SC

SC Workforce: Still Shrinking

ANOTHER RECORD-LOW LABOR PARTICIPATION RATE FOR PALMETTO STATE Once again, it is NOT a great day in South Carolina for workers … despite the best efforts of “Jobs Governor” Nikki Haley to put a positive spin on the state of the Palmetto economy. According to the latest data, South Carolina’s…

ANOTHER RECORD-LOW LABOR PARTICIPATION RATE FOR PALMETTO STATE

Once again, it is NOT a great day in South Carolina for workers … despite the best efforts of “Jobs Governor” Nikki Haley to put a positive spin on the state of the Palmetto economy.

According to the latest data, South Carolina’s labor participation rate hit a new record low of 58 percent in December – its fourth straight monthly decline. For those of you keeping score at home, that figure is five percentage points below the national labor participation rate of 63 percent – which itself has been hovering at low levels not seen since the 1970s.

Bad, bad, bad …

Labor participation in South Carolina under Haley peaked at 60.9 percent in June 2011 but has been falling precipitously ever since.  Similarly, the national rate has been declining steadily since U.S. President Barack Obama took office in January 2009.

Surprisingly, Haley was called to account last month by the Associated Press – which published a story questioning her administration’s job claims (numbers the governor has previously been busted fudging).

But for the most part South Carolina’s shrinking workforce has been ignored by the mainstream media …

Here are the disappointing numbers, though:

SC LABOR PARTICIPATION RATES

December – 58.0 percent
November 58.1 percent
October – 58.2 percent
September – 58.4 percent
August – 58.4 percent
July – 58.5 percent
June – 58.7 percent
May – 58.8 percent
April – 58.9 percent

(For historical labor participation rate data, click here).

Haley likes to brag about the Palmetto State’s declining unemployment rate, but at this point it’s painfully obvious that’s being driven by a rapidly shrinking workforce.

But hey … let’s keep letting our corrupt politicians throw money at select corporations and see if that eventually works.

Related posts

SC

Charleston Legal Drama Erupts

Will Folks
SC

How Pastor John-Paul Miller’s ‘Memorial Service’ For His Dead Wife Went Viral

Jenn Wood
SC

Missing Macaque Shot And Killed

Will Folks

71 comments

Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 11:40 am

I love that Fits blasts Haley for not bringing businesses here. Then, if by luck or chance she does get a business here, he trashes the business and the government doing what it takes to get the business to move here in the first place.

If you expect the government to get businesses to move here, then you’ve got to understand the government is going to use incentives to get them here. It’s not like Boeing was going to move here on Haley’s hooker boots alone.

Reply
Will Folks aka Sic February 7, 2014 at 11:44 am

Look here, Holmes. I report numbers. If you got a problem with the numbers, then take it up with those numbers. Don’t bitch and moan at me – this data comes straight from Haley’s cabinet.

As for the governor “getting a business here,” this website is 100 percent consistent: We do not support taxpayer-funded incentives for “economic development” because 1) they often do not work, 2) even when they do “work” they shift the tax burden onto the backs of small biz/ individual taxpayers and 3) MOST IMPORTANTLY they are unfair and (as multiple studies have shown) anti-transparent.

Do not come onto this website with your B-grade trash talk … I will flat out embarrass your ignorant ass.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 11:55 am

“Do not come onto this website with your B-grade trash talk ”

LMAO!

I feel like I’m witnessing something similar to that scene in 8 mile when Eminem drops the mic and walks off stage after brow beating Papa Doc.

Reply
Will Folks aka Sic February 7, 2014 at 12:02 pm Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:20 pm

lol, I got a “thumbs down” too!

I’ll wear it like a badge. “Fuck y’all.”

GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:37 pm

No worries: Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Obama are crazy about the easily-led, like you…

Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:37 pm

I always appreciate our “crazy time” together.

Smirks February 7, 2014 at 1:50 pm

Sorry, Obama didn’t make the band:

http://i.imgur.com/3mnp6Mm.jpg

He was good in the audition, though.

Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 2:25 pm

In many ways, Sic is just like the progatonist in 8 mile.

Criminal history? Check
Shaved head? Check
Work out clothes in photos? Check
Work out gloves in photos? Check
Angry all the time? Check
Acts like a buffoon when challenged? Check
Embarrassed in the public eye on multiple occasions? Check
Makes little money? Check
Simplistic understanding of the world? Check
Believes one big change will fix everything? Check
Cheers the burning of a house (Boeing)? Check
Disrespect for authority? Check
Likes guns? Check
Talks about music a lot? Check
Was on the government dole at one point? Check

I could go on, but you get the picture.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 3:32 pm

lol…dude…that’s pretty creative and funny

Thomas February 9, 2014 at 1:44 am

You forgot to mention a few:

Formulaic copywriting? check
Lazenby trying to memorize Associated Press Stylebook? check
Redundant SEO wording? check here,here,here,here
Gift store that disappeared? check’s in the mail
A TOS that shifts any blame on the user? checkmate suckas

That said, anyone who can make a buck this way is worth his diploma’s especially when the formulaic copy writing is directed at anything elected or hired to suck off the tax payer funded sugar tit colloquially known as the South Carolina Retirement System.

Norma Scok February 7, 2014 at 11:55 am

lulz..”B grade trash talk”.

He just typed exactly what everyone was thinking. I was thinking the same thing when I read your article.

Thinking you are right isn’t usually the same as actually being right, especially when you are arrogant about it.

And after reading your article, I’m not sure how (or why) you think large businesses would locate here otherwise without tax or other incentives. Face it..SC ranks at the bottom of most lists that mater, and those that make money on that fact are in no hurry to change it. And as much as you say you either dislike (or like, depending on the day) Nikita, one governor, (nor one “journalist”), is going to be able to fix that that.

Reply
Will Folks aka Sic February 7, 2014 at 11:59 am

what he typed was a demonstrably false representation of this website’s position on economic policy.

having said that, if Nikki embraces genuine economic development policy (i.e. individual income tax relief) then this website will praise her …

Reply
GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:30 pm

Yeah: you are consistent. You hate Producers, Earners and Contributors that form the foundation of the tax base…while you suck the D!*k of the self-called compassionate, hand-out leftwing thieves, who broke the economy and rob us blind…

YOU are why it is so hard to build this country. The media loves the easily led like you. They get fat off government freebies and favors…while you bash the people paying for it…

Yuk, Yuk, Yuk February 7, 2014 at 12:31 pm

“You hate Producers, Earners and Contributors that form the foundation of the tax base”

You mean, like guys sitting in a trailer home getting Medicaid?

24/7 CEO February 7, 2014 at 1:29 pm

True that. GT wants everyone to think he’s working hard, yet, spends every minute on Fits or some other blog.

Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 12:46 pm

Individual income tax relief is the only economic policy this website has even proffered. Simple doesn’t mean better.

Even if we eliminated the individual income tax, SC would still have to offer incentives to lure larger corporations to the state. Texas, Florida, and TN all continue to offer incentives to corporations to move there in spite of their individual income tax relief. To pretend that the ONLY thing the government can do to lure companies to the state that will work is individual income tax relief is simple minded and foolish.

Frank Pytel February 7, 2014 at 12:52 pm

Not true. While he has stated ‘fair share’ on numerous articles he typically argues against increased taxes on business, including this article.

Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 12:49 pm

1. The often do work, and work spectacularly. A single $100 million success story makes up for 9 $10 million failures.

2. There is no tax burden shifted when the taxes generated by the larger corporation more than pay for the tax incentives.

3. I’m unaware of fairness studies, but here’s a clue- life is unfair. If your company can generate $100 million in taxes, then it’s not a bad plan to give you a $5 million incentive to move here. If your business generates $100k in taxes, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to offer you the same $5 million incentive to move here. It’s common sense.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:52 pm

Give us your link to the overall numbers Jackie.

Reply
Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 2:59 pm

I’ve posted the BMW taxation impact in the past. If I get some time, I’ll find it again. It’s clear that BMW has generated a LOT of tax dollars directly and indirectly through its employees. Sic’s only got a few failures like the LaFrance deal to show for the “often they fail” claim. Furthermore, in the event that these deals fail, the company has to reimburse the county for the tax incentives that were used if they company did not come. That was clearly stated in the LaFrance article.

Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 3:22 pm

I look forward to the numbers Jackie, and I will scrutinize them for accuracy. (regardless of moral argument, which we will set aside…for now)

Also, if you are going to simply focus on BMW..I have a problem with that as I don’t think it’s reflective of the concept as a whole for SC…but I will look at it none the less.

Jackie Chiles February 9, 2014 at 9:41 am

Studies indicated that the Boeing plant alone could release as much as $5.9 billion PER YEAR into the S.C. economy.http://www.postandcourier.com/

It appears that figure was downgraded to $4.6 billion in 2013.http://siteselection.com/aeros

Under either calculation, that much economic activity is a major tax revenue generator.

The state offered BMW roughly $130 million in tax benefits. From 1992 to 2002, the combined tax benefit to the state government was $27.6 million in each year. If those figures remained constant, that would mean that a $130 million investment generated $552 million in tax income over 20 years. That’s not including the $2.4 million in tax revenue to county governments and $3.1 million to the school districts.

http://mooreschool.sc.edu/User

Props to the 313 February 9, 2014 at 12:35 pm

Page not found I your links(2 of the 3, one isn’t specific), also, the $130 million in tax benefits not only doesn’t have a link but doesn’t tell me specifically what the “benefits” are(tax breaks vs incentives).

I don’t truck in “studies” Jackie, do you know how many times the CBO forecast has been changed the last 5 years? How about EVERY time in each year…significant changes at that…just that the recent change in your Boeing figures.

I don’t trust one number/statistic coming from a government organization, and many from private ones. You can make numbers appear to justify whatever agenda you might have but they still don’t overcome logic.

Jackie Chiles February 9, 2014 at 4:00 pm

http://mooreschool.sc.edu/UserFiles/moore/Documents/Presentations%20&%20Studies/2002%20BMW.pdf

So basically, you ask for numbers, then say you don’t trust numbers.

Props to the 313 February 9, 2014 at 7:10 pm

I can see how you would deduce that, but not exactly.

If you give me numbers and I look at the sources, they seem reasonable, etc. (and I spend a lot of time looking at financial statements) then I am completely open.

That being said, I can’t tell you how often I look at bullshit…unfortunately much more then “reality” based numbers…from a variety of organizations.

So let me clarify, “Don’t trust, but verify”…slightly different from Reagan but you get the point-I do the work anyway.

Jackie Chiles February 9, 2014 at 7:36 pm

The fact remains, that study clearly indicates that BMW was a smart investment. $27.6 million annual revenues to the State after accounting for costs incurred by the state government. $691 million in wages annually. $4.1 billion in output annually. $2.4 million in tax revenues to 4 upstate counties. $3.2 million annually to local school districts in the upstate. All of this was BEFORE the $300 million expansion.

We can afford a LOT of failed incentive attempts because of the success of BMW.

In short, getting BMW to come here was worth the expense. Cutting a 7% income tax on some local business that has less than $250k net just wouldn’t have had the same effect. When one business is responsible for $4.1 billion in a state with an entire GDP of $176 billion, it’s ludicrous to say offering some incentives up front, that are now more than paid for, was a bad idea.

Props to the 313 February 9, 2014 at 8:38 pm

“In short, getting BMW to come here was worth the expense.”

I am reviewing what you linked right now, and let me tell you- you presupposing way more than is in this report with info from 01.

Let me start with this simple statement in the report:

“After accounting for the costs
incurred by state government, South Carolina receives
$27.6 million in net revenues each year.”

Now let me remind you Jackie, what you’ve linked has no receipts, tables, or accounting data. It has some methodology, but I’m going to get to that is a bit.

So with this statement we have no actual government ledgers to actually check these statements against. Problem number one.

Second, this is a run down on the figures they gives us, again with no actual ledgers of the expenditures(I am going to leave out the exemptions because I have no problem with that) and I’m going to focus only on SC gov’t expenditures to keep it apples to apples(not local):

$5 mil to Tech School, $31 million in land, UNAMED AMOUNT IN INDUSTRIAL BONDS, UNAMED AMOUNT in “offered site improvements including sewers, utilities, and road improvements such as a highway overpass and commitment to widen
existing roads along Interstate 85.”, $10 million more for road improvement local to the plant.

So Jackie, how much is it costing SC in infrastructure? YEARLY? The SCDOT won’t issue a total picture of total debt(is that surprising?) But they have said(in an effort to get more gas tax) that they are paying interest approaching $120 mil…..think about that.

How much did is cost us for BMW alone? How much in bonds did we give them?

Really, honestly, what you just linked is garbage. How is anyone supposed to draw any conclusions from it?

You wanna guess? Just like our pols? Give a couple of happy speeches, shake some hands and move on to the next taxpayer funded giveaway?

I haven’t even touched on methodology, IMPLAN being famous for small economy forecasting screwups and all the games we can play with “factoring”.

But the real cherry on top of this shit pie you just put together is this statement:

“Cutting a 7% income tax on some local business that has less than $250k net just wouldn’t have had the same effect.”

Hey Jackie, look at this:

http://www.sctax.org/Tax+Information/Smallbus/sbfacts.htm

You wanna do a fun,not completely accurate, but close enough to where you get the point using your statement?

Take $17,500, times 67,000 and tell me what you get in revenue Jackie.

“wouldn’t have the same effect”- Har Har Har!

Thomas February 9, 2014 at 2:01 am

You forgot he never mention the ten layers of “upper management” in the South Carolina agencies, departments, districts and counties that do basically nothing productive. In fact these 100k to 180k “management” positions actually slow down delivery of tax payer revenues to much needed projects because not only do they draw unforgivable salaries with no oversight, no production, no benefit, they often will retire from one “management” position taking home full SC Retirement System pensions while staying “on the job” drawing the same bloated salary they “retired” from. It is this waste of tax payer money in state governments and x 10 for the federal government that makes any comparison to tax payer funded economic development a misnomer.

Reply
Norma Scok February 9, 2014 at 3:38 pm

I’ve been looking for one for those management gigs for a looong time. They must be hidden, cause they sure are hard to find.

Thomas February 9, 2014 at 8:25 pm

Take a look at the “Information Director” for the DOR, the one who allowed our tax info to be stolen, not even pisessing a Computer Science degree, his position paid out 125k a year. Take a look a CJ Toal. She “retired” in the SC Retitement System years ago, so now she collects full a 120k pension payout plus her 125k a year salary as CJ. Take a look at the SC Education Lottery Director’s pay, and the fact that the appointees have been in the system for a long time, some having accrued enough time from previous positions, retired at current Director pay, around 125k a year, and still draw 125k a year. Not to mention we provide free (taxpayer subsidized) SC BC/BS healthcare for their spouses long after the primary employee (contributor) passed on, even though are adequately covered with Medicare/SS Survivor Benefits and paid nothing into the system. We do not have a tax revenue pool to continue to payout these kinds of salaries/pension double dipping for ten percent of the population. This include Non-Governmental Associations that also are included into the SCRS. The only solution for solvency is offer open enrollment to all South Carolinian’s with current group rates or cut the eligibility down to size. It is obvious there is a designed “take care of ours” mentality at the behest of all hard working tax payers who often do not have access to any pension plan.

venomachine February 7, 2014 at 1:00 pm

Stuck pig squeals the loudest.

Jus sayin’….

Reply
Numbers My Ass February 7, 2014 at 1:17 pm

Numbers are one thing, analysis is quite another. Brother, your typical economic analysis wouldn’t persuade my grandkids.

You do have an ego, however, and a thin skin to boot.

Reply
GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:26 pm

You are exactly right. These Caveman, anti-reality Liberal-Tarians have no problem w/ government “investing” Trillions and Trillions into welfare, food stamps or public housing…but if a business negotiates a deal for the jobs and prosperity it brings to the tax base of a community, the liberal-tarians, too stupid to really think, $#!* all over themselves…

If you REALLY want to stop Gov’t waste, FITS, Stop liberalism…don’t attack economic development that produces an exponential return on the investment.

You look Stupid railing against success, while burying your head up your @$$ regarding FAILED liberal and destructive programs…

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:29 pm

“don’t attack economic development that produces an exponential return on the investment.”

Holy Sheeeeet T…you are arguing for redistribution!

Which of you Lefty’s is gonna send Big T his honorary Democrat party membership?

Reply
GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:32 pm

Dumb@$$. Redistribution is a Gov’t, that produces NOTHING…taking it from those who do, and giving it to their special interest groups, who will not work for it…

A Communist, like you, should know that…

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:36 pm

“taking it from those who do, and giving it to their special interest groups, who will not work for it…”

Like Medicaid recipients, right?

Lol…you are as crazy as bat with rabies sometimes.

You are missing the point my sanity deprived friend, if gov’t “funds” tax incentives to big corps, they are using OUR tax money to do it.

If gov’t simply reduces taxes on a big corp to nothing it costs the taxpayer nothing. There’s a big difference there.

GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:44 pm

Let me make i t simple,. Gov’t produces NOT a CENT, or no product, except tax notices. The Gov’t takes from the people.

If an industry, or people, pay less tax, the PEOPLE have more money. That is ALWAYS better for the economy, than the Gov’t taking wealth from people and giving it to people who cannot, or will not, produce it.

Smirks February 7, 2014 at 1:56 pm

Oh hell naw, you can keep him.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 2:00 pm

lol….I’m not a Republican or on the Right…I just kind of float around aimlessly…but sorry dude…he said Big T wants “investment” via taxpayers dollars so that puts him squarely in your camp.

I know right? You want to slit your wrists now huh? lol

GrandTango February 8, 2014 at 4:42 pm

You’ve been investing all your life Dumb@$$, if you’ve ever had a real job..Or atleast I have been INVESTING…whether I want to or not…

You can either choose to invest in success, or waste..I see you seem to be stupid to really figure out any of that…because the liberals and liberal-tarians are selling you a bill of goods to manipulate you…

Torch February 8, 2014 at 1:06 pm

Matthew 19:24 and Matthew 25:45

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:28 pm

“We do not support taxpayer-funded incentives ”

That’s the key bro. You can give the big fish tax breaks, but if you actually redistribute money from the little people/companies to the big ones…well…that is one big moral hazard aside from no one knowing what the big picture return(or loss) is.

Cutting the tax rate to zilch is much better and should be as effective. If a company won’t come after that, than the investment is dubious anyway.

Reply
Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 12:44 pm

Except it’s not a redistribution. Time and again, it’s been demonstrated that tax incentives offered to larger corporations are a NET GAIN to the coffers of local and county governments. There’s nothing being shifted from small businesses to large businesses.

Cutting the tax rate to nothing won’t be the only incentive that lures businesses to SC. We’d cut the tax rate to 0 and then still be offering other tax incentives to lure larger corporations here. Do you think that Texas, TN, and Florida all suddenly gave up on tax incentives after they eliminated their state income tax for individuals? Of course not.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 12:50 pm

” it’s been demonstrated that tax incentives offered to larger corporations are a NET GAIN to the coffers of local and county governments.”

No dude, it hasn’t. BMW has been cherry picked, no one has all the data even in their case only, but more importantly we don’t have the overall picture in SC. There’s no spreadsheet any where of total dollars in & out where on all this taxpayer dollars that go to “economic development”. Hell, an article just came out a couple of weeks ago with Hitt admitting they don’t even follow up on the handed out money.

“We’d cut the tax rate to 0 and then still be offering other tax incentives to lure larger corporations here. Do you think that Texas, TN, and Florida all suddenly gave up on tax incentives after they eliminated their state income tax for individuals?”

It doesn’t matter. It’s not moral to gamble(and that’s what funding a business is) with taxpayer money. Additionally, what if these other states redistribute(which you claim is not happening, which is COMPLETELY outside reality/wrong-you even admit it in the same paragraph) and the companies fold? SC actually “wins” because it didn’t sink taxpayer dollars into the nonsense.

Sorry bro, you are just straight up wrong on this topic.

Reply
Frank Pytel February 7, 2014 at 12:55 pm

That’s false. Almost always, after considering all of parties involved, there is a net loss to all taxpayers via increased taxation for additional infrastructure.

Reply
Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 2:49 pm

Show me a direct correlation between a business moving to SC and a tax increase.

Frank Pytel February 8, 2014 at 8:50 am

Well lets start with something really simple, like unfunded liabilities related to infrastructure?

Frank Pytel February 10, 2014 at 5:26 am

Hey Jackie; I think I might have been talking about infrastructure earlier in the week?

https://www.fitsnews.com/2014/02/09/dana-beach-dont-raise-sc-gas-tax/

Jackie Chiles February 10, 2014 at 9:30 am

You must have missed this quote from the article:

“To understand how this works, consider the proposed Boeing roads. There is, in fact, already more than enough money to cover Boeing’s needs.”

If politicians choose to re-allocate money from Boeing-related infrastructure to other projects, that doesn’t mean bringing Boeing here was a bad idea. It means we have crappy politicians that should be voted out of office.

Frank Pytel February 10, 2014 at 9:33 am

Ummm… I think you asked for a direct correlation?

I agree about stupid politiks. Never the less, there’s one.

Jackie Chiles February 10, 2014 at 10:01 am

Except it’s not a direct correlation. The correlation is politicians want an unnecessary extension of I-526 and want to raise taxes for it. It has less to do with Boeing and more to do with stupid politicians doing stupid stuff.

Frank Pytel February 10, 2014 at 10:09 am

I disagree. The politico clearly states “…for Boeing”. What it’s used for is inconsequential to it’s stated purpose. Direct Correlation. :)

Jackie Chiles February 10, 2014 at 10:12 am

How? The article clearly said there’s already enough money for boeing’s roads. There’s no reason to raise taxes to pay for something that’s already funded. The taxes are being raised to pay for unnecessary roads unrelated to Boeing.

Frank Pytel February 10, 2014 at 10:43 am

Agreed. There is still a direct correlation. If you raise the price of a product based on fuel price increases as a direct correlation of same, the correlation does not go away when fuel prices go down. You’re just lying, but the correlation is not invlidated.

Smirks February 7, 2014 at 1:46 pm

Then, if by luck or chance she does get a business here, he trashes the
business and the government doing what it takes to get the business to
move here in the first place.

A vast majority of the kinds of articles you’re complaining about that I’ve read on FITSNews since coming here have bashed:

1) Boeing, which Haley did not bring here.
2) BMW, which Haley did not bring here.
3) Amazon, which Haley actually fought against.
4) Random companies leaving SC that came here during Sanford’s tenure (or even before that).

There have been a few businesses that made the decision to come here under Haley’s tenure (for incentives anyways) but otherwise Sanford and those before him were far better at actually producing jobs at least.

Reply
Jackie Chiles February 7, 2014 at 2:42 pm

That’s fair. Haley sucks. My point is though, according to Sic, there’s literally nothing she can do to bring businesses to the state short of eliminating the state income tax. To think that making that one simple change, a change that’s already been made in other states, will solve all of your job problems is either naive or a lie.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 3:27 pm

“My point is though, according to Sic, there’s literally nothing she can
do to bring businesses to the state short of eliminating the state
income tax.”

It’s not just the “income tax” Jackie. It’s the property tax, SUTA, and a bunch of other stuff.

SC has a large cannon of tax exemption available to it that is NEVER used as it’s easier and more profitable for pols to dole out taxpayer money instead.

“To think that making that one simple change, a change that’s already
been made in other states, will solve all of your job problems is either
naive or a lie.”

Has Will actually made that argument, cause if he has, I agree…but see my above point.

There are NUMEROUS way to cut taxes and lobby for corps without resorting to taking money from little people/companies and handing it to big ones.

Reply
RogueElephant February 7, 2014 at 3:20 pm

Sounds like you actually know how business works. The incentives that the libertarians say we should never give are what brings the businesses here for the benefit of our workers. I am living proof of that. During Sanford’s term we lost KIA, Mercedes, Spitzer vans, JCB const. machines and no telling how many more companies that went where the incentives were offered. I have heard all the arguments pro and con . The bottom line is it works for the most parts. There are exceptions but then there always are.

Reply
Props to the 313 February 7, 2014 at 3:24 pm

“Sounds like you actually know how business works.”

What does that matter?

A business if it has access to pols will take as much as it can get. That has nothing to do with whether it’s justified for SC.

And let me tell you brother, I am in and understand “business”-no joke.

Reply
GrandTango February 7, 2014 at 12:47 pm

A big problem: stupid people, like FITS, who DO NOT understand successful economics, have too much control over it, because of an overbearing and greedy government.

Give business breaks. They hire people, who account for ALL of the wealth a gov’t is able to take from them.

No producers…no money for the Gov’t or anyone else.

Reply
anon. February 7, 2014 at 1:27 pm

NIKKI HALEY ONLY CARES ABOUT NIKKI HALEY!

Reply
Smirks February 7, 2014 at 1:31 pm

The guy in your stock photo looks awfully cheery for someone who decided to wear a hard hat but not safety goggles to work while applying what looks like a screwdriver to what looks like moving parts. But this is SC I suppose.

Reply
venomachine February 7, 2014 at 2:59 pm

I still can’t figure out wth he’s working on.

Reply
RogueElephant February 7, 2014 at 3:07 pm

With all the bobbins around it most likely is a weaving mach. The idea of the hard hat and no safety glasses sounds like it was staged. The safety glasses come first. Hopefully there is no need for the hard hat.

Reply
IVEBEENHACKED February 7, 2014 at 3:55 pm

All out identities stolen bank accounts cleaned out lies upon lies and yet there are idiots that are saying they are going to vote for her again…..dear god this state is so screwed.

Reply
Rocky February 7, 2014 at 4:36 pm

Or the other spin is – spouses working now are doing so well, the little Mrs doesn’t have to work. See – it’s a great day to be in South Carolina.

Reply
happytobeme February 7, 2014 at 9:11 pm

Well said. Look I worked for this agency and would love to shed some light on the bullshit the managers feed executive management and then executive management takes that Information to the governors office. Then a few months down the road when stuff like the above happens, everybody plays stupid. I worked in the private sector for all of my career until I was lured to dew. I could write a book about the things I know. Hmmmm

Reply
happytobeme February 7, 2014 at 9:24 pm

One more thing- I find it disturbing that dew is still spitting out b.s. unemployment numbers. Put it this way, if dew says unemployment is 8% it’s probably more like 18%. They think everyone who is
unemployed uses SCWORKS online. They forget about the people who did not qualify to receive benefits, the people who are contract workers, the people who maxed out their whopping 20 weeks of benefits, and the people who never file because they don’t want to deal with the customer service department. Oh and don’t forget about the people who get forced out or fired because they stood up for what was right and got tired of bullied by upper management. Hell, we have to be the only state that cannot find someone in state to run the job agency. WTF

Reply
Deo Vindice SC February 8, 2014 at 7:34 pm

Dumb asses, more war is the answer, nuke China now!

Reply
Ben_Kinlaw February 9, 2014 at 2:08 pm

When you “incentivize” people not to work, then you do have a dwindling labor participation rate.

There are dynamics that drive down the available work force, and more gov’t programs drives down this number.

In this link is a chart that reflects how this rate has significantly dropped. http://on.wsj.com/1gbNXYc

Reply

Leave a Comment