Scott Walker is a Liar.

[wnyerlaughs]

MC and ILNY, the only #'s that REALLY matter, are these:
62,818
28,745

do you know what they are ? se ebelow.

and yes, MC, I will completely concur that Walker wanted to bust the unions stranglehold on their own members.MOST of whom were being forced to pay aginat their will. His objective was to give FREEDOM of choice back to the govt employees who were being a) forced to join a union, and b) having $$ taken directly out of their checks to go to the govt union. oh sure..it might have the net effect of the union and its political clout fading away...but quite obviously, the majority of employees did NOT want the union nor its extortionist tactics.

MC, look at those 2 #'s...because it looks like the govt employees themselves wanted the union busted. If the MAJORITY.... didnt want the govt unions what agenda are YOU on to insist that they are in the wrong? The union wasnt taken away from anyone...gov temployees were simply allowed to have choice.. It looks like it was the (forced) union members themselves who busted the union....by voluntarily leaving. No one forced them to leave the union..it was free will.

an appropriately named link
http://personalliberty.com/2012/06/0...tuns-the-left/

The paramount issue was whether the government could force someone to belong to a union in order to hold a job and deduct union dues from his pay without giving him any say in the matter.

Governor Scott Walker and a Republican majority in the Wisconsin Legislature ended that sweetheart deal for public-sector unions in the State. The results have been catastrophic for the bully boys (and girls) of collective bargaining.

Once the law went into effect, no State employee could be forced to join a union in order to hold a job. Dues would no longer be deducted automatically; employees had to specifically request the deduction of union dues from their paychecks.

Given a choice, guess what happened? Tens of thousands of former union members said “no thanks.” As a result, union membership and dues fell like a safe being dropped out of a window.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) is the second-largest public-sector union in Wisconsin. The largest is the National Education Association.

Prior to the passage of the Walker reforms, AFSCME had 62,818 members in Wisconsin. Six months after the new law took effect, the number had declined to just 28,745 dues-paying members. In other words, once they weren’t forced to be union members, more than 50 percent headed for the doors.

Bryan Kennedy, the president of the American Federation of Teachers in Wisconsin, said that failure to recall Walker “spells doom” for his union. Let’s hope he’s right.

None of this should come as a surprise. Time after time and in State after State, whenever right-to-work laws have replaced compulsory union membership, the results have been the same: More and more workers refuse to support unions. As President Barack Obama’s team will tell you, it takes a heck of a lot of “community organizing” to make up the difference.
-------------------------------
blah blah blah..unemployment CES..etc etc etc. Go aead and argue away the semantic. The reality was that , when GOIVEN THE CHOI
Ce...most of the govt employees did NOT want to be in the union. Hmmm....lets try that in NYS see what happens..give people a CHOICE ?

[Mindcrime]

The method I used?
I simply went to the BLS website to check out your claims of Wisconsins job losses between 3-01-11 to 3-01-12.
And the BLS says you are full of ****.
Here's the link again. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LASST...a_tool=XGtable
This website is updated daily so I'd say these are Current Employment Statistics.
There is nothing there that supports you CES numbers.
So either provide some proof for your claims.
Or I'll just declare game, set, match.

You really are thick. "My CES numbers" come directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, genius. They use 2 different metrics to determine employment, Current Employment Statistics and Current Population Survey. The number you were quoting was the wrong one. More favorable for Walker, but wrong. During the period in question, there was clearly a loss of 5,900 jobs, not the gain you claim. Learn about the information you provide before claiming it's the gospel truth.

Game. Set. Match.

[ILOVEDNY]

You really are thick. "My CES numbers" come directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, genius. They use 2 different metrics to determine employment, Current Employment Statistics and Current Population Survey. The number you were quoting was the wrong one. More favorable for Walker, but wrong. During the period in question, there was clearly a loss of 5,900 jobs, not the gain you claim. Learn about the information you provide before claiming it's the gospel truth.

Game. Set. Match.

So where is your link to these "numbers"?

Foot foul.
You lose.

[WNYresident]

You really are thick. "My CES numbers" come directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, genius. They use 2 different metrics to determine employment, Current Employment Statistics and Current Population Survey. The number you were quoting was the wrong one. More favorable for Walker, but wrong. During the period in question, there was clearly a loss of 5,900 jobs, not the gain you claim. Learn about the information you provide before claiming it's the gospel truth.

Game. Set. Match.

May I have the links so I can see how you came up with this?

[WNYresident]

May I have the links so I can see how you came up with this?

And how is this for a thought. How about making an effort to link to what ever source to sort of verify what your saying.

[ILOVEDNY]

May I have the links so I can see how you came up with this?

Came up with this is the key phrase Res.

I have asked him repeatedly to link me this so called secret employment CES numbers.
I went on the BLS CES site and when sent to Wisconsins stats, I ended up at the same page which I linked.

The only source that mindless uses for his claims are a Christian Science Monitor article.
And when you click on the link you get: Sorry, this page has moved or does not exist.

Now 2 updates to Wisconsins data.
The April jobs growth has gone from prilimarily to factual.
Looks like Wisconsin UE rate went up in May as the prilimarily has been posted.

[Mindcrime]

May I have the links so I can see how you came up with this?

Certainly. Here:
Wisconsin Budget Project
Associated Press

Now, as ILOVEDNY has already illustrated, sources sometimes change after you post them. If someone posts a link and 2 days later it's moved, updated or dead, I have no control over that. Even his own link has changed since he posted it a few days ago.

And here are the revised numbers, from Walker's own Department of Workforce Development:
Department of Workforce Development
Turns out Wisconsin only lost 4,200 jobs. Still pretty impressive, eh Gov. Walker?

[ILOVEDNY]

Well, you did post links so I'll give you that.
Your links still do not prove your numbers.
They prove mine.

Wisconsin budget workshop is the website of the public sector unions.
Just states a bunch of BS with no sourcing for their info.

And of course an AP article.

Now your third link actually sourced some statistics.
And they show almost the exact numbers from my first BLS link.

April 2012 Wisconsin employed numbers.
From BLS 2,863,779
From Wis. Div of labor 2,863,800
So WDL says an additional 21 jobs were added in April.

Now both the BLS and the WDL list Wisconsins May employed number as 2,866,815.
An increase of 3,000 jobs for May.

Once again.
Where is the loss mindless?

[ILOVEDNY]

Now, as ILOVEDNY has already illustrated, sources sometimes change after you post them. If someone posts a link and 2 days later it's moved, updated or dead, I have no control over that. Even his own link has changed since he posted it a few days ago.

A perfect example of libtard so called equivilancy.

The link I posted still works to show the numbers.
It is updated daily so any new information is added.

Your link to a CSM article went buh bye.
Guess some editor flagged it for spewing bogus information.

Yeah. Same thing.

[Mindcrime]

A perfect example of libtard so called equivilancy.

The link I posted still works to show the numbers.
It is updated daily so any new information is added...

If it's constantly changing, using it to argue over what numbers were posted there on a specific day when it's updated daily makes it a bit unreliable as a source, wouldn't you say?

And the info you're looking for is on page 3. Do I need to hold your hand, too?

[ILOVEDNY]

If it's constantly changing, using it to argue over what numbers were posted there on a specific day when it's updated daily makes it a bit unreliable as a source, wouldn't you say?

Actually, Both the LAUS and the CES numbers are revised constantly.
Now lets compare the % of revisions for both methods.

In March 2012, the prelimary employed number for Wis. was 2,856,700.
It was revised upward to 2,856,829. An increase of 129 or a correction of less then .00001%

In April, Prelimary numbers of Wis. employed was 2,863,779.
It was revised upward to 2,863,800. An increase of 27 or a correction of less then .00001%

Now libtards like mindless tell us that the LAUS numbers are bogus.(Even though this is the standard for National employment numbers).
We must only use one dataset called the Place of Work Survey and ignore all others.

Now lets look at how accurate their initial numbers were.
March -4,500 jobs.
March POWS correction + 2,800
Or a correction of +7,300 jobs. A 162% correction. How accurate.

April -5,900 jobs.
March POWS correction -4,200
Or a correction of +1,700 jobs. A 28% correction.

Yet this is the method thats "Accurate".
But even if we use this highly inaccurate method.
It still shows that Wisconsin added 13,900 jobs in the first 4 months of 2012. Or 3,475 new jobs per month.
If Obama was able to have simular results on a National level.
He would have had to create 175,000 new jobs per month to match Wisconsins.

And, using the POWS numbers we see that of those 13,900 new jobs?
1,900 were new Government jobs.
So much for mindless' claim of 17,000+ government job losses.

And the info you're looking for is on page 3. Do I need to hold your hand, too?

No need to hold my hand (anyone have latex gloves?)
You have chosen an employment dataset that is based on surveys opposed to statistics.
From your link.

The BLS monthly place of work data is based on a monthly survey of approximately 5,500 Wisconsin employers
(3.5 percent), called the Current Employment Statistics (CES).

BLS monthly place of residence data is based on Unemployment Insurance claims and a monthly survey of 1,450
Wisconsin households (0.06 percent), called the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS).

Preliminary May totals for LAUS and CES will undergo further revisions in the next several weeks. Revised totals
for all months in 2012 and the second half of 2011 will undergo further refinement during an annual benchmarking
process in early 2013.

The most accurate count of jobs data, the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), is available
through December 2011. This data is based on a census of approximately 96 percent of Wisconsin employers. It
shows net job growth (total nonfarm) of 23,608 in Wisconsin from December 2010 through December 2011.

Funny how Mindless wants to dismiss the LAUS numbers due to constant revisions.
Yet the sole source for his/hers claims come from a chart of just revisions.
But use any metric you want mindless.
Wisconsin is way ahead of the US when it comes to job creation.