Real Ohio Growth

Posted on October 2, 2012 by


After the auto bailout, GM plants were closed in Ohio–at least two of them. So with fewer plants and therefore fewer auto-related jobs, how exactly is the bailout responsible for the turn around parts of Ohio are seeing? Maybe it  has nothing to do with what Obama claims it does.

Take a listen: I Spy Minute for Tues., Oct. 2nd, 2012

Or read the transcript below…

@iSpyRadioShow #iSpyMin #frakmap

#       #       #

A common error in statistical analysis is finding correlation where none really exists. In other words, simply because two events occur, it does not mean they’re related.

For example: Ohio’s economy is recovering. The auto industry was bailed out. Therefore the bailout must be causing Ohio’s recovery.

Let’s see. On one hand, since the bailout there are fewer auto plants in Ohio and fewer people working at them. How, exactly, does that lead to economic recovery?

On the other hand, since 2009, hundreds of new leases have opened up drilling;

oil companies have spent over $30 million in Ohio just for road repair and improvement.  Ohio mills have seen a $1.5 billion increase to produce steel for the oil and gas companies. And the oil boom is expected to create new 200,000 jobs throughout Ohio.

Hmm. 200,000 new jobs or fewer jobs than we had before. I don’t even think I need to break out my calculator for that one.

Ohio’s recovery is more likely tied to the oil boom thanks to fracking—and has nothing to do with the bailout.

Posted in: Multimedia