Washington Post Is Gobsmacked That Red States Are Doing Much Better On Job Creation

It couldn’t possibly be that Blue states are very anti-business and create lots of impediments to companies employing people? That Blue state businesses are taking their jobs and moving to Red states? (you can see all the charts at the direct WP link)

Why are red states hiring so much faster than blue states?

We ranked the 50 states by their hiring rates and were swiftly struck by a trend so clear that – if it holds up – should be front-page news: Republican-leaning states are hiring faster than blue states.

Of the 17 fastest-hiring states, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 14 voted for Trump in 2020. The top two Biden-voting states, Georgia and Nevada, are probably best classified as purple (Biden-blue Delaware is the other). The 10 slowest-hiring states all went for Biden.

Have we all missed a hidden red-state resurgence? For every politician who loves to talk about job creation, there are several economists who love to remind us that politics don’t have much influence on the economy. A political split this stark is as rare as a 17-pound potato, and at least as newsworthy.

That said, there are some plausible explanations in this case. Many of the fastest-hiring states – Alaska, Wyoming, Montana and Kentucky – have unusually low tax rates and lean on extractive industries such as mining or petroleum. We’ve seen firsthand the economic boom that gas and pipelines can bring to struggling regions.

Certain outspoken workers in those places often tell reporters that regulation-happy Democrats in Washington are stifling business. And they may be right. Until the booms go bust and the environmental bill comes due, hiring and pay often soar as the gas industry expands.

It must have required a lot of Pepto Bismal to publish this, eh?

But when we delved deeper, confusion seized our synapses. First, we found this isn’t just a matter of pandemic policies or a Trump-era triumph. This set of states has been hiring faster for the entire decade for which we have data.

And now we get into the “let’s find a way to make it seem as if red states aren’t actually better” mode

More perplexingly, we found that faster hiring hasn’t translated to faster job growth. When we ran the payroll numbers, the typical red state wasn’t adding jobs any faster than the typical blue one.

See? Reasons. They have Reasons. But, consider that Blue states just lost 5 House seats, and the outward migration from California and NY continues. Washington and Oregon are starting to see a big trend away. It’s not just people blowing out of Portland and Seattle to the outskirts. The WP can spin it all they want, they can yammer about lower wages in Red states, less unions, etc, but, Red states have much more attractive hiring standards, a lower cost of living, and are more business friendly.

Now we’re kicking the question to you: What else might explain the relationship?

Loony lefty policies.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

One Response to “Washington Post Is Gobsmacked That Red States Are Doing Much Better On Job Creation”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    from the citation:

    Bewildered, we called Nick Bunker, economic research director at the job site Indeed. Bunker is the world’s second-most-prominent fan of job-opening and hiring data, behind only Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen, and he had a ready explanation for the seeming disconnect.

    “It’s churn,” he said. Those red states weren’t creating jobs faster. They were just hiring more often because folks were bouncing around more. Red states don’t have more layoffs or job openings than blue ones, they just have more quits and hires.

Pirate's Cove