Welcome to Scott Walker’s Wisconsin, Mr. President

scott_walker_ap_img_10

Later today, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker will welcome President Barack Obama to the Badger State, where Obama is traveling to announce a new Labor Department rule requiring companies to pay their employees overtime rates for overtime pay, just as federal law has demanded for some 80 years now.

Obama’s choice of Wisconsin is not accidental. Apparently, the White House sees Walker as a useful foil in its effort to contrast Democratic proposals to help working Americans with those that are championed by Walker and fellow Republican governors.

Walker in turn is thrilled by the attention, because there is nothing that an ambitious Republican politician wants more than to be picked on by Barack Obama. In a column headlined “Welcome to Wisconsin, Mr. President,”, the governor claims that Wisconsin’s “dramatic recovery” offers the nation a model of what conservative policies and leadership can do for the economy.

For example, Walker brags that as of February, Wisconsin now has more jobs than at any previous point in state history. While that’s nice, the national economy hit that landmark back in April 2014. He also claims that over the past four years, his policies have “turned a $3.6 billion budget deficit into a nearly $1 billion surplus.”

Apparently, that latter claim comes as quite a surprise to the people of Wisconsin and to the Republican legislators stuck still trying to pass a state budget. To them, that $1 billion surplus looks suspiciously like a $2.2 billion deficit. It turns out that like their counterparts in Kansas, Walker and his allies built their budgets on the assumption that their conservative policies would produce an economic boom, which in turn would flood the state treasury with revenue. The boom hasn’t happened, and neither has the revenue increase.

In April, a statewide poll conducted by the Marquette Law School reported that just 41 percent of Wisconsin residents approved of Walker’s performance as governor; 56 percent disapproved. (It also showed Walker losing in his home state to Hillary Clinton by 12 percentage points, 52-40.)

And why is Walker’s job rating so dismal? The economy.

“Voters also see the state’s employment situation as turning down compared to other states, with 52 percent saying that Wisconsin is lagging behind other states in job creation, 34 percent saying that the state is doing about the same as other states and 8 percent saying that the state is creating jobs faster than other states.”

Just 8 percent believe that Wisconsin job growth is better than average?

Of course, since perception isn’t always reality, I thought I would take a look at the data to see how the Wisconsin economy has performed since January 2011, when Walker became governor. I wanted to see two things: How total job growth under Walker’s anti-union, education-slashing policies compare to those of neighboring states in the upper Midwest, and how it compares to job growth nationally.

Here’s what the data tell us:
wiscjobs

At his first inauguration, Walker had pledged to create some 250,000 new jobs by 2015. He didn’t reach half that number. He promised the creation of 10,000 new businesses. Last month, Wisconsin was ranked last in the country in business startups, a fall of five spots from its previous ranking of 45th.

Welcome to Scott Walker’s Wisconsin, the model for Republican economic policy.

Reader Comments 0

553 comments
Peachs
Peachs

The right are suckers for show.  Big hat and no cattle.  Walker put on a show for them and now he is all everything for a week.  Their debates are like worm eating contest where one macho out performs another while the cowboys ride horses on stage and eat raw meat.  The Teddy Rough Riders that leave piles of mature and not much else. Real business is being conducted by Obama, his legacy is being formed and he will be one of the top 10 presidents of all times, and all the right has is trick ponies.

Exacta
Exacta

Jay uses unflattering photos of non-liberals like Governor Walker—to show us how very petty he himself is?

Peachs
Peachs

@Exacta  or maybe that is just how that nerd looks..

AvgGeorgian
AvgGeorgian

Let’s see – Waldemort, I mean Walmart, is the largest employer in Wisconsin and : 


http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/  


“The study estimated the cost to Wisconsin’s taxpayers of Walmart’s low wages and benefits, which often force workers to rely on various public assistance programs,” reads the report, available in full here. “ “It found that a single Walmart Supercenter cost taxpayers between $904,542 and $1.75 million per year(in public assistance), or between $3,015 and $5,815 on average for each of 300 workers.”


Maybe that’s part of the problem – corporate welfare.

jezel
jezel

Walker thinks the world is flat.

Recon2/3
Recon2/3

To all of those folks who embrace America and our history as the most prosperous nation in God's wonderful creation, Happy Independence Day our Fourth of July. Be happy and be safe.

US_Patriot
US_Patriot

"Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics" - Is this the same outfit that annouced today an increase in employment of 223k, yet posts a labor rate decline of 423k?  And comes up with a REDUCTION in the unemployment rate?  Must be new effing math in DC!


Got any new "pictures" for your lib audience?


Sheesh!

JKLtwo
JKLtwo

@US_Patriot Maybe obama and teach Walker how to cook the books while he's there.

WI's problem with job creation is the Socialist republic of Madison and the Welfare state of Milwaukee.  Hard to get people to work when they are too busy drinking the Demwit koolaid and sucking on the government teet.

KUTGF
KUTGF

Flag video sheetz

YouLibs
YouLibs

Jay


Could we add a feature where we could vote somebody off the island?

Wena Mow Masipa How
Wena Mow Masipa How

 I've yet to see you every refute any of my points, let alone make a cogent point of your own. Take a look at your posts. Ya got nuthin. 


I got news for you doomy - I'm never, ever, ever even going to attempt to attempt to try to attempt to 'refute' your nonsense.  Simply a waste of time.  You get from me what you give, and nothing more. 

KUTGF
KUTGF

@Wena Mow Masipa How  Ya got nuthin.

_____________


The Doomy tell that he has already lost the argument when he has to blotivate (and it is almost every post)....

Brosephus
Brosephus

@Doom Classical liberal 

Doom:  "Is 85 billion a month in a 16 trillion dollar economy the same as giving the lower half of america $50,000 each as you opined? That would be $7,500,000,000,000 put into the economy in YOUR example."

What kind of math are you doing?  $50,000 to 1 million people is $50B, which is less than the $85B per month the government pushed into the market under QE.  Either you didn't read my example as I opined, or you're purposefully trying to misrepresent what I said in order to try to make yourself appear correct.  Let's go back in the wayback machine to see what I actually said....

"Giving 1 million people in the lower half of the economy $50,000 each to spend will do more than giving $10 million to the top 5000 people in the economy."--Brosephus @ 3 hours ago
So, are you going to concede that you were wrong or you misspoke my position or should we just chalk this up to you being Doom?

I mean, on this thread alone, you've posted a chain scare email and tried to link it to the CBO.  You completely twist what I said into something totally bogus.

Yeah, I took my family to the movies.  I'll take my younger two for their swimming lessons soon.  Come on back again and "school" me again as you think you've done.

Doom:  "After pointing out numerous fallacies of yours earlier and detailing specifically why they were fallacious I kinda figured you would be heading out the door, seeing as how you couldn't refute any of the fallacies I pointed out.  Have a good day with the family."
LOL!!!  Only fallacy I think you pointed out is this one here...


When you have to LIE to make a point, you really don't have a point.


Here is what happened on January 1, 2015 :

Top Medicare tax goes from 1.45% to 2.35%

Top Income tax bracket goes from 35% to 39.6%

Top Income payroll tax goes from 37.4% to 52.2%

Capital Gains tax goes from 15% to 20%

Dividends tax goes from 15% to 39.6%

Estate tax goes from 0% to 40%

Households in the top quintile (including the top percentile) paid 68.8 percent of all federal taxes, households in the middle quintile paid 9.1 percent, and those in the bottom quintile paid 0.4 percent.


http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44604


LMAO!!!!!!


[Edit]  What's the over/under on doubling down on the "empirical" fallacies on this one people???

Brosephus
Brosephus

@TBS 

LOL!!!  He tries to call me out about fallacies while posting something about taxes going into effect 1 Jan 2015 while posting a link to the distribution of household income and federal taxes from 2011.

THAT's testicular fortitude!!  Mick Foley would be proud.

Doom Classical liberal
Doom Classical liberal

@Brosephus


You didn't even make a cogent point Bro.


"So, are you going to concede that you were wrong or you misspoke my position or should we just chalk this up to you being Doom?"


Where did I misspeak your position? You noted that if we gave half of America 50k it would spur demand. If there are 300 million Americans and we gave half of them 50k then that's the number we get- admittedly an absurd number because you didn't think about what you were posting- more nutty thinking again. I can't help it if you make ridiculous statements.


"I mean, on this thread alone, you've posted a chain scare email and tried to link it to the CBO.  You completely twist what I said into something totally bogus."


A chain email. What on Earth are you talking about Bro? Those are the taxes that went up. I've yet to see you, Lenin, or anyone dispute them. As for the CBO data it could be that i copied the wrong source for that info but that doesn't change the validity of the taxes that went up. I see that, as usual, you attack me personally but could not dispute the taxes. Why don't you try disputing the actual data as opposed to a personal attack. And besides, that post was directed to Lenin. It had absolutely nothing to do with you. Why you bring up a completely irrelevant point to what you and I were discussing is a mystery. You must really be reaching Bro if you have to bring up posts that have nothing to do with our topic of discussion. 


"Yeah, I took my family to the movies.  I'll take my younger two for their swimming lessons soon.  Come on back again and "school" me again as you think you've done."


You got shown to be an abject fool in terms of your understanding of economics Bro. You can scream all you want but its not going to change the fact that you can't refute any of the fallacies I pointed out. 



I think penses got it right long ago. Your points are never logical. You only think they are. Then when someone on my side shreds them you resort to anger. Its kinda pathetic. 


Doom Classical liberal
Doom Classical liberal

@Brosephus


So I posted the wrong link to some data in a post directed to a completely different blogger. BFD. Is that really all you got Bro? Seriously? All you got is an honest mistake in citing data to a completely different blogger. I mean that's just weak. 

Doom Classical liberal
Doom Classical liberal

@Brosephus


Actually, I just rechecked my link. The cbo link confirms the 68.8% number of the top quintile. Given that, what exactly are you screaming about. Its right there in the first paragraph. 

Brosephus
Brosephus

@Doom Classical liberal
Yeah, yeah....  Honest mistake.  Nobody actually expects you to admit you were wrong, even though we know you were wrong.

Continue to double or triple down with whatever makes you feel better about yourself. 

As I said, when you're honest with yourself, THEN you can say something about fallacies on my part.


As far as making a cogent point, I made enough of one that you had to post 3 separate responses to ONE post that I made.  I know it gets under your skin to have your faults pointed out, so I'm done with picking at you today. 

Thanks for the laughs because you responded just as I predicted you would.  I could write a psychology book based on you if I really wanted to.  I just don't think it would really be that interesting to the rest of the world.  Narcissism and ego isn't something new.

Dusty2
Dusty2

Did something disappear?

DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

Obama badgers Scott Walker in Wisconsin

Soooo, this his how YOU treat people when you visit their "house."

I bet you'd be offended if someone came to your house and heckled you..

OH

WAIT!

Wena Mow Masipa How
Wena Mow Masipa How

 I usually bring facts, logical points, links, empirical data.


Yes, yes you do doomy.  Of the Swiss cheese variety.

Dusty2
Dusty2

Wena Mow Masipa How 


Wena, is your name pronounced "weiner" as in bratwurst with sauerkraut? Seems to fit.

Cupofjoe
Cupofjoe

darn- thought Jaybee was going to do a Christie filleting but he went Walker- I am sure it is an interesting read with a tremendous amount of original thoughts-

Dusty2
Dusty2

@Cupofjoe Interesting reading?  Nawww.  Bookman is thinking about music for tomorrow.  Let me suggest "Lonesome road" as played for failing Hillacrats and all others lost and alone.  

hamiltonAZ
hamiltonAZ

"Out here the gravity of discontent pulls in only one direction: to the right, to the right, further to the right. Strip today's [Wisconsans] of their job security, and they head out to become registered Republicans. Push them off their land, and next thing you know they're protesting in front of abortion clinics. Squander their life savings on manicures for the CEO, and there's a good chance they'll join the John Birch Society. But ask them about the remedies their ancestors proposed (unions, antitrust, public ownership), and you might as well be referring to the days when knighthood was in flower."


Apologies to Thomas Frank whose quote on Kansas has been borrowed for this other midwest state.

Dusty2
Dusty2

@hamiltonAZ 


How much did Thomas Frank get paid to write  this?  They ought to get their money back.

straker
straker

Jam - "the ugly aftermath of the post-Bush/Cheney madness"


The gift that just keeps on giving.

JamVet
JamVet

Scott Walker could no more win the White House than Donald Trump.

And though the list is long, I cannot see any of the GOP candidates being electable.

This is the ugly aftermath of the post-Bush/Cheney madness...

TBS
TBS

@JamVet


That's my take on Walker as well.  Hillary can be beat but I wouldn't bet a dime that Scott Walker is going to be the one.  I wouldn't bet that he is the nominee. 

Dusty2
Dusty2

@JamVet 


Hillary could no more win the White House than Carley f. 

Hillary is  not electable.

That is the aftermath of a poor political record and a disgraced husband by his own  roving fallacies.

SAVE the White House,  Send Hillary home with Bill and good riddance to Democrats!  Save America!

JamVet
JamVet

@TBS @JamVet 

The intreresting question is who will win the nomination for the Party of the Past. (hat tip GaGirl)

Perry, Santorum, Huck and Trump are all obvious DOA retreads. 

Rand is his dad's (lacking) retread.

They might as well bring back Tancredo, Keyes, Newt, Brownback and Romney, while they are at it...

Arms_Akimbo
Arms_Akimbo

@JamVet 


The Dems can't seem to find a viable candidate younger than the age of 62. Who is really the party of the past?



Arms_Akimbo
Arms_Akimbo

@JamVet @TBS 


The Dems still have Biden, Sharpton, Pelosi and Reid if they want some fresh faces.

JamVet
JamVet

@Arms_Akimbo @JamVet @TBS 

Unlikely that any will run for POTUS.

If Biden does join the fray then you will have one point.

But added to your minus three, you would still only be at -2.

And thus your speculative comparison of names, way off base.

BTW are you contending that any of the 15 (is that right?!) Post-Bush/Cheney campaigners will sit in the West Wing in 2017?

That would be a very bold prediction. And if so, which one of them?

Take your time, while you consider the distinct possbility that none are electable nationwide...


JamVet
JamVet

@Arms_Akimbo @JamVet 

The political party whose platform policies are many times anchored in the past.

Not any one individual or another.

Duh...