Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (793012)	7/2/2014 1:22:50 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 1576767

Here are the 18 states that cut taxes in 2012-2013: Alaska, Arkansas , Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin *Of those states, the following are experiencing strong employment growth: Florida, Indiana, Iowa, North Dakota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas Average to sub par employment growth [1.5% to 1% YOY]: Arkansas, Mississippi, Montana, Wisconsin Sub par employment growth [less than 1% to 0.1]: Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio Zero to negative employment growth: Alaska*, New Mexico From the Bureau of Labor Statistics: bls.gov **Energy producing states: without oil, ND's employment would be sub par and OK's average Of the 18 states that cut taxes, 8, or 44% are doing better than average growth. Of those 8, two are energy producing states and that skews their numbers considerably. Texas is big enough so that energy production has less of an impact. Apparently, Alaska is screwed period. Meanwhile, 10 of the 18, or 56% have sub par employment growth. So where's the correlation Tim?