| Author | Message | ||
     Reindog |
Has anyone else heard of this guy? This was in the WSJ opinion section today. Mr. Fortuno is the Governor of Puerto Rico and there is nothing precluding him being the Vice-Presidential nominee. Yeah I know, Republicans hate black people and Hispanic people. Yawn. Fortuno favors the GOP | ||
| Pwnzor |
And he's not Marco Rubio. Second line of the article. Did I miss something? What's wrong with Rubio? | ||
| Hootowl |
Because the author thought people might think he/she was talking about Marco Rubio. | ||
| Hootowl |
They should have said, "No, I'm not talking about Marco Rubio." | ||
| Pwnzor |
ohhhhhh, I get it. | ||
| Slaughter |
I wanna see his birth certificate. Not a certificate of live birth. (joke) | ||
| Buellkowski |
Thanks, Reindog. I'd never heard of Mr. Fortuņo before. Interesting that his party (NPP) is a pro-statehood one. There are many images of the mass protests his fiscal policies have triggered in Puerto Rico. Putting tens of thousands of public employees out of work during a recession may win him Tea Party street cred, but perhaps not center-right soccer mom votes. Unemployment in PR took a big jump since he took office. Currently stands at 16.1%. Might be an election liability.  | ||
| Sifo |
Looks to me like unemployment took a jump when BO got elected. Or is unemployment only tied to governors of individual states and territories? Certainly it CAN'T be BO's fault.  No doubt BO would take credit if the rate fell though. | ||
| Buellkowski |
As I stated, Fortuņo's administration slashed tens of thousands of public jobs. Certainly, that had much to do with the unemployment rate. Was PR's economy in trouble when Fortuņo took those steps? Yes. Could the resulting anecdotes and images prove to be problematic to a potential vice-presidential campaign? I think so, and that was my point. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I wouldn't think that 20,000 government employees would create a 5% increase in unemployment. | ||
| Sifo |
As I stated, Fortuņo's administration slashed tens of thousands of public jobs. Certainly, that had much to do with the unemployment rate. Seems that he laid off 8,000 in May '09 and another 30,000 after September. http://www.businessinsider.com/puerto-rico-to-anno unce-more-government-layoffs-2009-9
Total of about 38K workers. How much did that affect the unemployment rate? Looking at your chart - almost none. The spike in unemployment happened in 2008 and the first half of 2009. Could the resulting anecdotes and images prove to be problematic to a potential vice-presidential campaign? I think so, and that was my point. Only for those who are dishonest or uninformed. | ||
| Buellkowski |
I heard a lot of sniping during the Republican presidential candidate debates about which candidate produced more jobs in their state while in office. It's important to voters. How will Fortuņo answer those questions in a vice-presidential debate? What images will the Dems conjure up to cast doubt on his track record? It's these points of "electability" I'm trying to raise. Since you don't seem convinced about my arguments against a Fortuņo spot on the GOP ticket, why not give us your arguments for his candidacy? | ||
| Buellkowski |
As for unemployment figures, try to think about how laying off 30,000 workers might affect the employment prospects of the other local workers who used to serve those 30,000. | ||
| Hootowl |
How about the tax dollars that won't have to be collected from working folks to pay those 30,000 state employees? Article says one in three people was employed by the government in 2008. That's two people paying taxes to support one other person. That's nuts. Any thinking person should see the unsustainability of that. Yes, I made up a word. | ||
| Sifo |
I heard a lot of sniping during the Republican presidential candidate debates about which candidate produced more jobs in their state while in office. If a governor can point to a track record that differs from the national average then they can make that claim. In this case it trends right along with the national average (higher than the national average, but the same trends). He seems to have done no better or worse than average on the issue of unemployment.  How will Fortuņo answer those questions in a vice-presidential debate? What images will the Dems conjure up to cast doubt on his track record? It's these points of "electability" I'm trying to raise. I don't think he will have to answer those questions in a vice-presidential debate. Who other than a single reporter in PR is even talking about him as VP? Since you don't seem convinced about my arguments against a Fortuņo spot on the GOP ticket, why not give us your arguments for his candidacy? I have no arguments for his candidacy. I know virtually nothing about him. I'm simply pointing out the errors you have made. As for unemployment figures, try to think about how laying off 30,000 workers might affect the employment prospects of the other local workers who used to serve those 30,000. Again, I'll point out that it seems to have had virtually zero effect on the unemployment rate. It may have a real effect on the drag on the local economy though by not having 30K people being paid large government salaries to do jobs that aren't needed. That in the long term will help unemployment. Hey... is that a negative trend in the chart starting in 2010, soon after cutting the dead wood from the government dole? I believe it is. The real point though is the drag on the economy has been reduced. That is the correct thing to do to create a better economy. | ||
| Blake |
>>> try to think about how laying off 30,000 workers might affect the employment prospects of the other local workers who used to serve those 30,000. Perfect example of the difference between big gov't liberals and conservatives. "the employment prospects of the other local workers who used to serve those 30,000"? Trickle down socialism. No thanks. |
