Big Day in Sconny

[gbpfan1231]

 

But it isn't funny if it is about the twins. They get all self righteous when that happens.

 

So you laughing must mean it was not a bad link which then I guess would mean that the joke is because I said where am I wrong and he linked to the front page - I guess saying that everything I post is wrong? That is what is now considered funny. Wow - that was good Bushwacked - you are a funny little guy.

 

I will say it was a better post than "No Jobs"

[tosberg34]

Yeah, about that lost jobs report the Walker haters have been parroting for the last month or so? Turns out WI has actually gained jobs instead.

 

 

 

State officials said they show a gain of 23,321 jobs (public and private) between December 2010 and December 2011, which represents Gov. Scott Walker's first full year in office.

 

 

 

 

That stands in sharp contrast to a commonly used and widely reported monthly jobs measure, the Current Employment Survey, which earlier this year showed an estimated loss of 33,900 jobs in Wisconsin for the same 12-month period.

 

 

 

 

Job numbers are reported in different ways, based on different sources, and it's been common throughout the current recovery for different data to tell different stories.

 

 

 

But in this case, one set of well-publicized numbers (from the Current Employment Survey of businesses) put Wisconsin at the very bottom of 50 states in job creation during Walker's first year. These figures were based on a sample of 3.5% of the state's employers and are subject to significant revisions.

 

 

 

 

 

The other numbers, from the Quarterly Census, tell a more positive story, one the Walker administration is in a hurry to get out. They are based on a jobs count, not a survey. Each state gathers the quarterly census data from virtually all employers in both the public and private sectors, which are mandated to share staff and wage data as part of their tax and unemployment insurance reports. That makes it a more reliable source of employment data, state officials and many economists say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Guess you Walker haters will have to consult The Daily Kos to find out what to say next. I'll be waiting to hear the spin.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2012 by tosberg34

[borge007]

Yeah, about that lost jobs report the Walker haters have been parroting for the last month or so? Turns out WI has actually gained jobs instead.

 

[/size][/font][/color][/left]

 

 

Guess you Walker haters will have to consult The Daily Kos to find out what to say next. I'll be waiting to hear the spin.

 

 

 

I've got some swamp land for sale.

[tosberg34]

I've got some swamp land for sale.

 

 

Did you even read the article?

[gbpfan1231]

I've got some swamp land for sale.

 

Please add a bit more.

 

Seriously - why the hate - prove that the new jobs numbers are less accurate than what has been previously stated and you will get no argument from me (and probably Tosberg) until then it is just another one of the posts by you/Chuck/BPWallace/Bushwacked that really say nothing.

 

So - let's recap - Wisconsin has saved money - class sizes have not gone up - property taxes have actually gone down - the job numbers are not as bad as previously noted (assuming this report is accurate) - no government buildings were sold for .02 cents this was a big one from BPWallace a while back that he kept harping on - places where teachers were laid off are generally places that signed contracts ahead of Act 10 - Schools are paying less for insurance because of the scam that WEAC was pulling has been uncovered. All of this and I don't see why there is all this hate - Oh wait I know - because now you are PERSONALLY paying a bit for your insurance and kicking in for YOUR pension. Oh the humanity!!!!

 

And people wonder why the teachers are getting a bad rap in this state and being called whiners.

 

Suck it up people there is more good going on than bad.

[Yukon Cornelius]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/15/scott-walker-magically-turns-dismal-wisconsin-job-numbers-into-a-pre-election-miracle/

 

Scott Walker Magically Turns Dismal Wisconsin Job Numbers Into A Pre-Election Miracle

[rocknrobn26]

http://www.forbes.co...ection-miracle/

 

Scott Walker Magically Turns Dismal Wisconsin Job Numbers Into A Pre-Election Miracle

 

 

> <

Edited May 16, 2012 by rocknrobn26

[stevegrab]

I think it would be interesting to see some analysis of these employment figures from both sources, and how the adjustment compares to the originals. I can understand the skepticism of one side, but I also understand the reality that surveys of a very small sample size are not as accurate as the actual counts of jobs done during the census.

 

The fact that such inaccurate extrapolations are even used to heavily is troubling, considering the weight people give to them.

 

Also interesting that the Forbes story makes no mention of what percentage of businesses or households are contacted. While the other story claims 3.5% of businesses in one survey, while making the other (more favorable) number sound as though include everybody (virtually all employers). Of cource Forbes talks about surveying households while the other doesn't. So I'm inclined to say they're not even talking about the same thing.

 

As with all things political, I'll assume that both sides are lying at least a little and trying to skew the numbers in their favor.

 

ETA Ok, after reading the second page of the Forbes story and the update I see it more clearly. But still lots of room for interpretation and different views. I suppose if the only point one side has is "he didn't creat the jobs he said he would" that isn't going to change. But I hardly see that as a legitimate reason for recalling a politician. Otherwise every one would be recalled for not keeping their promise.

Edited May 16, 2012 by stevegrab

[gbpfan1231]

I think it would be interesting to see some analysis of these employment figures from both sources, and how the adjustment compares to the originals. I can understand the skepticism of one side, but I also understand the reality that surveys of a very small sample size are not as accurate as the actual counts of jobs done during the census.

 

The fact that such inaccurate extrapolations are even used to heavily is troubling, considering the weight people give to them.

 

Also interesting that the Forbes story makes no mention of what percentage of businesses or households are contacted. While the other story claims 3.5% of businesses in one survey, while making the other (more favorable) number sound as though include everybody (virtually all employers). Of cource Forbes talks about surveying households while the other doesn't. So I'm inclined to say they're not even talking about the same thing.

 

As with all things political, I'll assume that both sides are lying at least a little and trying to skew the numbers in their favor.

 

ETA Ok, after reading the second page of the Forbes story and the update I see it more clearly. But still lots of room for interpretation and different views. I suppose if the only point one side has is "he didn't creat the jobs he said he would" that isn't going to change. But I hardly see that as a legitimate reason for recalling a politician. Otherwise every one would be recalled for not keeping their promise.

 

 

Agree - did not read the forbes article yet but will. I will say before I read it that if he is lying abit like you say and playing games with the numbers he is an idiot. I also said he was an idiot when he claimed he saved 1 Billion and it came out he had some figures wrong - someting like one area alone saved 1 million but it turned out to only be like 650k - why say a high number unless you can absolutley prove it - like 650k is not good news? Why say 1 million - you just give the other side to bitch about you lying and not understand that 650k is still good.

 

We will see but I sure hope his numbers have backing.

 

And you are 100% right that jobs have nothign to do with a recall - can you let Bushwacked know this please.

[bpwallace49]

Stevegrab. Despite what the "challenged" twins continue to spew, no one is saying to recall walker because of jobs. In fact, I don't think anyone is in favor of recall except for malfeasance (except for tossberg who is in favor of recalling democrats by using a military code of justice for elected state officials)

 

 

[tosberg34]

Stevegrab. Despite what the "challenged" twins continue to spew, no one is saying to recall walker because of jobs. In fact, I don't think anyone is in favor of recall except for malfeasance (except for tossberg who is in favor of recalling democrats by using a military code of justice for elected state officials)

 

 

Keep twisting the truth and taking my posts out of context to fit your ridiculous narrative. Whatever you need to jerk off to with your girlfriend buttwhacked.

Edited May 17, 2012 by tosberg34

[bpwallace49]

Maybe yer reading ain't so good.

 

Maybe you can't remember your own posts.

 

Either way I am shocked that gbpfan was able to teach you how to use a computer.

[tosberg34]

Maybe yer reading ain't so good.

 

Maybe you can't remember your own posts.

 

Either way I am shocked that gbpfan was able to teach you how to use a computer.

 

 

Surprised you were even able to respond with bushwacked giving you a handy.

Edited May 17, 2012 by tosberg34

[gbpfan1231]

Maybe yer reading ain't so good.

 

Maybe you can't remember your own posts.

 

Either way I am shocked that gbpfan was able to teach you how to use a computer.

 

BP - seriously - stop you are not funny - Adding a laugh icon does not make your posts funny. You have tried very hard the last few weeks to make humorous posts and you have failed miserably. I am not trying to be a jerk here - you just have a bad sense of humor.

[gbpfan1231]

Stevegrab. Despite what the "challenged" twins continue to spew, no one is saying to recall walker because of jobs. In fact, I don't think anyone is in favor of recall except for malfeasance (except for tossberg who is in favor of recalling democrats by using a military code of justice for elected state officials)

 

Go back and count how many posts in this thread are about jobs. You have mentioned jobs and Bushwacked has mentioned jobs - this thread is basically about recalling Walker so why do you and Bushwacked mention jobs when you say no one is saying it is about jobs?

 

You conveniently say you are not against recalls - so why are you posting so much? you are against saving money? You are for insurance companies screwing over taxpayers? Is it only because Walker did not take a pay cut?

[tosberg34]

This is interesting.

 

 

 

Wisconsin's next monthly jobs report, due out Thursday, should be hotly anticipated.

 

 

 

 

It's the last report before a June 5 recall election that has turned on employment and economic management.

 

 

 

 

But already, there's a huge asterisk.

 

 

 

 

The Walker administration in the days preceding the report has done everything possible to discredit the reliability and accuracy of any monthly state jobs numbers.

 

 

 

 

The governor released fourth-quarter employment data - not due for formal release until June 28 - showing Wisconsin added about 23,321 public and private sector jobs last year. Those figures from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages - which is collected from 95% of the state's private and public sector employers and deemed reliable by most economists - contrast sharply with more than a year's worth of monthly employment surveys, which suggested that Wisconsin lost 33,900 jobs last year, ranking it last among the 50 states.

 

 

 

 

It was those monthly survey numbers that Walker's op ponents have used since last year to criticize him.

 

 

 

 

The accuracy of the monthly data has been called into question in the past. The monthly estimates, after all, are based on surveys of only 3.5% to 5% of the state's businesses each month and then extrapolated statewide under a mathematical model that's routinely prone to error.

 

 

 

 

But the inaccuracies were never shown on a scale of 57,200 in a single year.

 

 

 

Inaccurate data

 

 

 

And it brings up an issue that's been reported, but is often overlooked or willfully ignored: The state employment data that triggers each month's partisan eruption is prone to stunning degrees of inaccuracy. It's a fact that even government statisticians don't talk about unless asked. But the common margin of error would astonish anyone who assumes that Wisconsin's monthly unemployment reports are a reliable reflection of the Badger State economy.

 

 

 

 

An example: On any given month, the margin of error for the net change in Wisconsin employment can be off by 9,340 jobs in either direction, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which compiles the figures for the nation and each of the 50 states.

 

 

 

 

Using the most recent monthly data - in March, when the data reported an estimated loss of 4,500 jobs in the state - that could either mean a dispiriting loss of 13,840 jobs or a respectable gain of 4,840.

 

 

 

 

And that range of standard deviations, as the discrepancies are known to the green-eyeshade crowd, is only to achieve a 90% degree of confidence in the numbers. "Ten percent of the time, it's outside of those bounds," meaning they are even more wildly erratic, said Kenneth Robertson, chief of the division of Current Employment Statistics at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

 

 

Funding affects accuracy

 

 

 

The monthly estimates are far more accurate on a national level, where the scope of the sample is far larger, diminishing the inaccuracies. Even government statisticians agree that monthly survey data loses its accuracy whenever it is broken out below the national level.

 

 

 

 

At the state level, "we know there is error in the estimates," said Robertson at the bureau.

 

 

 

 

"The BLS needs to revise its models in order to get a more accurate first look at the data," said Brian Jacobsen, an economist for Wells Fargo Fund Management in Menomonee Falls.

 

 

 

 

Asked if the bureau could do anything to improve the accuracy of its monthly estimates, Robertson said that Congress would need to allocate significantly more funds than it does.

 

 

 

 

"Basically, the margin of error is based on the sample size, and the sample size is based on the funding for the program," Robertson said.

 

 

 

 

Job numbers are confusing in the best of times. There are multiple ways to report employment: the monthly job count; private sector jobs vs. government jobs; the unemployment rate, which comes from a survey of households rather than businesses; and straight numbers vs. those with seasonal adjustments to smooth out cyclical changes because of holidays or weather changes.

 

 

 

 

The welter of different ways makes it easy for politicians to cherry pick whatever numbers suit their purposes - and the state's politicians on both sides of the aisle have reported the numbers selectively for years.

 

 

 

 

For example, the Wisconsin unemployment rate has a margin of error of 0.18 percentage points in either direction if one wants a 90% degree of confidence in the numbers. That means a downward tick of the state unemployment rate to 6.8% from 6.9%, as was the case in March in Wisconsin, theoretically could have been unchanged.

 

 

 

 

"Typically, if the monthly Wisconsin seasonally adjusted unemployment rate changes by one-tenth of a percentage point, that change is deemed not statistically significant, and we say that the rates for the two months are effectively the same," said Ken Levasseur, a senior economist at the bureau.

 

 

 

 

There's a reasonable chance that Thursday's job numbers could be weak. The national jobs report for April, released two weeks ago, disappointed virtually all economists and policy-makers, setting the stage for similar letdown in Wisconsin.

 

 

 

 

"I suspect the April numbers will be not only irrelevant, but disappointing," said Jacobsen at Wells Fargo.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2012 by tosberg34

[bushwacked]

http://www.forbes.co...ection-miracle/

 

Scott Walker Magically Turns Dismal Wisconsin Job Numbers Into A Pre-Election Miracle

 

 

It's voodoo economics....minus the economics part.

[gbpfan1231]

It's voodoo economics....minus the economics part.

 

Sad part is it sure seems like you and Yukon would be happy if the other reports are more accurate. Pretty pathetic that people are hoping for the bad job numbers to be the correct numbers - but hey if that puts a few more bucks in Yukon's pockets then it is good for the state.

[bpwallace49]

 

BP - seriously - stop you are not funny - Adding a laugh icon does not make your posts funny. You have tried very hard the last few weeks to make humorous posts and you have failed miserably. I am not trying to be a jerk here - you just have a bad sense of humor.

 

 

Oh no! My day is now ruined!!

 

[detlef]

Sad part is it sure seems like you and Yukon would be happy if the other reports are more accurate. Pretty pathetic that people are hoping for the bad job numbers to be the correct numbers - but hey if that puts a few more bucks in Yukon's pockets then it is good for the state.

 

 

I don't think that is fair to say. I'm not familiar enough with the specifics of Walker's policies and how closely they resemble other GOP alleged job creation plans of the past, but those who don't buy the logic often championed by the GOP are put into a tough situation. You're pretty certain they're not going to work, but it's a hollow victory to say "told you so" because that "victory" comes at the expense of jobs. You wish that the mounting failures would make these guys stop selling us the program as something that is even supposed to work, but it doesn't. And the cycle continues.

 

Again, in fairness, I'm talking about trickle down here and I don't know how closely this resembles what Walker is trying to do. Like I said, I haven't been following it all that closely and don't want to pretend to know more about it than I do. I'm only commenting on it because that's when I'm caught in that trap of being certain that it's not going to work, watching it not work, and then feeling like a dick because now it seems like I'm rooting against job creation, when all I'm really doing is saying "SEE!? IT DOESN'T EFFING WORK! CAN WE FINALLY STOP PRETENDING THAT HANDING MONEY TO THE GUYS AT THE TOP MEANS THEY'RE GOING TO GO OUT AND OPEN FACTORIES JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT!?!"

 

Something like that. And, while we're at it, let's not pretend that there haven't been plenty on the other side of the aisle who have been actively rooting against Obama's policies to work so they can get a hold of the government and do what they want (both financially and socially).

Edited May 17, 2012 by detlef

[gbpfan1231]

I don't think that is fair to say. I'm not familiar enough with the specifics of Walker's policies and how closely they resemble other GOP alleged job creation plans of the past, but those who don't buy the logic often championed by the GOP are put into a tough situation. You're pretty certain they're not going to work, but it's a hollow victory to say "told you so" because that "victory" comes at the expense of jobs. You wish that the mounting failures would make these guys stop selling us the program as something that is even supposed to work, but it doesn't. And the cycle continues.

 

Again, in fairness, I'm talking about trickle down here and I don't know how closely this resembles what Walker is trying to do. Like I said, I haven't been following it all that closely and don't want to pretend to know more about it than I do. I'm only commenting on it because that's when I'm caught in that trap of being certain that it's not going to work, watching it not work, and then feeling like a dick because now it seems like I'm rooting against job creation, when all I'm really doing is saying "SEE!? IT DOESN'T EFFING WORK! CAN WE FINALLY STOP PRETENDING THAT HANDING MONEY TO THE GUYS AT THE TOP MEANS THEY'RE GOING TO GO OUT AND OPEN FACTORIES JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT!?!"

 

Something like that. And, while we're at it, let's not pretend that there haven't been plenty on the other side of the aisle who have been actively rooting against Obama's policies to work so they can get a hold of the government and do what they want (both financially and socially).

 

You are spot on - the funny part is that some of the same people in this thread who seem to enjoy the fact that Walker is not creating jobs are the people who have claimed what you say about the "other" side hoping Obama fails - it is the typical hypocrisy that is BP and Bushwacked.

 

The point I am making is not about if the ideas will work and disputing trickle down - it is an argument of what the job numbers really are. One report says it is bad and one reports says it is not so bad - it seems like the lefties are rooting for the report that says it is bad to be the one that is correct - that way they have a reason to rip Walker - if the report that says it is not so bad turns out to be more accurate they have lost the one and only issue they can honestly scream about. That is a bit different about arguing if job creation ideas will or won't work.

[gbpfan1231]

Oh no! My day is now ruined!!

 

 

 

0-6

[detlef]

You are spot on - the funny part is that some of the same people in this thread who seem to enjoy the fact that Walker is not creating jobs are the people who have claimed what you say about the "other" side hoping Obama fails - it is the typical hypocrisy that is BP and Bushwacked.

 

The point I am making is not about if the ideas will work and disputing trickle down - it is an argument of what the job numbers really are. One report says it is bad and one reports says it is not so bad - it seems like the lefties are rooting for the report that says it is bad to be the one that is correct - that way they have a reason to rip Walker - if the report that says it is not so bad turns out to be more accurate they have lost the one and only issue they can honestly scream about. That is a bit different about arguing if job creation ideas will or won't work.

 

I guess I'm not sure they're enjoying the fact that he's not creating jobs so much as they don't want him getting credit for creating jobs, if in fact, he's not. And, further, if they had (and voiced) their doubts about how effective his policies would be, then, like with me and the trickle down bit, they'll end up being stuck in that space where it looks like they're rooting against success.

[stevegrab]

I guess I'm not sure they're enjoying the fact that he's not creating jobs so much as they don't want him getting credit for creating jobs, if in fact, he's not. And, further, if they had (and voiced) their doubts about how effective his policies would be, then, like with me and the trickle down bit, they'll end up being stuck in that space where it looks like they're rooting against success.

 

 

Sadly it seems a growing number in the population (along with many politicians) are constantly rooting (or appear to be rooting) for the other side to fail, whether to prove their point that those policies don't work, or just to force the other side out of power. You are right that many in the GOP have been doing that since Obama was elected. I'm sure many Dems have done that as well in the past with Bush and others.

 

I jumped into this thread because a lot of what is going on in WI is similar to OH, except that our collective bargaining reform passed in the legislature was overtuned by a vote of the people (which is completely fair). But nothing much has changed, we still see budget cuts being needed at many government agencies, schools are running massive debts, and while they try to make some cuts they still don't hesitate to ask the citizens (who are still struggling) for more money. They can't understand why the average working stiff is upset with their great benefits which they feel entitled to keep.

 

Since I've been following this thread there's been a few posts of actual reasonable discussion, mixed in with the hundreds of barbs being traded between the two sides. If we has a huddle award category for "biggest pissing match thread" I'd nominate this one in an instant.

 

Anyway, the whole thing that got my attention was the jobs numbers and how massively inaccurate they are, yet they are used as constant talking points and as a way to slam the politicians for not doing enough. (Even if a politician tells you they are going to create jobs you shouldn't believe it and shouldn't hold them to it, because that is NOT the job of government.)

 

PS This recall seems to be nothing more really than a small (yet vocal) group who is unhappy with the election and policies of the new Governor. Not unlike here in Akron OH where they tried to recall the mayor (in his 7th term now 25+ years on the job) after he was elected because, well they just don't like him and think he is crooked. That recall was soundly defeated by a 3-1 margin.

[bpwallace49]

You are spot on - the funny part is that some of the same people in this thread who seem to enjoy the fact that Walker is not creating jobs are the people who have claimed what you say about the "other" side hoping Obama fails - it is the typical hypocrisy that is BP and Bushwacked.

 

The point I am making is not about if the ideas will work and disputing trickle down - it is an argument of what the job numbers really are. One report says it is bad and one reports says it is not so bad - it seems like the lefties are rooting for the report that says it is bad to be the one that is correct - that way they have a reason to rip Walker - if the report that says it is not so bad turns out to be more accurate they have lost the one and only issue they can honestly scream about. That is a bit different about arguing if job creation ideas will or won't work.

 

 

You seem to be obsessed with a Obama/Walker comparison that any logical human being would not make. Wisconsin/Walker is being compared to it peers . . other Governors/states . . using the same measuring metric used by every other state. That seems to be a pretty fair barometer doesnt it? Kinda like apples to apples? But Walker doesnt "like" those numbers, becasue it shows that he cant drastically cut state jobs and positions without an enormous jump in private jobs to offset his agenda. That hasnt happened.

 

But walker jumps out with hi s"own" way of accounting, that surprisingly paints him in a better light! Shocker! It is similar to how he has flip flopped on his budget accounting to make himself look better.

 

Walker is a classic politician that cannot be trusted or believed. he will get his reckoning in the next election and see how things fall out.

 

PS- If Obama was anything like Walker, we would have a single payer healthc are system and a 70% tax on the upper brackets. Walker doesnt have any concern about the views or input of other alternatives, so it is "eff you, I will do what I want".