6 percent ; california ’ s is 2. 59 percent ; and new york ’ s 2. 06 percent. now, let ’ s look at job creation in texas since june 2009, the date that the national bureau of economic research ( or nber, the body that “ officially ” dates when a recession starts and ends ) declared the recent economic recession to have ended. there are several ways to calculate texas ’ contribution to national job creation from june 2009 through the end of june 2011. one is to look at the number of jobs created by all 50 states, including those that have lost jobs since the nation ’ s anemic recovery began. using this metric, through june of this year texas has accounted for 49. 9 percent of net new jobs created in the united states. another way to calculate texas ’ contribution to job creation is to lop off those states that have continued losing jobs and consider only those that have positive growth in employment these past two years. using this metric, texas has accounted for 29. 2 percent of job creation since the recession ended. these are the facts. you may select whichever metric you wish. regardless, it is reasonable to assume texas has accounted for a significant amount of the nation ’ s employment growth both over the past 20 years and since the recession officially ended. this raises the obvious question – what kind of jobs are being created in texas? here are two charts that might help you form an opinion. bis central bankers ’ speeches the first provides a breakdown of employment growth by sector since the recession ended, listing each employment sector by its weight in the employment mix of texas. the most jobs have been created in the educational and health services sector, which accounts for 13. 5 percent of texas ’ employment. the second - most jobs have been created in the professional and business services sector, which accounts for 12. 5 percent of the texas workforce. the mining sector, which includes support activities for both mining and oil and gas, employs 2. 1 percent ( yes, two - point - one percent ) of texas ’ workers. in the second chart, you will see that these jobs are not low - paying jobs. the average weekly wage in the education and health services sector is $ 790 ; in the professional and business services sector it is $ 1, 117 ; and in the mining sector, the average weekly wage is $ 2, 271. together these three sectors account for 68 percent of the jobs that have been created in texas in the past two years. i

debt, combined with the fomc ’ s commitment to hold short - term rates near zero until mid - year 2013, some cynical observers might interpret such a policy action as a “ bernanke put. ” my long - standing belief is that the federal reserve should never enact such asymmetric policies to protect stock market traders and investors. i believe my fomc colleagues share this view. connecting the dots now, how do you connect the dots between texas ’ record of economic growth and my dissenting vote? despite the fact that texas has severely limited social services and an education system that faces great challenges, people and businesses have been picking up stakes and moving to texas in significant numbers over a prolonged period. 3 it should be noted that in the last census, texas gained population and congressional seats, while california ’ s population growth and congressional representation was static and new york ’ s was diminished. jobs have been created for american workers in texas in several different sectors, not just in the oil and gas and mining sectors. people have taken those jobs of their own free will, even though the jobs may not measure up to the compensation levels everyone would like. and yet texas, like all states, is subject to the same monetary policy as all the rest : we have the same interest rates and access to capital as the residents of any of the other 49 states, for the federal reserve conducts monetary policy and regulates financial institutions under its the code of the woosters, by p. g. wodehouse, new york : doubleday, doran, 1938. see “ texas : what makes us exceptional? where are we vulnerable?, ” speech by richard w. fisher before the 2010 pre - session legislative conference, dec. 2, 2010. bis central bankers ’ speeches purview for the nation at large. from this, i draw the conclusion that private sector capital and jobs will go to where taxes and spending and regulatory policy are most conducive to growth. therein lies a lesson for our fiscal policy makers as they grapple with their monumental task of reconfiguring fiscal policy and eliminating the prevailing uncertainty about their remedy. we live in a world that, through steadfast sacrifice of the american treasure and with blood and capable diplomacy, won the cold war, induced the chinese to pull back the bamboo curtain and opened up the majority of the world to once unimaginable economic opportunity. china, the rest of southeast asia, eastern europe, india, most