Comparative Employment Growth in California and Wisconsin

Both Governors Brown and Walker are coming to the end of their second terms. Time to appraise how their respective economies have fared, in terms of employment.


Figure 1 Log nonfarm payroll employment for California (blue), Wisconsin (red), and US (black), all normalized to 2011M01=0. Rank is rank by ALEC Laffer-Moore-Williams Rich States, Poor States, 2017 Economic Outlook ranking. Source: BLS via FRED, RSPS 2017, and author’s calculations.

Note that employment growth has risen much faster in 47th ranked California than 14th ranked Wisconsin, according to ALEC’s Rich States, Poor States, 2017, in terms of policies that foster economic growth. See this post for more on the correlation (or lack thereof) between the ALEC-Laffer ranking and economic performance.

54 thoughts on “Comparative Employment Growth in California and Wisconsin

  1. Moses Herzog

    I’ve probably shared on here before that Jerry Brown was my very first vote for a President as a young man back in 1992. Even back then I strongly suspected Jerry Brown was a homosexual. I don’t know if that’s ever been confirmed publicly, but I still strongly suspect he is, or possibly even a “switch hitter”. I wanted to vote for Paul Tsongas but because of the extremely prohibitive ballot laws in my state Tsongas failed to get on the ballot by the deadline. Tsongas died 5 years after that vote was held. Brown was also talking about things I cared about at that time, so I didn’t care what Jerry Brown did behind closed doors ‘cuz he struck me as a “sharp cookie” and that was enough.

    One of the more “complex” guys you’ll see in the political realm. Something tells me he won’t completely “fade away”. He’s got too much rambunctious in him and orneriness in him to just go out sheepish like.
    https://goo.gl/images/fnNxLL

    https://goo.gl/images/VTr3t6

    https://goo.gl/images/8a7Stf

  2. pgl

    I was curious what “rank” meant but then it is defined as:

    “Rank is rank by ALEC Laffer-Moore-Johnson Rich States, Poor States, 2017 Economic Outlook ranking.”

    I’m sure Stephen Moore is mining the data to figure out a different starting point other than 2011. And his political masters have given him an RA to do the dirty work.

  3. PeakTrader

    Wisconsin job growth is constrained by full employment, given its low unemployment rate and high labor force participation rate.

    California is still catching up. However, it’s been noted, a lot of people are in college, rather than the workforce, and a lot of people get on disability.

    California is very aggressive collecting state taxes. It’s a further transfer of payments from people who work to people who don’t work.

    1. Bruce Hall

      I noticed your point after I posted mine. Same thoughts. I’m not sure what constitutes “full employment” for California vs. Wisconsin, but I’d have to say that there is less “wiggle room” for Wisconsin than California. Wisconsin was never a “growth” state, but there is something to be said for economic stability when it equates to prosperity rather than poverty. http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/jan/20/chad-mayes/true-california-has-nations-highest-poverty-rate-w/

      When looking at the Supplemental Poverty Measure by state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_poverty_rate
      – California 23.8% (raw 16.4%)
      – Wisconsin 10.8% (raw 13.2%)

      1. PeakTrader

        In California, mostly middle class natives move to other states, while it attracts high skilled and low skilled immigrants, along with high skilled workers from other states. I noticed, a large number Californians moved to Colorado in the ‘90s, until housing prices went way up.

        1. Barkley Rosser

          PT,

          You have rhe data on population wrong. Since 2010, CA’s population has been growing at 5.9% per year, while Wisconsin’s has been growing at only 1.9% per year. Unemployment rate in CA is 4.4% and 3.1 % in Wisconsin. Clearly CA has needed (and has gotten) more job growth. People are not moving go Wisconsin. Sorry to bust your story, but as usual, you are just plain wrong.

          1. PeakTrader

            BR, you don’t know what you’re talking about. For example, California’s population growth is less than 1% a year. And, the difference in growth rates supports my statement.

          2. pgl

            Barkley – PeakyBoo gets his data from Fox & Friends. We get our data from official sources that Peaky would call “Fake News”.

          3. Barkley Rosser

            I was partly wrong. Data source is US Census, https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/demo/popest/state-total.html , which also is what is reported in Wikipedia if you google “Population growth rates by state. So, the rates are for the entire period between April 1, 2010 and July 1, 2017. California was 17th among states in its rate of population growth during that period at 6,13 percent. Wisconsin was at 39th among states in its rate of population growth, which was 1.91 percent for that entire period.

            So, you are right, PT, that the annual population growth rate of California has been less than 1 percent, but it is also the case that its population growth rate has substantially exceeded that of Wisconsin, which is the issue at hand, with CA having a growth rate above the national average, while Wi has had a growth rate below the national average.

            That is the bottom line, PT. You have been spouting nonsense, as usual.

      2. 2slugbaits

        I can think of a few other differences. The most obvious is the difference between MEDIAN household income:
        CAL: $63,783
        WIS: $54,610

        California is also quite a bit younger than Wisconsin. Percent of population 65 or older:
        CAL: 13.6%
        WIS: 16.1%

        California’s percent that is younger than age 18 is greater than the national average. Wisconsin’s is less than the national average. In other words, Wisconsin is an aging state. Not exactly a recipe for long run growth.

        And people aren’t exactly fighting to live in Wisconsin. Since 2010 Wisconsin’s population has only increased 1.9% while California’s increased by 6.1%.

        And to pgl’s point, if PeakTraitor’s explanation is true, then why didn’t Gov. Walker take account of this apparently predictable fact before he promised all those jobs??? Is Walker just stupid or economically illiterate?

        PeakTraitor I noticed that you didn’t post yesterday, but then I recalled that it was election day in Russia and you were probably out stuffing ballot boxes for Putin. But now it’s back to work at the old troll farm.

          1. 2slugbaits

            I read a lot of history, so I know all of the strongman holidays. The 8th of November comes up a lot. That’s the date that Napoleon staged a coup (18th of Brumaire in the Revolutionary calendar). It’s the date that his nephew Napoleon III seized power. It’s the date that Lenin and the Bolsheviks took power. And don’t forget Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch. And oh…it’s also the day that Trump “won” the election. Coincidence???

    2. spencer

      Funny about that, Peak Trader. But in case after case the data seems to say that states that give to those that do not work seem to do better than states where policy
      is to transfer income upward. Maybe you need to reexamine your priors.

      1. PeakTrader

        Which states transfer income from the poor to the rich Spencer?

        California has a big tourism and high tech industry. Also, people are attracted to the big cities, where there are more opportunities. California attracts enormous wealth and highly skilled workers from the rest of the country and the world. Moreover, it has great weather and scenery. However, the poor and much of middle class suffer, particularly when they don’t own a home, given the high cost of living. And, of course, the State shakes down many of the working class for more money. They’ll need to get a second job just to survive and pay for those who don’t want to work. Living standards are very poor for a huge percentage of the population.

        1. pgl

          “the State shakes down many of the working class for more money.”

          You truly excel in right wing BS. Trump should take lessons from you.

          1. noneconomist

            Exactly how, PT, does the state shake down the working class and the poor for more money? Examples?

          2. PeakTrader

            California is very aggressive collecting state taxes. You’ll get a letter stating you owe taxes from five years ago, your bank account will be drained, and the penalties, interest, and fees will be exorbitant. Of course, most people don’t keep records, at least for long. So, they just pay off the bill. I didn’t know how prevalent it was till it happened to me and five out of five co-workers I talked to, and all my relatives in California, had the same thing happen to them at one time or another – some over multiple years. Also, a friend moved to another state and California drained his bank account, because it was opened in California, and wanted him to pay a big bill, for not paying enough in taxes many years ago, although he wasn’t living in California. It’s up to you to dispute it, with proof, while California shoots first and asks questions later. I suspect, people who earn tips are most vulnerable. Anyway, it’s much more aggressive than other states and I wonder if it’s a scam.

          3. PeakTrader

            If I recall correctly, the state drained my bank account before I received the letter saying I owe taxes. I had to agree to make monthly payments to get my money back into the account. The letter was just about what I owed, in taxes, penalties, interest, etc.. It didn’t say what income I didn’t pay taxes on.

    3. pgl

      “Wisconsin job growth is constrained by full employment”.

      If this were true – Scott Walker’s claim that his tax cuts would work employment magic were always bogus. Ah Peaky – your attempt at defending conservative spin falls woefully short.

    1. pgl

      Of course they may be a demographics issue here if old people choose not to endure Wisconsin’s winters.

      1. Bruce Hall

        Net migration from Wisconsin to California in 2016 was 524 people. Doesn’t look like winters are much of an issue. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/geographic-mobility/2016/state-to-state-migration/State_to_State_Migrations_Table_2016.xls

        California has an advantage in overall climate. Wisconsin has an overall advantage in affordability.
        https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/CA,WI/PST045217,PST045216

        Back to the original subject of employment growth… my comment is above comparing labor participation rates and unemployment rates.

      2. Jake formerly of the LP

        pgl hits on some of this. Wisconsin’s cold weather is already a drawback for adding population. But then add in a regressive, anti-education governor like Walker along with subpar job growth, and it means WIsconsin was 46th in the nation for population growth of people 18-24 in the last year.

        The demographic problems make Walker’s policies even worse- if the point of those policies are to grow the economy. If they’re to drive away talented people who might be inclined to vote Democrat and have a more progressive state, then maybe it’s working.

  4. dilbert dogbert

    I think it unfair to compare Kali with WI. It is also fun. Keep it up. Give us more on Kansas and Oklahoma. The other states it is fun to compare to Kali.
    When Kali returns to its historic link to the Republican party there will be such a Yuge burst of economic growth that will be unbelievably awesome.

  5. Lord

    Due no doubt to all those unemployed Californians moving to Wisconsin, they would have you believe. Where are borders when you need them?

        1. noneconomist

          You do realize there are differences,, in a state as large as California, huge differences? It’s only a couple of hours from Bakersfield to Santa Barbara or from San Diego to Barstow or from Newport Beach to just about anywhere inland. Doesn’t take too long to go from Carmel to Coalinga or from Monterrey to Stockton. The differences are quite noticeable and dramatic.

        2. Menzie Chinn Post author

          Bruce Hall: Amazing I survived those six years living in the hellhole that is the SF Bay Area, and those trip to the City… Next visit, I’ll bring my kevlar vest, biohazard suit and respirator.

          1. Bruce Hall

            I go to San Francisco every year to visit my son’s family. His wife works for Google and he is an engineering consultant and expert witness in lawsuits. They live in the Mission District and rent because they can’t afford to buy a house, pay their taxes, and raise two children on their combined salaries of on the plus side of $300K. There are human feces and needles around the neighborhood. The homeless are everywhere. Yes, the climate is nice and the vistas beautiful. Just don’t get too close.

            Every year when he comes to visit us in Michigan he agonizes over the same thing: how well they could live on their incomes here. Home
            prices are roughly $1,000/s.f. in San Francisco and $150/s.f. here. For the $2 million to get 2,000 s.f. or so in a nice neighborhood in San Francisco, they could have 6-7,000 s.f., lots of property, and throw in an indoor pool. But then their kids might have to put up with lousy educations at the University of Michigan.

  6. Ed Hanson

    The RSPS rankings and forecast are general in nature. They readily identify individual state exceptions. RSPS is also honest in their treatment of states, politically, which might be difficult for some to see because of the states which change policies in the direction advocated by RSPS are generally republican. But reading RSPS will show they are equally critical of republicans as they are to democrats when RSPS sees policies changes detrimental to the people of a state.

    Is California an exception to RSPS forecast. Certainly its RSPS economic ranking of 29th (2005-2015) seems to show an exception to RSPS forecast. It is not a great number but certainly better than Wisconsin’s rank of 40 (2005-2015). But keep in mind the rankings above are past performance and the Rankings 14 and 47 are for future performance. It is not all rosy for California. It is losing population to the rest of the country. Enough that the 2020 Census will possibly cause a loss of one House seat.

    I have always considered California as a high tax state. but I found this website created by the RSP folks that make me wonder. Try it yourself, it shows the expected tax cost per year if you move from one state to another assuming your income remains the same. Plug in California and you can also see a map of the cost to go to any other state. I found that until you reached extremely high income California is quite competitive. Even more so if you are filing joint. One point, the numbers reflect 2013 so are becoming somewhat out of date.

    http://www.savetaxesbymoving.com/

    The RSPS puts a lot of effort in tax analysis, and it should be appreciated. But I think they need to be more careful about the use of top marginal income rate. More consideration to the income bracket it is attached to. But since it must be remembered the direction of RSPS ranking is forward looking and general in nature , I will continue to appreciate the work done by them.

    Ed

    1. noneconomist

      You’re not far off here, Ed. I’ve used this example previously, but it’s worth stating again.
      Joint filers in California with a TAXABLE income of $100,000 (about $32,000 above current household median) would owe $4115 in state income tax. But it gets better. You then subtract two personal exemptions ($114 each). Total tax owed: $3887, a n effective rate of 3.887% Seniors get an additional two exemptions, reducing tax owed and rate even more.
      The rate for a single filer on that same income is 6.54%
      In “low tax” Utah, where a flat 5% income tax is levied on all incomes, that same couple filing jointly would owe $5000 or another $1113 after exemptions. They would also owe more in both Oregon and “low tax” Idaho because higher marginal rates kick in on much lower incomes.
      One other significant California advantage: long time homeowners enjoy relatively low property taxes. Newer home buyers purchasing in the current market are not so lucky.

    2. Bruce Hall

      You have to be a little careful with these simple calculators. In Michigan, as a senior, much of my income from pensions/annuities are exempt from state taxes so my effective rate is less than 0.3%. This would not be considered in such a simple calculator.

      And then you have to look at city taxes and property taxes.

      1. 2slugbaits

        Right. And sales taxes, and school district surtaxes on base income taxes, and car license fees, and fuel taxes. A long time ago I was stationed in Texas. No income taxes. But you get what you pay for. I quickly realized that only native Texans love Texas.

      2. noneconomist

        However, Bruce, looking at marginal income tax rates for the non-retired, California is a step ahead of many states regarded as low tax. In California, the marginal 6% rate applies when taxable income for joint filers exceeds $60,000. That’s far above Georgia ($10,000) Idaho ($11,600) Iowa ($13,900) Mississippi ($10,000) Oklahoma ($12,200) South Carolina ($11,600) and Wisconsin ($29,000). And numerous others as well.
        Those who have “escaped” to Oregon and who haven’t done their homework are shocked to find their income tax bill to be considerably higher. The 7% marginal rate kicks in at below $4,000.
        Californians seeking to avoid state income tax seem to congregate in Nevada–mostly western Nevada– where there is no state income tax, where returning to family doesn’t require airline tickets or prolonged drives.
        California does tax pensions/annuities but does not, as some states still do, tax Social Security benefits.

      3. Ed Hanson

        nonec

        Extending Bruce Hall’s comments a little, something needs to explain the reduction of relative population. One such small input, even after taxes, someone with that $100,000 taxable income would be better off in Utah due to lower cost of living and lower other non-income taxes.

        Did you try plugging in numbers in that neat moving tax calculator. I did, the simplest but not quite you example of 100,000 gross income joint filer, and 45 years old returned a saving of $748 for the Utahan. Plug in you best number. you will find it an interesting algorithm.

        Ed

        1. noneconomist

          No doubt, Ed, cost of living overall in Utah is less. You don’t have to convince me of that.
          My comments, however, concerned income tax and how those with middle class incomes in California generally pay lower rates than those in states often thought to be “low tax.” (I also referred to TAXABLE income, not gross income’ Last I saw, average deductions in California ranged near $20,000 with the standard deduction for joint filers at around $8,500)
          Stereotypes that portray California as a high income tax state FOR EVERYBODY are misleading, as I have attempted to show. I’ve had discussions with former colleagues, neighbors, and friends who honestly believe they’re paying the top California tax rate (13%) on incomes similar to mine. If so, their tax preparers are pocketing lots of money, and if they’re preparing they’re own taxes, God help them.
          I have plenty of above average expenses compared to friends and relatives in other states, but excessively high state income tax isn’t one of them. Nor, as I mentioned before, are high property taxes. I’ll take the breaks where I can get them.

          1. Ed Hanson

            nonec

            Which is why I said to put your own numbers in, depends on your determination of above line deductions.Now I said the top marginal rate can be overemphasized. But here you go overemphasizing the average tax rate. And a s most lefties I known, they love highly progressive taxes as long as the gin the system so it effects them little.

            Ed

          2. noneconomist

            What AVERAGE tax rates did I overemphasize? I showed the differences between taxes owed on a $100,000 TAXABLE income by joint filers in California and Utah. (There’s no mention of average income or average rates. I previously mentioned the California median, which is quite a bit below that $100,000 example. I did mention average deductions which would affect a final taxable income).
            The simple fact is: income tax rates for middle income earners in California are lower than those of middle income earners in Utah (and Oregon and Idaho and Montana and South Carolina and Georgia and plenty of other states as well). That they live in a state that is more expensive overall is not in dispute. In your relatively insular world, I suppose that somehow explains how lefties–especially middle class ones–have somehow “ginned” the system by paying the taxes they owe.

    3. Bellanson

      Are you sure that California is losing population to the rest of the country. If that is true how come the population is growing? Could you elaborate on that. As to Ed Hanson’s Comment about the cost of moving from California, one should also consider the probability that moving from California to most other states would entail a reduction in income, since salaries and cost are higher in California than most other states

      1. Ed Hanson

        Bell

        Just ask Menzie, if you don’t want to look up the prevalent resources on the web which confirms California relative population change. Menzie has posted elsewhere a newspaper article saying the same, and possibly even more.

        Ed

  7. Moses Herzog

    @ Menzie
    I usually cherish and treasure these big data sets on blogs you can get for free—white papers, pdf books, and things such as this RSPS book. And I always try to make extra sure to say THANK YOU to the blog host or book author or whoever who was kind and gracious enough to offer educational materials for free to people. To let them know their generosity didn’t go unappreciated. But it’s mysterious and slightly spooky—my computer starts off with the dry heaves, and then it even seems to sound like liquid is gurgling something of oatmeal consistency in the PC speakers and it’s gagging whenever I try to DL anything authored or co-authored by Arthur Laffer.

    Strange, I guess I’m gonna have to take it to the Apple store……. er something.

  8. pgl

    Maybe it comes to down to who would you cheer for if the Packers played the Raiders in the SuperBowl. Not that either team will be in Hotlanta in a few months but if they were – “go Raiders” (oh my prediction – the Falcons get there and finally get their owner taking in his new “living room” as they finally crush pretty boy Brady).

  9. Neil

    Is there anything to read into the fact that average hourly earnings are growing much more rapidly in Wisconsin than in California?

Comments are closed.