(09-24-2012 11:28 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Because I know that those same states pay far more into the federal government than they receive, which really is the main issue.

No, you don't know that. First of all, states don't pay more to the federal government than they receive. People and businesses domiciled in those states might, but states don't. What you know is that someone has prepared some charts and graphs purporting to show that people in some states pay in more than they get back, and some get back more than they pay in, but you don't really know what's in those numbers unless the people preparing those charts and graphs have explained their methodology.

Case in point, take a company based in NY but doing business in all 50 states, are its taxes (on income clearly earned in all 50 states) counted as income from NY or allocated among all 50 states? And if allocated among all 50 states, on what basis?

There are plenty more. For example, are payments to purchase goods and services distinguished from handouts? If so, how?

Then produce something which refutes my statement, because simply saying 'well, maybe, that isn't the case, possibly' isn't really compelling.

(09-24-2012 11:28 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Is this federal or state welfare? Because I know that those same states pay far more into the federal government than they receive, which really is the main issue.

Not when you try to lump together soldiers with welfare recipients.

"See that guy there? He's an E4 making 24K a year to serve his country and perhaps go off to war"

"See that guy there? He's in line for his Obama-dollars"

Yea Totally the same thing..

They're both coming out of my pocket, so yes they are.

(09-25-2012 12:07 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  They're both coming out of my pocket, so yes they are.

No, they are not, because one (the soldier) is rendering something of value in return whereas the other is not.

A bank employee and a bank robber both get money from the same place, the bank. But one renders a useful service in return whereas the other does not. They are not the same thing.

At some point in that response did you think 'argumentum ad absurdum' or are you just completely oblivious to that concept entirely?

(09-25-2012 12:45 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  At some point in that response did you think 'argumentum ad absurdum' or are you just completely oblivious to that concept entirely?

Logic has never been your strong point. You're back and you've already made at least 3 mistakes.

(09-25-2012 12:07 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  They're both coming out of my pocket, so yes they are.

That is moronic and just plain ignorant.

http://www.cinewsnow.com/news/local/Peor...67001.html

CHICAGO, Ill -- The August local unemployment rate fell in 11 metro areas in Illinois compared to last year, according to the Illinois Department of Employment Security.

"This economic cycle is filled with small up-and-down movements in the monthly data, and August shows falling unemployment rates in nearly every corner of our state," IDES Director Jay Rowell said.

News Now Digital Daily - subscribe to our daily News Now Digital Daily - subscribe to our daily newsletter newsletter

"While the uneven movements shadow the progress we have made, stronger economic growth will occur when consumer confidence improves," Rowell continued.

Bloomington-Normal and Peoria both saw decreases in their unemployment rate from last year. Bloomington-Normal fell from 7.8 percent in August of 2011 to 7.3 percent this year. Peoria's unemployment rate dropped one percentage point to sit at eight percent.

Peoria saw the largest increase in non-farm jobs, gaining approximately 4,200 jobs. Bloomington-Normal has also gained apporximately 1,500 jobs from August 2011.

Good for those metro areas. Your overall state is still a hell hole.

(09-27-2012 07:56 PM)Max Power Wrote:  http://www.cinewsnow.com/news/local/Peor...67001.html

CHICAGO, Ill -- The August local unemployment rate fell in 11 metro areas in Illinois compared to last year, according to the Illinois Department of Employment Security.

"This economic cycle is filled with small up-and-down movements in the monthly data, and August shows falling unemployment rates in nearly every corner of our state," IDES Director Jay Rowell said.

News Now Digital Daily - subscribe to our daily News Now Digital Daily - subscribe to our daily newsletter newsletter

"While the uneven movements shadow the progress we have made, stronger economic growth will occur when consumer confidence improves," Rowell continued.

Bloomington-Normal and Peoria both saw decreases in their unemployment rate from last year. Bloomington-Normal fell from 7.8 percent in August of 2011 to 7.3 percent this year. Peoria's unemployment rate dropped one percentage point to sit at eight percent.

Peoria saw the largest increase in non-farm jobs, gaining approximately 4,200 jobs. Bloomington-Normal has also gained apporximately 1,500 jobs from August 2011.

Just curious if people are moving away (to Texas). Or falling out of the gov't defined unemployment category.

Illinois unemployment rate still down 2.5% since early 2010--

http://touch.chicagotribune.com/#story/c...-20120927/




11 of 12 metro areas in Illinois see falling unemployment rates (though deep red rural areas may not be doing so hot):

Metro area unemployment rates August 2012, compared to August 2011:

Bloomington-Normal -- 7.3% from 7.8%
Champaign-Urbana -- 8.8% from 9.3%
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville -- 8.8% from 10.5%
Danville -- 11.0% from 11.1%
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island -- 7.2% from 7.5%
Decatur -- 11.4% from 11.2%
Kankakee-Bradley -- 11.4% from 12.4%
Lake-Kenosha -- 8.8% from 9.4%
Peoria -- 8.0% from 9.0%
Rockford --11.7% from 13.8%
Springfield -- 7.9% from 8.0%
St. Louis (Illinois section) -- 9.4% from 10.1%

Source: Illinois Department of Employment Security

Jobs are being added. We don't know about migration until the census.

http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/Sh...cNum=10570

CHICAGO – Illinois added +9,600 jobs in August and the unemployment rate inched up 0.2 percentage points to 9.1 percent, according to preliminary data released today by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES). The data is seasonally adjusted.

“A pattern developed last year of slowing job growth in the summer months followed by lower unemployment rates after school re-opened in the fall,” IDES Director Jay Rowell said. “As we head into winter, the economic uncertainty caused by Congressional inaction threatens this recovery. Waiting to the last minute to make serious decisions unnecessarily undermines consumer and business confidence and hinders economic growth.”

Total private-sector employment grew by +9,000 jobs in August, boosted primarily by gains in Educational and Health Services and Leisure and Hospitality. Although the entire Government sector added +600 jobs in August, Local Government added +1,300 because classes resumed after summer vacation. Manufacturing employment gains remained steady (+700) and continues a more rapid growth rate in 2012 compared to previous year gains. From January through August of this year, manufacturing employment has expanded by +18,900 jobs.

Illinois added +151,200 private sector jobs since January 2010 when job growth returned to Illinois following nearly two years of consecutive monthly declines. Leading growth sectors are Professional and Business Services (+75,000); Manufacturing (+44,900); and Educational and Health Services (+37,700). Government has lost the most jobs since January 2010, down -34,300.

(09-25-2012 12:05 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-24-2012 11:28 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Is this federal or state welfare? Because I know that those same states pay far more into the federal government than they receive, which really is the main issue.

Not when you try to lump together soldiers with welfare recipients.
"See that guy there? He's an E4 making 24K a year to serve his country and perhaps go off to war"
"See that guy there? He's in line for his Obama-dollars"
Yea Totally the same thing..

I agree it's not the same thing but I don't think the difference is all that relevant. The country gets the same benefit from the soldier regardless of where he is located. The states that have military bases also benefit economically from the soldier. It wasn't the prestige of having military bases in their districts which required Congress to create an independent commission to shut military bases. If tax dollars from California are paying for soldiers in South Carolina, and if those soldiers are spending their money in South Carolina, how is South Carolina not benefitting at the expense of California?

I don't believe federal government spending helps the national economy. The money it spends is either taken out of the national economy or created out of thin air. But it can help a state economy if it puts back more money than it takes out. That the spending might be on a completely legitimate federal government function is irrelevant in examining its economic effect.

(09-27-2012 08:00 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Good for those metro areas. Your overall state is still a hell hole.

The Southern part of the state hasn't been great for a while, this recession (and / or president if you want to argue that) isn't to blame for it. Cairo, East St. Louis, etc.. are and have been on the decline for 50 years. That's a completely separate issue from what's going on now. The farming communities, outside of this recent drought are doing better, but the population's there are so low, it's obviously not a huge factor.

A comment like this makes me believe you've just never even been to my state. I've traveled extensively throughout this country, and it's laughable to suggest Illinois is a shithole when you go to other states. You can suggest our state budget is a mess, or argue the future isn't bright due to that budget and pension plans, but there here and now, IL is not a **** hole by any means. It's a great place to be.

(09-28-2012 12:00 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(09-27-2012 08:00 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Good for those metro areas. Your overall state is still a hell hole.

Cairo, East St. Louis, etc.. are and have been on the decline for 50 years. That's a completely separate issue from what's going on now.

Same root cause though.

Quote:A comment like this makes me believe you've just never even been to my state. I've traveled extensively throughout this country, and it's laughable to suggest Illinois is a shithole when you go to other states.

Not in the least. And I've spent quite a bit of time in IL, as well as many other states.

(09-28-2012 12:30 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-28-2012 12:00 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(09-27-2012 08:00 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Good for those metro areas. Your overall state is still a hell hole.

Cairo, East St. Louis, etc.. are and have been on the decline for 50 years. That's a completely separate issue from what's going on now.

Same root cause though.

Quote:A comment like this makes me believe you've just never even been to my state. I've traveled extensively throughout this country, and it's laughable to suggest Illinois is a shithole when you go to other states.

Not in the least. And I've spent quite a bit of time in IL, as well as many other states.

What cause would that be? A decrease in dependency on rivers for commerce?

Nobody asked you.

(09-28-2012 12:37 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-28-2012 12:30 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-28-2012 12:00 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(09-27-2012 08:00 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Good for those metro areas. Your overall state is still a hell hole.

Cairo, East St. Louis, etc.. are and have been on the decline for 50 years. That's a completely separate issue from what's going on now.

Same root cause though.

Quote:A comment like this makes me believe you've just never even been to my state. I've traveled extensively throughout this country, and it's laughable to suggest Illinois is a shithole when you go to other states.

Not in the least. And I've spent quite a bit of time in IL, as well as many other states.

What cause would that be? A decrease in dependency on rivers for commerce?

Nobody asked you.

Pro tip: Saying "Nobody asked you" isn't a particularly effective argument when it's immediately preceded by you asking that same person two questions.