Blue, Red, and Swing States - Jobs Data for 2012

Blue, Red, and Swing States.  The employment data does not lie.

The claim by the Obama campaign (Team Obama TO) is that we've had continuous job growth for the last 24+ months. This is more-of-less true, but here we consider the actual data and how it fractionates by Blue, Red, and Swing states.

Let's give TO the small consideration by examining only data from the last 13 months available for employees on nonfarm payrolls from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). See http://www.bls.gov/sae/eetables/tabled1.pdf.   Thus, we consider only employment data from April 2011 to April 2012, wherein the numerous Obama interventions should have been in full swing.

The Republicans generally view unemployment and underemployment data as paramount, not to mention the large number of people that have opted out of the jobs market, and moreover not to mention the large numbers of people that have gone on disability. But, is the public really convinced?  In this note, we view the Democratic viewpoint of solid increased employment over time and build our case from there.

From the BLS data, there were in April 2011 about 131,274,200 people employed.   In round numbers, employment in April 2011 for Blue states was about 50,644,000 jobs, Red states employed in 36,406,000 jobs, and Swing states employed in 44,225,000 jobs.

Over the thirteen months, April 2011 to April 2012, Blue states jobs grew by much more, about 627,700 jobs.  Trailing were the Red states growth with 598,500 jobs, and Swing states growth with 385,400 jobs.

Naturally, you would expect the Swing states to come in much smaller as there are only twelve (wide sense) of them. No surprises yet. 

On the face of it, the Blue states did much better.   Now, consider this. Viewing the annual average per state percentage increase in jobs over the same period, we see this.

Overall, annual employment grew over this period by approximately 1.13%.  At an annual growth of 0.80%, Swing states are doing most poorly.  But significantly Blue states are doing far poorer than Red states.  Assuming an unemployment rate of 8.2% of the work force, and an annual employment rate increase of 1.133% it would take a mere 13.5 years to bring the USA back to normal employment levels.  Here we ignore population increase, underemployment, and other factors - data that is not quite reliable and significant and yet dramatically increases the time recovery factor.

A couple of points:

1. There is little wonder Swing states are just that, states swinging and wondering about their future. 
2. Does not the Team Romney (TR) campaign have anyone that can read a simple spreadsheet?  Can they not construct an advantage in this data?  It is apparent that the Team Obama campaign has done so, i.e. steady job growth – ignoring unemployment.
3. Overall, the employment data suggests the Swing states are fairing most poorly.
4. The Blue states seem consistently to be at much lower level than Red states for increased employment. Happily for TO, these states are in the tank. Why's that?
5. Viewing employment sector data, e.g. manufacturing, government, trade-transportation, financial, professional-business, education-health, and leisure, the results are even more interesting.

Blue States: California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont,  Washington

Red States: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West, Wyoming

Swing States: Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin

Total = 51:  This includes the District of Columbia

Totals:

19                    Blue

20                    Red

12                    Swing

The New Dark Age

The new dark age of man is upon us.  Is technology at its base? Though I'm kind of a techie geek, I don't know, but...

Technology has reached far beyond the ordinary person's ability to understand it, its basis and its implications.  This engenders a basic insecurity in the mental systems of humanity, politics, religion, and science.  It goes much deeper.

Perhaps this is driving the religious right,  cult-type movements, the slavish adherents of left, and in general all fundamentalist type movements.  Each has the common quality of wanting, desiring, and needing something simply framed to follow. 

The suspension of understanding has been achieved.  Folks can now barrel headlong into anything, such as literal biblical teachings, literal leftist teachings, literal conservative teachings, all without the any need for intellectual comprehension. Folks can now barrel headlong into any type or any form of understanding, logical, emotional, intuitive, and all.  Moreover, it is now OK to do so.  There is no shame of the lack of reflection.

Since little is even intuitively understood with any grasp of comprehension, all things can be interpreted without logic.  Belief and emotion rule.  The alternative to understanding, logic and reason, has evaporated.  Belief/emotion is much more flexible than logic, and is far more flexible than reason, axioms, argument, and all. 

There are two you's, the one of all the ages where you interpet what you see as ordinary objects, the other is new where things you do and can do have no basis in reason.

The human psyche seem to have these two complementary/contradictory systems to keep its sense of  balance and mental stability.

Please.  Is there another interpretation?

Trusting Obama

Trusting Obama

Forget about his base.  Polls seem to indicate that while many folks want to believe in the President, their conviction is waning.  The mantra of Hope and Change, only four years old, that inspired millions across the full spectra of the voting electorate has fallen a bit.  People are suspicious.  

The latest decision of the Supreme Court on the Affordable Care Act has resulted in a concern, many concerns, of how this will play out.  Seniors are wondering how this affects them. Medicare!  Businesses are wondering how this affects their hiring plans. Costs! Younger voters may be wondering how the ruling will result in a mandatory enrollment plan.  On this, we will see.  Independents are trying to muddle through the morass of regulations within the new law and its consequent rulings.   

Wondering is not the same as questioning.  Wondering precedes questioning.  Wondering is a state of both uncertainty and unknowing - it is unrest and more.

Wondering is not positive state of mind.  Wondering implies uncertainty.  Wondering is opaque to transparency. Wondering is a strong negative to the hopes of change.  Wondering breeds distrust.

Trust* in the Presidential mission is what the public is seeking.  Obama?  What is the trust factor? Trust in leaders is crucial. Trust in legislation is important.  Trust in the courts has been a staple of our country.  Trust in the future is paramount.  Trust is a strong positive that seems to be missing in the Obama mission and message.

Trust, not wondering, is what most people want, even crave, in their leaders.  How many have this?

*The book by FRANCIS FUKUYAMA, Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity, Free Press, 1995, sets forth a theory of national trust based on non-kin relations.  He describes low trust nations such as China and France, and high trust nations such as Japan, Germany, and the United States.  Can it be the United States is gradually migrating to a new status?  After all, it is now seventeen years later, when the USA was at the height of its economic powers.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Fukuyama