Click on the Picture to enlarge
This is one of several charts Sanford handed out to the press after his cabinet meeting last week. After BLS announced SC has the second highest unemployment rate in the nation, the Sanford economic team went into high spin gear, trying to come up with statistics that refuted what everyone knows: South Carolina’s economy is in trouble.
One of their most touted pieces of evidence was that SC’s personal income grew by more than the national average in the first quarter of 2006. Here’s the chart they passed out on this, and it sure looks impressive! Wow! Our personal income looks like it grew three times more than the rest of the country!
Until you look at the actual numbers. (Look especially at the numbers on the left – notice anything unusual?) The other thing, all members of the Sanford team began saying was that the unemployment numbers must be wrong. Maybe it’s because they’re all using the same new math they used for this chart! (This was said at different times by Gillespie, Taylor and Rainey, and Sanford said he would request that a review be done on them, but not until after the election because otherwise it would be political fodder. They already requested a review a year or two ago; it was done and the conclusion was that the numbers are correct.)
This deceptive chart was actually distributed by our Governor and his economic team. Of course only a couple of days later, The State reported on yet more discouraging numbers (Wages drop in most of S.C.; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15131891.htm)
17 comments:
Sanford and everyone working for him has been a joke since day one. I hope he is defeated.
Sanford will win. Get over it!
How many votes/percentage did Oscar Lovelace get again?
Doesn't matter. You and I both know that deep down you know that Sanford will win. You are from the Upstate you know how things work.
Yes I am from the upstate and all my friends up here are Republicans, or rather, people who think they are Republican. They are all unhappy with Sanford. Face it, all of his crazy ideas and political gimmicks have pissed a lot of people off.
Tell me they didn't actually pass that out to the press!!! What a bunch of clowns.
Didn't answre me. Deep down you think Sanford will win right?
No I dont and I will tell you why. Other than a few bloggers and a few anonymous posts like yourself......you guys are the only ones in the last two years that I have heard talk good about our Governor. WEll....I have heard some crazy people who wish to be above the law and not pay their taxes, they have spoken well of Sanford, but thats about it!
If Tommy Moore reaches 1.5 million in fundraising....seal it, stamp it, and deliver it.
If you notice I didn't say anything positive about the gov. I'm not neccessarily a Sanford fan, just a realist. I realize he more than likely win. I say odds are about 85%.
Travis
Seeing that the Gov. didn't dominate in Pickens, Oconee, or Anderson county, and considering Tommy Moore will be able to hold Lexington at bay, and Aiken at bay. It's going to come down to the upstate, if he can hold his own and not get killed up here, Tommy Moore will win.
Looking at everything right now, I say odds are in Sanford's favor. But if T. Moore is able to accomplish a few things which I think he will, I think it will def. be in his favor.
Give the Sanford Spin machine credit now....at least that started the U.S. at the 2nd 1.4 percent instead of the 1st 1.4.
Another interesting point to this is that Sanford previously asserted that non-seasonally adjusted unemployment figures should be used. Yet the BEA numbers this chart is derived from uses seasonally adjusted income data. How convenient.
It is highly dishonest to put any significant portion of the blame upon Governor Sanford.
Anyone who works in economic development or human resources or any related fields will tell you that South Carolina's number one asset or liability for job recruitment and income growth is its workforce.
In a world where 80% of jobs require education beyond high school, but only 25% of our workforce has that level of education, do you really think we can attract new jobs to our state?
This is a long-term problem in our state, and one that has existed for a long time. The majority of the blame rests upon those who opt not to continue their educations, those who fail to encourage their children to have higher aspirations, and those who remain silent.
Too many people just shrug their shoulders and figure we can keep buying off new industry with more tax breaks (corporate welfare) and then give those who earn low wages at these places public assistance (more welfare).
It only lasts so long, and at a high cost to the rest of South Carolina.
If we want to really turn this around, people have to start taking their own lives seriously and work to lead their communities to do better.
Blame it on the Governor all you want, but when you find the same problem is still around after he's gone, what will you tell yourself then?
earl capps,
In any organization, the man at the top is held resonsible for meeting the metrics of the organization. Why should it be any different with the Governor? You and others do an excellent job of making excuses for his failure to meet the metrics of the organization.
Governor Marshall Sanford fails as a leader because he fails to execise that most basic quality of leadership: the ability work with people. (Namely, the Republican State Senators and Representatives who control state government.)
The South Carolina General Assembly needs to be turned around and pointed in the direction of the 21st century. Mark Sanford is simply the wrong person to drive a persuasive shift in the mindset of the General Assembly. He is a poor organizational fit. He refuses to work with others and practice the necessary political compromises to get things done. He effectively criticizes his own political party in his campaign ads. He practices ideology for the sake of idealogy in a manner that disregards the very voters who voted him into office.
Mark Sanford has fractured his own state political party. When he and other Republican leaders jumped on the Karen Floyd bandwagon, to the exclusion of other primary contenders, they effectively squelched any sense of ownership by rank and file Republicans, and motivated a slew of Floyd opponents to jump into the race to openly oppose their own Republican party leadership. To throw full support so early on in the primary election cycle to one candidate, prior to the primary filing deadline, was a strategic blunder.
In the minds of most people, the man at the top does have primary responsibility for the bottom line of the organization. There is little in the way of effective leadership coming from the Governor's office. Any excuse is just an excuse.
Cack:
You didn't read my blog too well. i haven't been a big fan of the Governor either.
Industry doesn't come to much of South Carolina because the work force is piss-poor. That happened because of a conscious decision by too many of our state's population to not puruse their education to a point where they offer anything to an employer.
I do human resources work for a construction company, I also serve on my local workforce investment board. The problems I deal with in terms of potential hires without the requisite skills predates the tenure of Governor Sanford, as well as Hodges before him.
You can choose to politicize the issue all you'd like, but the reality is that much of the problem we face is due to a decision by too many individuals in this state that they don't need to complete a high school education, much less go on to pursue at least a technical education.
The problem we face is not political, so much as it is cultural. Pin it on Mark Sanford all you'd like, but I promise you this problem was here before him, and regrettably will be here after him.
"Industry doesn't come to much of South Carolina because the work force is piss-poor. That happened because of a conscious decision by too many of our state's population to not puruse their education to a point where they offer anything to an employer."
Actually, Earl, I think our history shows that for far too long we created a governmental and economic system that thrived on cheap labor. Hell, that's was our major selling point to draw industry for the whole damn 20th Century. We actively pursued policies that discouraged people from going beyond high school. In fact, it was better for our business "leaders" if people didn't even finish high school, because that keeps the cost of labor down even more. Our government "leaders" were more than happy to oblige by keeping unions out to force better wages for workers.
Tim - you're not too far off the mark. For too long, we did sell ourselves as "cheap labor" and seemed content to do that, when we should have actively worked to take what we could get then, and work our way up.
To sweeten the pot, we offered corporate welfare, in the way of fee in lieu and other incentives, and then welfare (food stamps, medicaid, housing, etc.) to those who would work.
It was a win-win. Companies got cheap unskilled labor, and people believed the status quo would keep their bills paid. And nobody felt the need to change a thing - let 'em stay dumb and we can get them hired cheap.
The problem we've run into is that many countries have unskilled workforces who can do what our unskilled workforce can, but for a lot less.
For years, we dismissed warnings about nations like India had higher math and science test scores. But given the number of IT jobs being outsourced there, maybe the critics had a point after all?
Now we're paying the price: higher unemployment, lower incomes, increased costs of social assistance programs to meet those gaps, and greater social problems.
It will get worse before it gets better.
Our leaders need to have the courage to tell people the hard truth. Then we have to figure out how to transform our workforce into something far more competitive than it is now.
I believe it will take a radical approach. An excellent example is in the GI Bill. The flooding of American colleges after WWII resulted in a massive boom in the 50s and 60s in terms of technological advances and productivity. We have to do that here - figure out how we can at least double the number of South Carolinians who hold at least a one-year technical certificate or associate's degree.
If you consider the long-term tangible benefits, it will pay for itself. But the intangible human benefits for people who can provide for their families without government assistance and set an example for their children to follow, and of stable communities who can rest assured they can attract and keep good employers are important as well.
But the reality is that we all have a role to play - that's why I got my GED, then my Bachelor's and then to grad school, as well as serve on my local WIA board. As a parent, I set a higher standard, and as a citizen, I work to address these concerns.
I'm doing my part, but how many others are?
Post a Comment