Texas v. Ohio

In the article entitled “Texas v. Ohio”, the author started the article by mentioning two famous political leaders in the contemporary time, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The author discussed the differences between the two states, Texas and Ohio, on terms of economic growth for the past few years. The comparisons that were made were supported by different statistical facts of the two states such as job creation, domestic migration, unemployment rate, per capita income and exports in which, results all favors Texas. The author also discussed the difference of Texas and Ohio when it comes to taxes and work rules. It was said that Ohio was having top times in manufacturing jobs and raising family incomes while the Texas economy has boomed since 2004. It was also stated that 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost since the year 2000 in Ohio while Texas was able to create nearly twice the rate of new jobs as the whole nation and was rankled as the nation’ top exporting state for the past 6 straight years. . The reason behind the growth in Texas and decrease in Ohio, as the article implies, lies on the taxation and work rules related with the two states, Ohio having higher taxation and being a forced union state and Texas having lesser taxation and being a “right to work” state.

The author also stated that the state of Texas denied the claim of Obama that one million jobs were lost because of trade deals regarding Nafta. The author also contradicted the view of Ohio’s governor Ted Strickland that the problem of the state is because of President Bush and stating that the wounds of Ohio were self-inflicted, having the third highest corporate tax (10.5%) and sixth highest personal income tax (8.87%). The author also suggests that the biggest problem that Ohio was facing in terms of economic rules and structure were its politicians and employers that are still in the grip of industrial unions. While Ohio’s workers are forced to join unions, Texas on the other hand has a “right to work” laws that made twice the job growth as that of Ohio although union organizing was made more difficult. Thus, Texas and Ohio are taking different directions as stated by the author, one burdened with high taxes and work rules while the other embraces free trade. Basing from these arguments, the author concluded that investors will definitely look after Texas rather than Ohio thus; it is our challenged to become less like Ohio and at the same time, become more like Texas.

            One of the most interesting ingredient of the article was the used of Obama and Clinton in the first paragraph. This established the interest of the readers in taking the time to read the article because of the present battle between the two politicians. The statistical facts that were used as proofs in the author’s arguments were also effective especially in establishing the credibility of the author and of the article as a whole adding the fact that these results were taken from recent studies. Thus, the comparisons were not made based only on the author’s points of view but rather on recent facts and researches regarding Ohio and Texas’ economy. The used of percentage and other numerical data were really helpful in proving the authors arguments because the readers are able to picture out the differences between the economy of and present condition of the two states. Without these facts, the readers who are unaware of the States’ current situation will definitely not believe the author’s claims and thus, loosing the very reason in establishing the arguments.

            Some may say that the author had been bias, that he or she favors Texas in a lot of ways and that his or her objective was to promote the State of Texas. However, considering all of the evidences and facts that had been laid, it can be said that the judgments made by the author were not based on personal opinions but rather on facts and scientific reasoning. Thus, I can say that the author had been fair in his or her arguments and that the main reason behind the article was not to personally promote Texas but rather, to suggest changes for the betterment of Ohio and its citizens.

Work Cited

Katz, S. & Skerl, J. No Date. Critiques. 08 March 2008

< http://www.rpi.edu/web/writingcenter/critique.html>