the less:



Also, I was too kind to Illinois in the post I excerpt from above.

Illinois’ problem with wealth flight isn’t just persisting, it’s getting worse. That’s the takeaway from new data released by the Internal Revenue Service on Nov. 30. In terms of both people and income, the Land of Lincoln saw a record-breaking exodus in the 2015 tax year (2015-2016).

Illinois saw a net loss of nearly 42,000 tax returns to other states on the year, representing a net loss of more than 86,100 people (measured in exemptions), according to the IRS. That’s an all-time high.

And when people leave the state, they don’t just take their talent, drive and ingenuity. They take their wallets, too.

Illinois lost $4.75 billion in adjusted gross income, or AGI, on net to other states in tax year 2015. That’s also an all-time high. While residents saw $6.35 billion in adjusted gross income, or AGI, move into Illinois from other states, $11.10 billion moved out of Illinois to another state.​

A. Berg, New IRS Data: Illinois Sees Record Loss of People, Income to Other States, Illinois Policy (Dec.1, 2017). According to the article, a good chunk of these people moved to Wisconsin. I wonder what that will look like when Foxconn is up and running.

But, for now, this thread is about Minnesota's meltdown, so I reiterate:

Are you interested in truth or cherry picking?

There's a reason why the bureau doesn't use CEM for its own employment numbers. When your counting payroll jobs by month it fluctuates too wildly. Why? It includes easonal employment changes, it includes part time jobs (which is a fun one, because if I had two part time jobs instead of one full time job, the CEM would show TWO jobs created).

Let's go right to the horse's mouth.

https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/minnesota.htm#eag

Total non-farm jobs drop in Minnesota. But, total employed increased and the unemployment rate drops. How can that be???

You won't get a full picture of what's happened in October in Minnesota for months, yet. All numbers are preliminary. Look at the chart to see where those jobs disappeared from. Construction is the largest, which is seasonal.

Your acting like that cranky old busy body neighbor, whose not just happy that your yard looks great, the neighbor's had to look horrible.

Stop being so partisan. Be happy things are going well where you live. Or, keep pounding your elephant shaped drum with your "numbers". I'll be back in January. Who knows, maybe your numbers will stand up?
 
Your acting like that cranky old busy body neighbor, whose not just happy that your yard looks great, the neighbor's had to look horrible.

You're forgetting what motivated this thread.

A few years ago, we started hearing about the "Minnesota Miracle." Back then, certain indicators suggested that Minnesota had a stronger economy than the other Great Lakes states such as Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin. This was considered significant because several of those states, lead among them Wisconsin, had in 2010 or 2014, come under Republican control, while Democrats controlled Minnesota. In fact, the comparison was most often made with its next-door neighbor Wisconsin, where Republicans had recently lowered taxes and enacted a number of controversial regulatory reforms to make the state more business friendly. With Minnesota having an arguably better economy, the supposed lesson: Democrats better run economies.

Now look what has happened since:

"What happened since" is the Minnesota Meltdown outlined in this thread.

The point isn't to pick on Minnesota per se. It is to dispel the myth that Democrats run better economies and to demonstrate, as current events and history do, that the economy is best, and this is especially true for the working class, when taxes are lower, labor laws more equitable, and regulations more reasonable, as they all have become in Wisconsin under Scott Walker and the Republican legislature.
 
Are you interested in truth or cherry picking?

It's only interested in cherry picking, not responding to the real data, getting absolutely destroyed, and pretending to be a girl on the internet.

For example, it complete ignores the reports it doesn't like, the Economic Snapshot of States. If you look at the most recent set of data you'll see that not only is Minnesota a wealthier state, it also has had more wage growth, overall growth, and higher wages than Wisconsin. And it's certainly not interested in learning that all of this was done without destroying the state's system of higher education, giving away billions of dollars for minimum wage jobs, and having a bald dick for a governor.

Oh yeah and more people are leaving the state than moving in. Another point is always fails to mention.
 
It's only interested in cherry picking, not responding to the real data, getting absolutely destroyed, and pretending to be a girl on the internet.

For example, it complete ignores the reports it doesn't like, the Economic Snapshot of States. If you look at the most recent set of data you'll see that not only is Minnesota a wealthier state, it also has had more wage growth, overall growth, and higher wages than Wisconsin. And it's certainly not interested in learning that all of this was done without destroying the state's system of higher education, giving away billions of dollars for minimum wage jobs, and having a bald dick for a governor.

Oh yeah and more people are leaving the state than moving in. Another point is always fails to mention.

Again, you've missed the point (on purpose, like here, I suspect). This thread is not about where the states are now, but how they have trended since Wisconsin got a Republican government (tremendous economic growth) and Minnesota a Democrat one ("below-average economic performance" [see below for details]).

A few years ago, we started hearing about the "Minnesota Miracle." Back then, certain indicators suggested that Minnesota had a stronger economy than the other Great Lakes states such as Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin. This was considered significant because several of those states, lead among them Wisconsin, had in 2010 or 2014, come under Republican control, while Democrats controlled Minnesota. In fact, the comparison was most often made with its next-door neighbor Wisconsin, where Republicans had recently lowered taxes and enacted a number of controversial regulatory reforms to make the state more business friendly. With Minnesota having an arguably better economy, the supposed lesson: Democrats better run economies.

Now look what has happened since:

Study finds Minnesota’s economy 'average' – with a dim future (August 15, 2016).

This article noted:

attachment.php

It goes on to point out that agencies of Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton's own administration "also predict below-average economic performance" (emphasis added).

attachment.php

So much for the "Minnesota Miracle."

Now, with last November's elections, Republicans regained power in the Minnesota legislature (indicating that Minnesota voters recognize that the Democrats are mishandling things). Democrat Mark Dayton remains governor, however, and prevents any of the sort of economic and regulatory reform that has benefited many of its neighbors, like Wisconsin.

Also, remember that Wisconsin's prior governor, Democrat Jim Doyle, left behind for Scott Walker a >$3 billion deficit, even after Doyle and the Democrat controlled legislature ill-advisedly raided the state's allocated transportation fund (we're still paying for that) and illegally stole from a trust fund established to help victims of medical malpractice (how cruel)! The trust fund money the Democrats stole had to be paid back during the early years of the Walker administration. In other words, the Republicans had to dig themselves out of a nearly $4 billion dollar hole left by their Democrat immediate predecessors, so if it has taken a few years to catch up, that is certainly understandable.

Minnesota's neighboring Republican run states like Wisconsin and North Dakota are booming while Minnesota is starting to follow the downward spirals of Democrat controlled states like California and Illinois. The lesson learned: lower taxes and limiting regulation to reasonable levels are what governments must do for a healthy economy.

Stop tilting at windmills and face reality.
 
Dawn is getting destroyed in her own thread. This is harsh shit.

Also, quoting yourself getting destroyed isn't a good look for you. Just like pretending to be a girl on the internet isn't working out well for you either.

fred.gdp_.jpg


ratliff-2016-07-20-3.png


bloomberg_walker.png


JOBS20G23.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dawn is getting destroyed in her own thread. This is harsh shit.

Also, quoting yourself getting destroyed isn't a good look for you. Just like pretending to be a girl on the internet isn't working out well for you either.

fred.gdp_.jpg


ratliff-2016-07-20-3.png


bloomberg_walker.png


JOBS20G23.jpg

Thank you for reiterating my point!

All of your data comes from 2014, or earlier. In case you hadn't noticed, it is now almost 2018.

My data establishing the Minnesota Meltdown shows it started right around the beginning of 2015.

As I wrote above, this thread is about how "have trended since Wisconsin got a Republican government (tremendous economic growth) and Minnesota a Democrat one ('below-average economic performance')."

Thank you again for emphasizing my point.
 
Sorry but quoting yourself on things that I've already owned you on is both sad and pathetic.

More ownage below.

fred.totalwages.jpg
 
Right behind Iowa and South Dakota, two economic titans.

GSP_per_capita_in_2015.png

Okay. 2015. Thank you for again emphasizing my point.

I am wondering which of these is the case:
1) you really do not understand that this thread is about trends, and that showing these initial data only better supports my argument;
2) you do understand the logic of this thread, but mistakenly think showing this old data confuses the issue sufficiently to undermine my argument; or
3) you are actually a conservative who consistently posts embarrassingly dumb claims (on all threads, not just this one) from a supposedly left-wing point of view as a foible allowing other conservatives to repeat their positions.

In any case, thank you for again giving me the opportunity for pointing out that since starting out with a superior economy left by their Republican predecessors, Minnesota Democrats -- by their own admission! -- have turned Minnesota into a declining economy while, since starting out with a failing economy left by their Democrat predecessors, Wisconsin Republicans have turned Wisconsin into a booming economy.

That's the point, admitted by the Democrats and indisputable from the raw data:
Under Democrats, Minnesota's economy has declined while Wisconsin's, under Republicans, has soared.
 
Back
Top