patrick.net

Sorry to bust you mutts bubble, but here are some facts to go with your conjecture:

Kansas Economic Growth Is On The Rebound--Look At The Real Numbers
Comment Now Follow Comments
When Kansas Governor Sam Brownback enacted his bold approach to tax reform, he gave a much-needed boost to small businesses throughout the state. Thanks to Brownback’s tax cuts, these businesses can make greater investments, hire more employees, and set themselves on a more stable course toward the future. Considering that 44 percent of working Kansans are employed by small businesses, the Brownback tax cuts positively impact thousands of families.

Unfortunately, no good deed goes unpunished, with outlets like the Kansas City Star questioning the wisdom and efficacy of the cuts. The Star’s editorial board published a column downplaying the positive impact the cuts have had on the state’s small businesses and expressing skepticism about Kansas’ ability to draw in business from states with higher tax burdens. In an excellent rebuttal to the Star’s editorial, the Kansas Policy Institute outlines the problematic nature of their claims. While successful growth is typically measured in the number of private-sector jobs created, the Star instead uses (but does not disclose this fact) nonfarm jobs – in other words, the total of government and private sector jobs.

Additionally, as the KPI paper rightly points out, the Star uses point-to-point comparisons to make its case, comparing Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers from January 2014 and January 2015. A more reasoned and accurate approach is to look at average annual employment numbers (which the BLS also publishes), in order to mitigate the impact of any single large spike or decline. Looking at these bigger-picture numbers, we see that Kansas nonfarm jobs grew by 2.4 percent between December 2012 and January 2015. In Missouri during the same timeframe, nonfarm jobs increased by 1.9 percent. This more stable, accurate comparison of average annual employment reveals Kansas to be growing faster than Missouri – whether you use nonfarm or private-sector employment figures.

Also, since Brownback’s tax reform, private-sector GDP has increased in Kansas. The Tax Foundation shows Kansas outperforming the 50-state average in 2013 (the numbers for 2014 aren’t yet available), as well as far outperforming the ten states with the highest state and local tax burden. In the fourteen years prior to tax reform, Kansas lagged behind.

Kansans should be celebrating their state’s strides. The growth of small businesses in Kansas is at an annual rate of 6 percent – higher than the national average and higher than the growth in any neighboring states, including Missouri. In the 2013 tax year, more than 8,600 first-time small-business filers invigorated the state’s economy with more than $486 million in new income.

As Governor Brownback himself stated this week: “Our goal, as a state, should be growing an economy that provides opportunity and jobs for all Kansans. A tax policy that puts more money in the hands of working Kansans and that rewards productivity is resulting in growth in Kansas, without question.”

Leaders in other states should be inspired by the small business and employment gains in Kansas as they examine their own state tax policies and determine which reform options will work best in their own home states.

From here:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinquefield/2015/05/04/kansas-economic-growth-is-on-the-rebound-look-at-the-real-numbers/

TypIcal

https://www.youtube.com/embed/K8E_zMLCRNg

The problem isn't that the rich don't have enough money already.

Actually, that is the problem, well the primary symptom / end effect at least, and of course the GOP is foundationally configured to defend this great and increasing imbalance.

We're so fucked.

anonymous says

The "mutts" aka leaders were and then this happened - Their ‘No-New-Taxes’ Vow is Now Haunting the GOP. For decades, many Republicans have embraced the “supply-side” theory that tax cuts more than anything else help to spur economic growth through savings and investment and that raising taxes – except under the most dire of circumstances – hurt jobs and the economy.

Gawd your conjecture is long winded. Brownback simply needs to cut government spending to balance the budget. Coolidge cut Fed spending by 50% and it ended the great recession of 1921.

Basically the mutts subscribe to the 1.5 multiplies and the sensible people subscribe to Say's law. The last 7 years prove that the prior is a crock. History proves the latter.

anonymous says

And yours wasn't ? Coming from the right of the aisle Fiscal Times I thought you would been jumping up and down for joy with that piece.

Big difference between your article and mine.

anonymous says

But while were on tax cuts in these states - why didn't Walker's tax cuts result in a massive flood of businesses moving into Wisconsin after they were enacted?

Don't know but they worked quite well for Coolidge. I would guess there is a time lag on this stuff, even Coolidge's cuts took 18 months to have an affect.

“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't fit in with the core belief.”

Frantz Fanon

socal2 says

Innovation will allow some industries to cut labor and will also grow labor in new industries that are supplying the innovation products and services.

ONLY if the savings from productivity are returned to the people, which isn't happening now. It's instead going only to the 1% or overseas.

tatupu70 says

ONLY if the savings from productivity are returned to the people, which isn't happening now. It's instead going only to the 1% or overseas.

Not the case with my company. The savings we achieved was put into R&D and our IT suppliers.

People don't just sit on money for shits and giggles. They want to use it to grow more money. The fact that many people are sitting on their money now suggests they don't think the sitting occupant in the White House has fostered an economic climate in America worth investing.

socal2 says

Not the case with my company. The savings we achieved was put into R&D and our IT suppliers.

People don't just sit on money for shits and giggles. They want to use it to grow more money. The fact that many people are sitting on their money now suggests they don't think the sitting occupant in the White House has fostered an economic climate in America worth investing.

No, it means they can't find any investment opportunities worth the risk. Because 50% of the population has almost no disposable income. Without demand, there is no reason to invest in new capacity....

The nonsense about Obama is just partisan BS.

socal2 says

The Blue State model is capable of destroying very prosperous States like Illinois

You realize Illinois has had a Republican in the governor's house for 26 of the last 38 years, right? 68% of the time?

thunderlips11 says

Brownback

Is this guy really called "Brownback"?

tatupu70 says

You realize Illinois has had a Republican in the governor's house for 26 of the last 38 years, right? 68% of the time?

"With the exception of 2010, Illinois Democrats have consistently gained more and more power in every election year in Illinois since the mid-1990s."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_General_Assembly

It was the 1990's when many Blue States started the corrupt practice of pension spiking which is the #1 reason these Cities and States are going bankrupt.

Besides, they have a Republican Governor now who tried to enact pension reform, and he was blocked by the Democrat Legislature and State Supreme Court which is packed with Leftists.

socal2 says

With the exception of 2010, Illinois Democrats have consistently gained more and more power in every election year in Illinois since the mid-1990s."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_General_Assembly

It was the 1990's when many Blue States started the corrupt practice of pension spiking which is the #1 reason these Cities and States are going bankrupt.

Besides, they have a Republican Governor now who tried to enact pension reform, and he was blocked by the Democrat Legislature and State Supreme Court which is packed with Leftists.

Ah, yes. If bad things happen under a Rep. President (or Governor) it's the legislators fault. But if bad things happen under a Rep. Congress, then it's the President's fault.

I forgot that's how things work.

socal2 says

Besides, they have a Republican Governor now who tried to enact pension reform, and he was blocked by the Democrat Legislature and State Supreme Court which is packed with Leftists.

Just like they had a Dem governor that tried pension reform earlier and the courts nixed it.

tatupu70 says

Just like they had a Dem governor that tried pension reform earlier and the courts nixed it.

I'll give Rahm Emmanuel some credit too for trying to reign in the public sector unions in Chicago.

But make no mistake, public sector unions and the pension corruption is the monster the Democrats created.

Italy, for all the snarks of Austrians and Free Marketeers, is one of the top 10 economies in the World; California would be in the top ten if it was an independent state.

Note Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi, famously low tax, low public spending, business friendly states. Note also Kansas as Hungary.

thunderlips11 says

Note Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi, famously low tax, low public spending, business friendly states. Note also Kansas as Hungary.

You moronically state that the only element involved is taxes and regulations. Taint so Lips

" the sitting occupant in the White House has fostered an economic climate"

the fuck does that even mean?

Democrats had a tenuous grip on the reins 2009-2010, and exactly all that time was battling to get out of the Bush recession / hangover of the 2002-2008 happy times of the Bush Bubble.

You know, this:

YOY debt growth / GDP, all sectors

Bellingham Bill says

Democrats had a tenuous grip on the reins 2009-2010, and literally all that time was battling to get out of the Bush recession / hangover of the 2002-2008 happy times of the Bush Bubble.

WTF does that even mean

socal2 says

"Germany’s birth rate has collapsed to the lowest level in the world and its workforce will start plunging at a faster rate than Japan's by the early 2020s, seriously threatening the long-term viability of Europe’s leading economy."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11644660/Germany-dominance-over-as-demographic-crunch-worsens.html

Just in time to replace people with robots and increase quality of life thanks to a less crowded country.

The great benefit of AI will be that we don't need to grow the population to grow the economy.
Economic growth itself will become unneeded, which is good, because there won't be any growth to be had.

Bellingham Bill says

" the sitting occupant in the White House has fostered an economic climate"

the fuck does that even mean?

This for starters.

"White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-size employers until 2016"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-delays-health-insurance-mandate-for-medium-sized-employers-until-2016/2014/02/10/ade6b344-9279-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html

My company is wary of adding personnel because we are not sure what our total labor/benefit costs will be next year. Labor and benefits are half our total operating costs.

socal2 says

My company is wary of adding personnel because we are not sure what our total labor/benefit costs will be next year. Labor and benefits are half our total operating costs.

AKA regime uncertainty, this is a very strong argument. In fact it is how FDR managed to fuck up the economy for 10 years.

indigenous says

AKA regime uncertainty, this is a very strong argument. In fact it is how FDR managed to fuck up the economy for 10 years.

You mean like debt-ceiling gamesmanship, threats to default on federal debt, and spiteful government shutdowns?

Or do those create stability and growth, seeing as they're all so conservitutional?

HydroCabron says

Or do those create stability and growth, seeing as they're all so conservitutional?

I don't think they come close to what FDR or O have done to create regime uncertainty.

indigenous says

. In fact it is how FDR managed to fuck up the economy for 10 years.

I'd love to see the economy fucked up like it was under fdr again.

indigenous says

I don't think they come close to what FDR or O have done to create regime uncertainty.

Any examples for those who don't do praxeology, or just assertion of this as an a priori?

bob2356 says

I'd love to see the economy fucked up like it was under fdr again.

Cherry picking stats I see...

It was called the great depression for a reason, are you saying that it was great?

Excellent reasoning Woggy...

don't have time right now, back later to bitch slap your specious arguments .

indigenous says

bob2356 says

I'd love to see the economy fucked up like it was under fdr again.

Cherry picking stats I see...

It was called the great depression for a reason, are you saying that it was great?

You are right. You said 10 years under fdr and I only provided 9. Perhaps the missing year of 1942 would tell a totally different story. Perhaps there is a pig out there that can whistle.

Are you saying the bottom of the great depression wasn't winter of 1932-33? After that recovery was slow but steady. I think 8 years of growth out of 10 with 4 years of double digits growth is a fucked up economy any country on earth would be glad to have. Your short term memory problems are getting worse. Here is what you said since you obviously don't remember.

indigenous says

. In fact it is how FDR managed to fuck up the economy for 10 years.

Call it Crazy says

Hmmm, the majority in Congress flipped to the Dems in 2006.... Then, when they had the reins in 2009-2010, they decided to jamb Obamacare up our asses INSTEAD of focusing on fixing the economy and jobs....

It's amazing what a socialist can "see" with his rose colored glasses....

and this is why we are currently here:

Great chart with great information that fully illustrates what happens when revenue/expense information is honestly reported. Starting in 2009 the Iraq/Afghanistan wars were finally no longer allowed to be put "off budget." Also the effects of Medicare Part D starts to kick in. Oh, and the government expenses went up as we had to bail out Wall Street beginning in 2009 so as to rescue them again from another round of Austrian "free market" casino culture. Let's not forget the glorious results of off shoring so many jobs that unemployment insurance increased. It must be merely a coincidence that all of these problems with revenue and expenditures started mainly around 2009. Damn that Obama, he should have known back in 2000-2004 when he has a new Chicago city councilman and a member of the Illinois legislature he had a chance to fix this upcoming problem.

bob2356 says

I think 8 years of growth out of 10 with 4 years of double digits growth is a fucked up economy any country on earth would be glad to have.

So there was no Depression?

Call it Crazy says

See ANY change in the trajectory after 6 years?? Want to take a guess where it will be after his next two years?

Yeah, you're kind of right. If we are still stuck with Bush's massive tax cuts of which 90% of those cuts went to the top 5%, funding two unfunded wars we were purposely lied into with exponentially increasing legacy costs, and if we are stuck with Medicare Part D that strictly prohibits price bidding for Medicare drugs, the trajectory will still be going up.

OH! I get it, I hate Obama and think he really stunk up the joint and allowed more government wide corruption on all levels from the city to the state capitols to the national capitol, just fraud and free for all. So since I don't care for Obama, I'm supposed to defend the Republicans that are bad... because Jindal is white...ish and well... just because!!!

indigenous says

bob2356 says

I think 8 years of growth out of 10 with 4 years of double digits growth is a fucked up economy any country on earth would be glad to have.

So there was no Depression?

Your reading skills are deteriorating faster than your short term memory. Let me refresh you.

bob2356 says

Are you saying the bottom of the great depression wasn't winter of 1932-33?

Yes there was a great depression just like I said. It bottomed in 1932-1933. If you could read a graph you would have seen that. You said fdr fucked up the economy for 10 years from 1932-1933. Are you claiming that double digit rises in the gdp are a fucked up economy? Talk about being a idiological drone.

Oh wait I get it, you will "WIN" yet another argument by throwing out meaningless post after meaningless post while dodging any relevant questions. Just another day on patnet.

bob2356 says

You said fdr fucked up the economy for 10 years from 1932-1933.

Again, why did they call it a depression?

Obama's graph would be similar, would you say he has done a good job?

indigenous says

Again, why did they call it a depression?

Hoover called it the great depression years before fdr took office you supercilious twit. Did the economy grow 8 years out of 10, yes or no?

indigenous says

Obama's graph would be similar, would you say he has done a good job?

You're the one posting praises for obmana's economic performance, not me.

bob2356 says

Did the economy grow 8 years out of 10, yes or no?

Listen you supercilious twit, 40 fucking % of the GDP was government spending. The trouble with graphs is that they do not show context i.e. what an asshole FDR was.

Call it Crazy says

... !!

Crap shacks!!!!

I agree.... interesting article??? If the country survives that long, that is...