Joined: 28 Dec 2005
|Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:47 pm Post subject: Growth - Wisconsin
Yes, we deserve the best of everything, like cheap and abundant energy to keep us warm this winter.
We deserve a market economy to provide us cheap and abundant goods, and therefore, pay for a strong military to protect our way of life.
We can put everything back on track, including bringing-down where there are high prices and rationing. A “train wreck” is unnecessary.
There will be winners and losers closing the income or compensation gap between union & government workers and non-union private workers, based on productivity or actual value added, although higher disposal, or after tax, income benefits everyone.
And, as the U.S. economy continues to move forward into newer industries, in each creative-destruction cycle, job growth may be slower in older industries. Wisconsin may have relatively fewer newer industries compared to many other states.
Spencer, no, the private sector in California does a better job compensating for poor government policies than the private sectors in Kansas and Wisconsin.
California has a stronger private sector, because of three huge metro areas with a large base of growing newer industries.
California attracts wealth and high-skilled workers from the rest of the world and other states. It’s a virtuous cycle.
Wisconsin non-farm employment is only 80,000 short of the forecast, based on prior data. However, Wisconsin population grew 6% from 2000 to 2010 and grew only 1.2% from 2010 to 2014. Moreover, there have been demographic changes, e.g. an aging population and a possible “brain drain,” to other states.
Or non-farm employment is about 2.7% short of the forecast. Moreover, the slow recovery in the macroeconomy likely has some significant negative effect.
The private sector should be allowed to expand and therefore expand the tax base to support the government rather than the government almost constantly propping-up the private sector.
We need growth before raising taxes and paying for regulations. There are too few pro-growth policies and too many anti-growth policies.