Public policy matters.
In those 10 years, Texas gained 732,800 private sector jobs, far ahead of the number two and three states, Arizona (90,200) and Nevada (90,000). The nation overall lost more than 2 million private sector jobs, with the biggest losses coming in California (623,700), Michigan (619,200) and Ohio (460,900). …
The lesson of the previous decade seems clear: if you take a previously prosperous and creative state and subject it to high taxes and intrusive regulations, it loses 5% of its private sector jobs; if you take a previously somewhat less prosperous and creative state and govern it with low taxes and light regulation, it gains 9% more jobs, even as the nation’s economy is suffering.
No place is perfect, but the Lone Star State does pretty well.
I’m a bit confused. This site:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
shows the state of California being in better financial shape than Texas, at least per-capita/percentage-wise, etc.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-texas-debt-clock.html
http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-california-debt-clock.html
Does that sound believable?
Or is the right interpretation of that, combined with Mr. Barone’s analysis above, that the trend now favors Texas whereas it didn’t before?