Click chart for a larger version, or click here for the chart’s page at FREDs Economic Data at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
Billions of Chained 2012 Dollars, Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate, Percent Change from Year Ago, Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate.
Frequency: Monthly.
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Real Personal Income [RPI], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI, May 31, 2019.
For the Wichita metropolitan area in April 2019, the labor force is up, the number of unemployed persons is down, the unemployment rate is down, and the number of people working is up when compared to the same month one year ago. Seasonal data shows small declines in labor force and jobs from March.
Data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, shows an improving, but also mixed, employment situation for the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Click charts and tables for larger versions.
Total nonfarm employment rose from 298,500 last April to 303,400 this April. That’s an increase of 4,900 jobs, or 1.64 percent. (This data is not seasonally adjusted, so month-to-month comparisons are not valid.) For the same period, jobs in the nation grew by 1.76 percent.
The unemployment rate in April 2019 was 3.3 percent, down from 3.5 percent one year ago.
Considering seasonally adjusted data from the household survey, the labor force fell by 227 persons (0.1 percent) in April 2019 from March 2019, the number of unemployed persons fell by 97 (0.8 percent), and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.7 percent. The number of employed persons not working on farms fell to 299,538 in April from 299,668 the prior month, a decline of 130 persons, or 0.0 percent.
The following chart of the monthly change in labor force and employment shows a general decline over the past year, with some recent months of losses for both measures.
The following chart of changes from the same month one year ago shows a general decline in the rate of growth.
Looking at the charts of changes in employment year-over-year, we see some months in the past year where Wichita outperformed the nation. That last happened in 2012.
This article has been updated to correct a mistake in the original version.
The City of Wichita lost 1,052 in population from 2017 to 2018, a decline of 0.27 percent.
Data released today by the United States Census Bureau shows the City of Wichita losing population from July 1, 2017, to July 1, 2018. 1
The bureau’s estimate of city population on July 1, 2018 is 389,255. This is a decline of 1,052 (0.27 percent) from the year before. These are populations of cities, not metropolitan areas, although the Wichita metropolitan area also lost population. 2
The estimate of population on July 1, 2017 was revised from 390,591 to 390,317, meaning that for 2017, Wichita population declined by 242 from the July 1, 2016 population of 390,509.
With the revised 2017 figure, Wichita has had two years of declining population, as can be seen in the nearby chart.
While Wichita lost 0.27 percent of its population in one year, the top 100 cities gained 0.51 percent. Since 2010, Wichita has grown by 1.71 percent, while the top 100 cities grew by 7.57 percent.
Wichita is the fifty-first largest city, down from fiftieth the two prior years.
—
Notes
In the fourth quarter of 2018, Sedgwick County continued strong job growth.
Data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, show a continuing strong jobs picture for Sedgwick County.
Data from the Bureau’s Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program show that from December 2017 to December 2018, Sedgwick County gained 5,500 jobs, which is a rate of 2.2 percent, as calculated by BLS. For the nation, growth was 1.5 percent.
The job growth rate for Sedgwick County was 100th best among the nation’s 350 largest counties.
While the job growth rate in Sedgwick County for the fourth quarter of 2018 exceeded the national rate, for the most recent four quarters the average rate for Sedgwick County was 1.3 percent, and 1.6 percent for the nation.
Average weekly wages in Sedgwick County increased by 3.8 percent over the year to $946. For the nation, wages rose by 3.2 percent to $1,144.
Click charts for larger versions.
Employment in Kansas continues to grow in April 2019, but continues a trend of slower growth than the nation. The labor force is smaller.
Data released today from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, shows rising employment in Kansas for April 2019.
Using seasonally adjusted data, from March 2019 to April 2019, nonfarm employment in Kansas rose by 6,900, which is 0.5 percent. Over the year, the number of Kansas nonfarm jobs for April 2019 rose by 12,400 or 0.9 percent over last April. This is using seasonally adjusted data. The non-adjusted figure is nearly identical at 12,300.
Over the year (April 2018 to April 2019), the Kansas labor force is up by 0.3 percent using seasonally adjusted data, with declines of 0.1 percent and 0.2 percent over the last two months. Non-seasonal data shows a decline of 7,033 (0.5 percent) in the labor force over the year.
The number of unemployed persons fell from March 2019 to April 2019 by 331, or 0.6 percent. The unemployment rate was 3.5 percent in April, up from 3.4 percent from one year ago, and unchanged from March.
Looking at annual job growth on a monthly basis shows Kansas averaging 0.94 percent over the past 12 months, while the rate for the nation is 1.75 percent.
Click charts and tables for larger versions.
Among the nation’s 383 metropolitan areas, Wichita ranked 347th for personal income growth.
Statistics released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, show personal income in the Wichita metro area growing at a slow rate.
The figures released today are through calendar year 2017. For that year, personal income in the Wichita metropolitan statistical area was $30,801 million, up 2.3 percent from $30,103 million the previous year. These are current dollars.
Using inflation-adjusted dollars, income growth was 0.7 percent.
Of 383 metropolitan areas, Wichita ranked 347 for growth from 2016 to 2017.
Per capita personal income in the Wichita MSA for 2017 was $47,708 in current dollars, up 2.2 percent from $46,696 in 2016. In inflation-adjusted dollars, per capita personal income grew by 0.5 percent from 2016 to 2017. This growth rate ranked at position 327 among 383 metropolitan areas.
Personal income is the income received by, or on behalf of, all persons from all sources: from participation as laborers in production, from owning a home or business, from the ownership of financial assets, and from government and business in the form of transfers. It includes income from domestic sources as well as the rest of world. It does not include realized or unrealized capital gains or losses.
Personal income is measured before the deduction of personal income taxes and other personal taxes and is reported in current dollars (no adjustment is made for price changes). Comparisons for different regions and time periods reflect changes in both the price and quantity components of regional personal income.
The estimate of personal income for the United States is the sum of the state estimates and the estimate for the District of Columbia; it differs slightly from the estimate of personal income in the national income and product accounts (NIPAs) because of differences in coverage, in the methodologies used to prepare the estimates, and in the timing of the availability of source data.
Per capita personal income is calculated as the total personal income of the residents of a given area divided by the population of the area. In computing per capita personal income, BEA uses Census Bureau mid-year population estimates.
For 2017, just four states had less growth in personal income than Kansas.
Statistics released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, show personal income in Kansas growing at a slow rate.
The figures released today are through calendar year 2017. For that year, personal income in Kansas grew to $141,459 million, up 2.4 percent from $138,105 million the previous year. These are current dollars.
Using inflation-adjusted dollars, income growth was 0.8 percent.
Of the states, BEA noted: “Two states had declines in real personal income — North Dakota (-1.3 percent) and South Dakota (-0.4 percent). States with the slowest growth in real personal income were Iowa (0.3 percent), New Mexico (0.6 percent), and Kansas (0.8 percent).”
The per capita personal income figures for Kansas rose by the same percentage values as the current and inflation-adjusted income. In current dollars, per capita personal income in Kansas for 2017 was $48,600.
Personal income is the income received by, or on behalf of, all persons from all sources: from participation as laborers in production, from owning a home or business, from the ownership of financial assets, and from government and business in the form of transfers. It includes income from domestic sources as well as the rest of world. It does not include realized or unrealized capital gains or losses.
Personal income is measured before the deduction of personal income taxes and other personal taxes and is reported in current dollars (no adjustment is made for price changes). Comparisons for different regions and time periods reflect changes in both the price and quantity components of regional personal income.
The estimate of personal income for the United States is the sum of the state estimates and the estimate for the District of Columbia; it differs slightly from the estimate of personal income in the national income and product accounts (NIPAs) because of differences in coverage, in the methodologies used to prepare the estimates, and in the timing of the availability of source data.
Per capita personal income is calculated as the total personal income of the residents of a given area divided by the population of the area. In computing per capita personal income, BEA uses Census Bureau mid-year population estimates.
A truthful accounting of the finances of Intrust Bank Arena in downtown Wichita shows a large loss. Despite hosting the NCAA basketball tournament, the arena’s “net income” fell.
The true state of the finances of the Intrust Bank Arena in downtown Wichita are not often a subject of public discussion. Arena boosters cite a revenue-sharing arrangement between the county and the arena operator, referring to this as profit or loss. But this arrangement is not an accurate and complete accounting, and it hides the true economics of the arena. What’s missing is depreciation expense.
This agreement specifies a revenue sharing mechanism between the county and SMG. For 2108, the accounting method used in this agreement produced a profit, or “net building income,” of $647,634 to be split (not equally) between SMG and the county. The county’s share was $123,817. 1
That bears repeating: This is not a reckoning of profit and loss in any recognized sense. It is simply an agreement between Sedgwick County and SMG as to how SMG is to be paid, and how the county participates.
A much better reckoning of the economics of the Intrust Bank Arena can be found in the 2018 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Sedgwick County. 3 This document holds additional information about the finances of the Intrust Bank Arena. The CAFR, as described by the county, “… is a review of what occurred financially last year. In that respect, it is a report card of our ability to manage our financial resources.”
Regarding the arena in 2018, the CAFR states:
The Arena Fund represents the activity of the INTRUST Bank Arena. The facility is operated by a private company; the County incurs expenses only for certain capital improvements or major repairs and depreciation, and receives as revenue only a share of profits earned by the operator, if any, and naming rights fees. The Arena Fund had an operating loss of $4.5 million. The loss can be attributed to $4.8 million in depreciation expense.
Financial statements in the same document show that $4,783,229 was charged for depreciation in 2017. If we subtract the SMG payment to the county of $123,817 from depreciation expense, we learn that the Intrust Bank Arena lost $4,659,412 in 2018.
(Of note, 2018 was the year the arena hosted a round of NCAA men’s basketball tournament games. For that year, the payment from SMG to the county was down by 58.8 percent from $300,414 in 2017. Attendance rose by 4.2 percent.)
Depreciation expense is not something that is paid out in cash. That is, Sedgwick County did not write a check for $4,659,412 to pay depreciation expense. Instead, depreciation accounting provides a way to recognize and account for the cost of long-lived assets over their lifespan. It provides a way to recognize opportunity costs, that is, what could be done with our resources if not spent on the arena.
But not many of our civic leaders recognize this, at least publicly. We — frequently — observe our governmental and civic leaders telling us that we must “run government like a business.” The county’s financial report makes mention of this: “Sedgwick County has one business-type activity, the Arena fund. Net position for fiscal year 2018 decreased by $4.7 million to $151.6 million. Of that $151.6 million, $142.9 million is invested in capital assets. The decrease can be attributed to depreciation, which was $4.8 million.” 4 (emphasis added)
At the same time, these leaders avoid frank and realistic discussion of economic facts. As an example, in years past Commissioner Dave Unruh made remarks that illustrate the severe misunderstanding under which he and almost everyone labor regarding the nature of spending on the arena: “I want to underscore the fact that the citizens of Sedgwick County voted to pay for this facility in advance. And so not having debt service on it is just a huge benefit to our government and to the citizens, so we can go forward without having to having to worry about making those payments and still show positive cash flow. So it’s still a great benefit to our community and I’m still pleased with this report.”
The contention — witting or not — is that the capital investment of $183,625,241 (not including an operating and maintenance reserve) in the arena is merely a historical artifact, something that happened in the past, something that has no bearing today. There is no opportunity cost, according to this view. This attitude, however, disrespects the sacrifices of the people of Sedgwick County and its visitors to raise those funds. Since Kansas is one of the few states that adds sales tax to food, low-income households paid extra sales tax on their groceries to pay for the arena — an arena where they may not be able to afford tickets.
Any honest accounting or reckoning of the performance of Intrust Bank Arena must take depreciation into account. While Unruh is correct that depreciation expense is not a cash expense that affects cash flow, it is an economic reality that can’t be ignored — except by politicians, apparently. The Wichita Eagle and Wichita Business Journal aid in promoting this deception.
The upshot: We’re evaluating government and making decisions based on incomplete and false information, just to gratify the egos of self-serving politicians and bureaucrats.
In February 2015 the Wichita Eagle reported: “The arena’s net income for 2014 came in at $122,853, all of which will go to SMG, the company that operates the facility under contract with the county, Assistant County Manager Ron Holt said Wednesday.” A reading of the minutes for the February 11 meeting of the Sedgwick County Commission finds Holt mentioning depreciation expense not a single time. Neither did the Eagle article.
In December 2014, in a look at the first five years of the arena, its manager told the Wichita Eagle this: “‘We know from a financial standpoint, the building has been successful. Every year, it’s always been in the black, and there are a lot of buildings that don’t have that, so it’s a great achievement,’ said A.J. Boleski, the arena’s general manager.”
The Wichita Eagle opinion page hasn’t been helpful, with Rhonda Holman opining with thoughts like this: “Though great news for taxpayers, that oversize check for $255,678 presented to Sedgwick County last week reflected Intrust Bank Arena’s past, specifically the county’s share of 2013 profits.” (For some years, the county paid to create a large “check” for publicity purposes.)
That followed her op-ed from a year before, when she wrote: “And, of course, Intrust Bank Arena has the uncommon advantage among public facilities of having already been paid for, via a 30-month, 1 percent sales tax approved by voters in 2004 that actually went away as scheduled.” That thinking, of course, ignores the economic reality of depreciation.
In 2018, the Wichita Eagle reported, based on partial-year results: “Intrust Bank Arena remains profitable but is reporting a 20 percent drop in income this year, despite a bump from the NCAA March Madness basketball tournament. Net income for the first three quarters of this year was about $556,000. That’s down from just shy of $700,000 last year, according to a report to the Sedgwick County Commission.” 5 This use of “profitable” is based only on the special revenue-sharing agreement, not generally accepted accounting principles.
Even our city’s business press — which ought to know better — writes headlines like Intrust Bank Arena tops $1.1M in net income for 2015 without mentioning depreciation expense or explaining the non-conforming accounting methods used to derive this number.
All of these examples are deficient in an important way: They contribute confusion to the search for truthful accounting of the arena’s finances. Recognizing depreciation expense is vital to understanding profit or loss, we’re not doing that.
—
Notes
We should be wary of government planning in general. But when those who have been managing and planning the foundering Wichita-area economy want to step up their management of resources, we risk compounding our problems.
As announced by the City of Wichita, “In response to recent recommendations from Project Wichita and the Century II Citizens Advisory Committee, community organizations and their leadership are stepping forward to take the next step to create a comprehensive master plan and vision that connects projects and both banks of the Arkansas River.”
The city says these organizations will be involved:
We should note that these organizations have been responsible for developing the Wichita-area economy for many years. Despite recent developments like Cargill and Spirit Aerosystems, the Wichita economy has performed below the nation. While improving, our economic growth is perhaps half the national rate, and just two years ago Wichita lost jobs and population, and economic output fell.
Thus, the question is this: Why these organizations?
Then, recent behavior by the city, specifically surrounding the new ballpark, has resulted in a loss of credibility. Few seem happy with the city’s conduct. To this day, we still do not know the identities of the partners except for one.
In the future, can we trust the city and its partners are telling us the truth, and the whole truth?
Then, there are the problems with government planning. Randal O’Toole is an expert on the problems with government planning. His book The Best-Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future
Planning seems like a good thing. But O’Toole tells us the problem with government plans: “Everybody plans. But private plans are flexible, and we happily change them when new information arises. In contrast, special interest groups ensure that the government plans benefiting them do not change — no matter how costly.”
He continues: “Like any other organization, government agencies need to plan their budgets and short-term projects. But they fail when they write comprehensive plans (which try to account for all side effects), long-range plans (two to 50 years or more), or plans that attempt to control other people’s land and resources. Many plans try to do all three.”
Other problems with government planning as identified by O’Toole (and many others):
Some will argue that the organizations listed above are not government entities and shouldn’t exhibit the problems inherent with government planning. But their plans will undoubtedly need to be approved by, and enforced by, government.
Further, some of these organizations are funded substantially or nearly entirely by government, are in favor of more government (such as higher taxation and regulation), and campaign vigorously for candidates who support more taxes and planning.
Following, from Randal O’Toole as published in 2007.
By Randal O’Toole
Unlike planners, markets can cope with complexity and change.
After more than 30 years of reviewing government plans, including forest plans, park plans, watershed plans, wildlife plans, energy plans, urban plans, and transportation plans, I’ve concluded that government planning almost always does more harm than good.
Most government plans are so full of fabrications and unsupportable assumptions that they aren’t worth the paper they are printed on, much less the millions of dollars taxpayers spend to have them written. Federal, state, and local governments should repeal planning laws and shut down planning offices.
Everybody plans. But private plans are flexible, and we happily change them when new information arises. In contrast, special interest groups ensure that the government plans benefiting them do not change — no matter how costly.
Like any other organization, government agencies need to plan their budgets and short-term projects. But they fail when they write comprehensive plans (which try to account for all side effects), long-range plans (two to 50 years or more), or plans that attempt to control other people’s land and resources. Many plans try to do all three.
Comprehensive plans fail because forests, watersheds, and cities are simply too complicated for anyone to understand. Chaos science reveals that very tiny differences in initial conditions can lead to huge differences in outcomes — that’s why megaprojects such as Boston’s Big Dig go so far over budget.
Long-range plans fail because planners have no better insight into the future than anyone else, so their plans will be as wrong as their predictions are.
Planning of other people’s land and resources fails because planners will not pay the costs they impose on other people, so they have no incentive to find the best answers.
Most of the nation’s 32,000 professional planners graduated from schools that are closely affiliated with colleges of architecture, giving them an undue faith in design. This means many plans put enormous efforts into trying to control urban design while they neglect other tools that could solve social problems at a much lower cost.
For example, planners propose to reduce automotive air pollution by increasing population densities to reduce driving. Yet the nation’s densest urban area, Los Angeles, which is seven times as dense as the least dense areas, has only 8 percent less commuting by auto. In contrast, technological improvements over the past 40 years, which planners often ignore, have reduced the pollution caused by some cars by 99 percent.
Some of the worst plans today are so-called growth-management plans prepared by states and metropolitan areas. They try to control who gets to develop their land and exactly what those developments should look like, including their population densities and mixtures of residential, retail, commercial, and other uses. “The most effective plans are drawn with such precision that only the architectural detail is left to future designers,” says a popular planning book.
About a dozen states require or encourage urban areas to write such plans. Those states have some of the nation’s least affordable housing, while most states and regions that haven’t written such plans mostly have very affordable housing. The reason is simple: planning limits the supply of new housing, which drives up the price of all housing and leads to housing bubbles.
In states with growth-management laws, median housing prices in 2006 were typically 4 to 8 times median family incomes. In most states without such laws, median home prices are only 2 to 3 times median family incomes.
Few people realize that the recent housing bubble, which affected mainly regions with growth-management planning, was caused by planners trying to socially engineer cities. Yet it has done little to protect open space, reduce driving, or do any of the other things promised.
Politicians use government planning to allocate scarce resources on a large scale. Instead, they should make sure that markets — based on prices, incentives, and property rights — work.
Private ownership of wildlife could save endangered species such as the black-footed ferret, North America’s most-endangered mammal. Variably priced toll roads have helped reduce congestion. Pollution markets do far more to clean the air than exhortations to drive less. Giving people freedom to use their property, and ensuring only that their use does not harm others, will keep housing affordable.
Unlike planners, markets can cope with complexity. Futures markets cushion the results of unexpected changes. Markets do not preclude government ownership, but the best-managed government programs are funded out of user fees that effectively make government managers act like private owners. Rather than passing the buck by turning sticky problems over to government planners, policymakers should make sure markets give people what they want.
An interactive visualization of GDP by state and industry, updated with annual data through 2018.
New figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, show gross domestic product in the states by industry.
BEA defines GDP as “the value of the goods and services produced by the nation’s economy less the value of the goods and services used up in production.” It is the value of the final goods and services produced. These values are real, meaning adjusted for inflation. The values for year 2018 are preliminary and subject to revision.
As shown in the accompanying illustration, Kansas has not kept up with most surrounding states.
In the interactive visualization, you may select a time period, one or more states, and one or more industries.
To learn more about the data and access the visualization, click here.
Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell’s State of the City video relies on flimsy evidence and plucks scant good news from a sea of bad. This is a problem.
Recently Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell delivered the State of the City video. It was posted to YouTube on March 28, 2019, and may be viewed here.
In this video, the mayor said, “The recent Livability.com study measured employment rates strength over time, affordability, and community amenities.” This isn’t the first time the mayor and other city officials have mentioned this study, if we can even call it that. 1 In January, a tweet from the official @CityofWichita Twitter account contained: “We have been named one of the top two recession-proof cities in the nation by @Livability. Wichita was praised for its ability to withstand turbulence in the national economy, steady job growth and the state’s low income-to-debt ratio.” 2
What does the data tell us? The nearby chart illustrates that since the end of the last recession, job growth in Wichita has been below job growth in the nation as a whole. Generally, job growth in Wichita has been at about half the rate of the nation. In 2017, Wichita lost jobs. Yet, City of Wichita officials, including Mayor Longwell, tout “steady job growth,” relying on a study that obviously isn’t based on evidence.
The mayor also said: “Wichita’s unemployment rate is at a historically low 3.5%, and WSU forecasts that Wichita is expected to see an across-the-board increase in overall jobs this year.”
Look at the data. In this table, we see that the unemployment rate (monthly average) for 2018 is nearly unchanged from 1999. Also nearly unchanged for these 19 years are the civilian labor force and number of jobs. Both values are slightly lower now. This is not “steady job growth,” as Wichita officials proclaim. It is stagnation.
It’s not only employment that has been bad news. In 2017 the Wichita economy contracted, which is the definition of a recession. 3 Personal income has grown only slowly. 4
Regarding jobs, the mayor accurately reports what the Center for Economic Development and Business Research at Wichita State University forecast said: Jobs are forecast to rise in Wichita for 2019. 5 Specifically, the report said: “Wichita is estimated to add approximately 2,500 jobs in 2018, and growth is projected to increase modestly to 0.9 percent in 2019, with more than 2,700 new jobs added.”
Is 0.9 percent job growth good? Nationally, the economy is expected to continue strong growth, although perhaps slightly slower than in 2018. 6 Nationally, job growth is forecast at 1.7 percent for 2019. 7 Wichita’s forecast rate of 0.9 percent is 53 percent of the national rate.
It’s good news that jobs are set to grow rather than shrink. But in a surging national economy, that’s setting a low standard for success.
What’s unfortunate is the mayor and city promote things like this as good news. But when we use readily accessible data from sources like the Bureau of Labor Statistics (part of the United States Department of Labor) and Bureau of Economic Analysis (a division of the United States Department of Commerce), we easily see that we’re not being told the entire story. “Recession-proof” glosses over recent years of declining production. “Historically low” unemployment rates ignore a stagnant and declining labor force. “An across-the-board increase in overall jobs this year” doesn’t contextualize that the forecast rate of growth for Wichita is anemic compared to the nation.
What we need to know is this: Are the mayor and city officials aware of the actual statistics, or are they ignorant?
—
Notes
In the fourth quarter of 2018, the Kansas economy grew at the annual rate of 0.9 percent, down from 1.2 percent the previous quarter.
In the fourth quarter of 2018, the Kansas economy grew at the annual rate of 0.9 percent in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars, according to statistics released today by Bureau of Economic Analysis, a division of the United States Department of Commerce. GDP for the quarter was at the annual rate of $169,558 million.
The rate of 0.9 percent ranked forty-fifth among the states.
Quarterly GDP growth for states can be volatile, as shown in the nearby chart.
Over the last eight quarters, Kansas has averaged quarterly growth rates of 0.5 percent in annual terms. For the nation, the rate was 2.7 percent. For the Plains states, it was 1.5 percent. (For this data, BEA defines Plains states as Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.)
For Kansas, industries that differed markedly from the nation include agriculture, utilities, construction, nondurable goods manufacturing, educational services, and government and government enterprises.
For the Wichita metropolitan area in March 2019, jobs are up, the labor force is up, and the unemployment rate is unchanged when compared to the same month one year ago. Seasonal data shows a small decline in jobs from February.
Data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, shows an improving, but also mixed, employment situation for the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Click charts and tables for larger versions.
Total nonfarm employment rose from 296,000 last March to 300,700 this March. That’s an increase of 4,700 jobs, or 1.6 percent. (This data is not seasonally adjusted, so month-to-month comparisons are not valid.) For the same period, jobs in the nation grew by 1.7 percent.
The unemployment rate in March 2019 was 3.9 percent, the same as one year ago.
Considering seasonally adjusted data from the household survey, the labor force rose by persons (0.0 percent) in March 2019 from February 2019, the number of unemployed persons rose by 149 (1.3 percent), and the unemployment rate rose from 3.7 percent to 3.8 percent. The number of employed persons not working on farms fell to 299,597 in March from 299,738 the prior month, a decline of 141 persons, or 0.0 percent.
The following chart of the monthly change in labor force and employment shows a general decline over the past year, with some recent months of losses for both measures.
The following chart of changes from the same month one year ago shows recent declines in the rate of growth.
Looking at the charts of changes in employment year-over-year, we see some months in the past year where Wichita outperformed the nation. That last happened in 2012.
Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell’s State of the City video doesn’t seem to be based on reality.
Recently Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell delivered the State of the City video. It was posted to YouTube on March 28, 2019, and may be viewed here.
Not long into the address, the mayor says, “… we must embrace the challenges we face and forge ahead into the bright future that is just around the corner.”
What about the population of Wichita city proper, as that is the jurisdiction the mayor was elected to represent? (It’s better to look at the MSA, for a number of reasons. 2 For one, several major “Wichita” employers are not located within the Wichita city limits. Major portions of Spirit Aerosystems, for example, lie outside the city, and the city certainly takes credit for job creation there.)
We have to ask: With a population growing much slower than the nation — and declining in the most recent year — what is the future of Wichita?
More importantly: Is Mayor Longwell aware of these statistics, and if so, why does he not recognize them? I hope this isn’t what he means by “embrace the challenges.”
—
Notes
An interactive visualization of the civilian labor force, employment, and unemployment, for each state. Updated through March 2019.
As seen in the nearby example, Kansas continues its undistinguished record in job growth as compared to nearby states. In the visualization, you can easily choose states to compare, select a timeframe, and look at labor force, employment, and unemployment.
Click here to learn more about the data and access the interactive visualization.
Employment in Kansas continues to mostly grow in March 2019, but continues a trend of slower growth than the nation.
Data released last week from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, shows a decline in jobs in Kansas for February 2019.
Using seasonally adjusted data, from February 2019 to March 2019, nonfarm employment in Kansas fell by 2,500, which is 0.2 percent. Over the year, the number of Kansas nonfarm jobs for March 2019 rose by 5,900 or 0.4 percent over last March. This is using seasonally adjusted data. The non-adjusted figure is nearly the same at 5,300.
Over the year (March 2018 to March 2019), the Kansas labor force is up by 0.5 percent using seasonally adjusted data, with only small changes over the past three months. Non-seasonal data shows a slight decline in the labor force over the year.
The number of unemployed persons rose from February 2019 to March 2019, rising by 792 persons, or 1.5 percent. The unemployment rate was 3.5 percent in March, up from 3.4 percent from one year ago, and also up from 3.4 percent in February.
Click charts and tables for larger versions.
The following chart shows the change in nonfarm jobs over the same month one year ago. For the past several years the line for Kansas has been below the line for the nation, meaning jobs were growing slower in Kansas. Recently, however, the gap between the lines is smaller.
Wichita leaders want to diversify the area economy. Has there been progress?
One way to measure concentration of an industry in a location is by the proportion of employment in that industry. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides employment by industry for metropolitan areas. I’ve gathered the data for the Wichita MSA for two industries: Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing (NAICS code 3364) and all manufacturing. I’ve gathered this data for the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area and compare it to total private sector employment. This data is not adjusted for seasonality, as some is available only in that manner.
Click for larger.
Click for larger.As the charts illustrate, there was a large shift in the two industry’s share of employment around the time of the Great Recession. Since then, the ratios have been more stable, with a slow decline until a small reversal of that trend over the last year.
The chart of employment ratio changes from the same month one year ago confirms: Manufacturing and aerospace employment has grown faster than total private employment in the recent year or so.
Click for larger.Another way to measure concentration of an industry is through location quotients. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides these, most notably for counties as part of the Quarterly of Census and Wages. 1 As described by BLS, “Location quotients are useful for studying the composition of jobs in an area relative to the average, or for finding areas that have high concentrations of jobs in certain occupations. As measured here, a location quotient shows the occupation’s share of an area’s employment relative to the national average.” 2
Further: “For example, a location quotient of 2.0 indicates that an occupation accounts for twice the share of employment in the area than it does nationally, and a location quotient of 0.5 indicates the area’s share of employment in the occupation is half the national share.”
This data is available by industry. I’ve gathered data for Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing (NAICS code 3364) for Sedgwick County and present it in a nearby chart.
First, note that the location quotient is large, 30 or more. This means the concentration of workers in this industry in Sedgwick county is over 30 times the concentration nationwide.
Second, the location quotient fell from 2007 through 2014. Since then, it has been steady.
Has the Wichita area diversified its economy? Based on these two measures, the answer is yes. That increased in diversity happened at the same time as a large decline in aviation-related employment, that decline being larger than the decline in all Wichita-area private-sector employment. That was not planned or desired. It was a result of worldwide trends. But since then, concentration in aviation-related employment has changed little, and shows signs of increasing concentration.
—
Notes
The population of the Wichita MSA fell from 2017 to 2018, and net domestic migration continues at a high level.
New data from the United States Census Bureau shows the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area losing population from July 1, 2017, to July 1, 2018.
The population estimate for 2017 was 645,628, and for 2018, 644,888. This is a decline of 740 persons, or -0.11 percent. Population changes in the seven years before 2018 averaged 0.30 percent each year.
The Wichita MSA ranked 89th largest among 383 metro areas, falling from rank 82 as recently as 2011.
Net domestic migration for the Wichita metro area showed a loss of 3,023 persons, or 0.47 percent of the population. This change, on a proportional basis, was 301st among the 383 metro areas. It is less than the loss of 3,235 persons the year before.
Click charts for larger versions.
Wichita MSA population and change from prior year. Wichita MSA population, percent change from prior year.
Rank of Wichita MSA population.
Rank of Wichita MSA population one-year change.
Wichita MSA net domestic migration.For the Wichita metropolitan area in February 2019, jobs are up, the labor force is up, and the unemployment rate is down when compared to the same month one year ago. Seasonal data shows a return to job growth.
Data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, shows an improving employment situation for the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Total nonfarm employment rose from 295,400 last February to 300,700 this February. That’s an increase of 5,300 jobs, or 1.8 percent. (This data is not seasonally adjusted, so month-to-month comparisons are not valid.) For the same period, jobs in the nation grew by 1.7 percent.
The unemployment rate in February 2019 was 3.9 percent, down from 4.2 percent from one year ago.
Considering seasonally adjusted data from the household survey, the labor force rose by 1,115 persons (0.4 percent) in February 2019 from January 2019, the number of unemployed persons fell by 64 (-0.5 percent), and the unemployment rate fell from 3.9 percent to 3.8 percent. The number of employed persons not working on farms rose to 300,080 in February from 298,01 the prior month, an increase of 1,179 persons, or 0.4 percent.
Looking at the charts of changes in employment year-over-year, we see some months in the past year where Wichita outperformed the nation. That last happened in 2012.
Click charts for larger versions.
For 2018, the rate of personal income growth in Kansas was near the bottom of the states, although the fourth quarter was much better.
Today the Bureau of Economic Analysis, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, released state personal income data for the fourth quarter of 2018, as well as preliminary state personal income for 2018.
For Kansas, personal income in 2018 was $146,028 million, an increase of 3.2 percent from 2017. For the nation, the increase was 4.5 percent. For Plains states, the increase was 3.9 percent. (For this data, Plains States are Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.)
The increase in Kansas was forty-sixth best among the states.
Per capita personal income in Kansas was $50,155 in 2018, compared to $50,905 for Plains states and $53,712 for the nation.
Earnings in Kansas grew by $3,159 million in 2018, although farm earnings fell by $659 million.
For the fourth quarter of 2018, Kansas personal income grew at the annual rate of 5.7 percent, which was sixteenth-best among the states.
According to BEA, “Personal income is the income received by, or on behalf of, all persons from all sources: from participation as laborers in production, from owning a home or business, from the ownership of financial assets, and from government and business in the form of transfers. It includes income from domestic sources as well as the rest of world. It does not include realized or unrealized capital gains or losses.”
Also from BEA: “Earnings by place of work is the sum of wages and salaries, supplements to wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income. BEA’s industry estimates are presented on an earnings by place of work basis.”
