Texas Job Growth

Geez, I've lived in Texas since 1983, but was born in California. Didn't realize I was considered an immigrant worker.

This data is useful how, exactly?
 
Skepticemea said:
Isn't that an offensive racial perjorative?
Click to expand...
No. First of all, it was used wrt Mexican Hispanics, an ethnic, not a racial group. Secondly, it's an obsolete term - since the Rio Grande was diverted to create a lake on the Mexican side, from which we were supposed to get half the water but never did, there's hardly any water at all in that creek bed.

Third, it's a joke. Get a life.

Por favor, no es necessario las correcciónes políticas.
 
Last edited:
mhaze said:
No. First of all, it was used wrt Mexican Hispanics, an ethnic, not a racial group. Secondly, it's an obsolete term - since the Rio Grande was diverted to create a lake on the Mexican side, from which we were supposed to get half the water but never did, there's hardly any water at all in that creek bed.

Third, it's a joke. Get a life.

Por favor, no es necessario las correcciónes políticas.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, just asking as I had to look it up (ignorant Brit, y'see).
 
Didn't most of the private sector jobs in Texas come from other states? I seem to recall reading in my Father-in-law's Austin paper (before his Bastrop house burned) that the majority of the job creation in Texas was a net loss to the country since they came from Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, etc. as the companies were able to pay lower labor, and downsize their operations as they moved to Texas.

And then there is that many of the jobs were public sector jobs (Whuddya mean smaller gubmint?). I'd be surprised if those were taken by illegal imigrants.
 
Skepticemea said:
Fair enough, just asking as I had to look it up (ignorant Brit, y'see).
Click to expand...
No problem. But even in joking "wetback" is never heard, it flat obsolete speech.

Bad joke attempt fail on my part come to think of it.
 
LarianLeQuella said:
..... many of the jobs were public sector jobs (Whuddya mean smaller gubmint?). I'd be surprised if those were taken by illegal imigrants.
Click to expand...

Oh, that public sector thing? We've been through that on another thread. Large growth in population, more schools, more teachers, that sort of thing. Lots of folks from New Orleans came here after Katrina, they stayed.

LarianLeQuella said:
Didn't most of the private sector jobs in Texas come from other states? I seem to recall reading in my Father-in-law's Austin paper (before his Bastrop house burned) that the majority of the job creation in Texas was a net loss to the country since they came from Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, etc. as the companies were able to pay lower labor, and downsize their operations as they moved to Texas.
....
Click to expand...
Net loss to the country? I'm not sure what to read into that. Does that mean they went to Texas instead of overseas, or they went to Texas instead of vanishing forever?

One thing I can read into it: Your statement does not as written make logical sense, if a job moves from one state to another that's a classic zero sum game.
 
mhaze said:
Net loss to the country? I'm not sure what to read into that. Does that mean they went to Texas instead of overseas, or they went to Texas instead of vanishing forever?

One thing I can read into it: Your statement does not as written make logical sense, if a job moves from one state to another that's a classic zero sum game.
Click to expand...

As the Austin Statesman said (and I am going from recall here, so forgive inexactness; in-law's house buring down is higher on my list of things to think about than this argument), the jobs were wooed from the other states (so not in danger of going overseas). And the number of jobs that were lost in, say Colorado, were greater than the number of jobs subsequently set up in Texas to do the work (and at lower wages to boot). Not a zero sum game after all.
 
mhaze said:
One thing I can read into it: Your statement does not as written make logical sense, if a job moves from one state to another that's a classic zero sum game.
Click to expand...

No new wealth is created and less wealth flows from the coporation to the workers. Everybody but the greedy drongos who go around looking for an opportunity not to pay a decent wage loses.
 
LarianLeQuella said:
As the Austin Statesman said (and I am going from recall here, so forgive inexactness; in-law's house buring down is higher on my list of things to think about than this argument), the jobs were wooed from the other states (so not in danger of going overseas). And the number of jobs that were lost in, say Colorado, were greater than the number of jobs subsequently set up in Texas to do the work (and at lower wages to boot). Not a zero sum game after all.
Click to expand...

Okay, so we here can do it here in Texas faster, better, cheaper, with fewer people.

Sounds about right. Tough luck, union states. Go cry a river.
 
mhaze said:
Okay, so we here can do it here in Texas faster, better, cheaper, with fewer people.

Sounds about right. Tough luck, union states. Go cry a river.
Click to expand...

If Texas were to secede from the union, not only would I quickly change my opinion regarding making stricter US immigration law changes and a wall on the new southern US border, ...I think I might even advocate for automated gun towers and a heavily mined buffer-kill zone.
 
Trakar said:
If Texas were to secede from the union, not only would I quickly change my opinion regarding making stricter US immigration law changes and a wall on the new southern US border, ...I think I might even advocate for automated gun towers and a heavily mined buffer-kill zone.
Click to expand...
Nice.

That'd be to keep your great unwashed masses IN, right? You'd need them, because we've got jobs for people, NOW. Some 30,000 just in the Eagle Ford oil shale deposit strip in the next two years alone. None of that phony crap about Jobs_From_Washington_Direct..


And when your economy collapsed from goofy, stupid and frivolous wasteful spending, and when you needed some hard cash, we could buy those assets for a penny on the dollar. Might just staff them with Mexicans, just for fun.
 
mhaze said:
Nice.

That'd be to keep your great unwashed masses IN, right?
Click to expand...

No need most of the US's great unwashed masses, live in Texas.

And when your economy collapsed from goofy, stupid and frivolous wasteful spending, and when you needed some hard cash, we could buy those assets for a penny on the dollar. Might just staff them with Mexicans, just for fun.
Click to expand...

LOL, not even approximating reality, but then I wouldn't expect anything else from a true Texican like yourself.
 
I think the reason that 80% of the new jobs created Texas went to immigrants is because the immigrants were willing to work for less.

Those who were hiring could have preferred "native" Texans but rather chose the immigrants instead.

I think this has more to do with cost and profit than education.
 
Last edited:
mhaze said:
No problem. But even in joking "wetback" is never heard, it flat obsolete speech.

Bad joke attempt fail on my part come to think of it.
Click to expand...

Yea, we prefer the term "mojado" instead
 
mhaze said:
Okay, so we here can do it here in Texas faster, better, cheaper, with fewer people.
Click to expand...

In other words, Texas doesn't give a rat's whether working people get fair value for their labor or whether they poison the environment as long as investors get an outlandish return on their inverstments.

Not a model for the nation to follow.
 
Trakar said:
No need most of the US's great unwashed masses, live in Texas.

LOL, not even approximating reality, but then I wouldn't expect anything else from a true Texican like yourself.
Click to expand...
Neither did the question approximate reality, and my answer follows accordingly. Your talk - automated gun towers - my talk - new 30,000 jobs one hour south of here.

I know what kind of talk I'm going with.

;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom