Bye-bye engineering, hello massage therapy

WorldNetDaily ^ | April 16, 2004 | Ilana Mercer

[neutrino]

Using the idiotic term " free-traitor" is pathetic.

Umm? But being a free-traitor is far worse. It is loathsome.

You really do not even understand what free trade is!

Yes, I do. And that one David Ricardo, mercifully taken into the great beyond in 1823, was the originator of the theory. More, that economists begin to realize that free trade is not the panacea that Ricardo and his misguided followers seem to believe that it is.

Are you advocating FORTRESS AMERICA too?

Absolutley and completely.

Do you, as it appears,imagine that the government should ensure everyone a job?

That cannot work. Establishing straw-man arguments is...shall we say...a pathetic tactic.

Enjoy your trinkets while you may. China is growing - and quickly.

[FreeReign]

And according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics latest Employment Situation Summary, Ms. Chao's future is now. For all the din sounded over the addition of 308,000 jobs to the economy in March, the government-fed news filters failed to mention which job sectors were surging. Sure enough, it transpires that employment opportunities are optimal in construction, retail trade, food services, social assistance, and (naturally) in government.

WorldNetDaily mistakenly(I'm sure) left out this surging sector:

[From their link to the Houseold Survey]:Professional and business services added 42,000 jobs in March.

[nopardons]

I enjoy my trinkets,pet,more than you could imagine and no, I don't buy cheap crap.Your implication being, I take it,that I buy garbage, because it's cheap.I don't buy things made in China,excerpt for my Coramandle screen and Ching Dynasty jar,that is and both were made centuries ago and weren't exactly what I'd call "cheap". Before making such silly statements, it would behoove you to know just to whom you're posting. :-)

Well,well, well...a Patsie,who claims to have voted for President Bush? You yearn for FORTRESS AMEDRICA,but also cl.aim to understand economics and free trade? What a hoot! I can't stop laughing my socks off.I just bet you're for sumptuary taxes too.

[nopardons]

"Me-tooism"? Ronald Reagan thought up NAFTA, were you against it when he talked about it? Hes was also a free trader,you know.:-)

[FreeReign]

Enjoy your trinkets while you may. China is growing - and quickly.

China has a GDP per capita of 4,400 which ranks it 129th of all countries in the world.

[FreeReign]

College administrators are already hip to Ms. Chao's future. For example, San Francisco State University is considering the closure of its engineering school.

Engineering programs come and go all the time.

Engineering school enrollment in this country is growing.

[sarcasm]

Ronald Reagan thought up NAFTA, were you against it when he talked about it?

Yes.

Hes was also a free trader,you know.:-)

He was also a former Democrat. Democrats were the traditional party of free trade. As Reagan once said - I didn't leave the party, the party left me. Reagan held on to that part of his Democrat identity.

[sarcasm]

China has a GDP per capita of 4,400 which ranks it 129th of all countries in the world.

How does it fare when you adjust for purchasing power?

[nopardons]

Correct and Reagan is also a neocon. :-)

Having agreed with me,thus far, on this matter, are you now also willing to flame/castigate Reagan even more? If so,then also please state which president,to your way of thinking,was a Conservative.

[FreeReign]

China has a GDP per capita of 4,400 which ranks it 129th of all countries in the world.

How does it fare when you adjust for purchasing power?

I'm sorry. I meant to say China has a GDP per capita of $4,400. That's U.S. dollars, which means it's already adjusted.

[sarcasm]

Having agreed with me,thus far, on this matter

I would say that it's the other way around.

If so,then also please state which president,to your way of thinking,was a Conservative.

In terms of free trade - Teddy Roosevelt - he called it a pernicious dogma.

[sarcasm]

I'm sorry. I meant to say China has a GDP per capita of $4,400. That's U.S. dollars, which means it's already adjusted.

Nope, look up purchasing power parity.

[nopardons]

The other way around? That's a laugh, when it was my post, that YOU agreed with,dear. :-)

Teddy Roosevelt? I didn't say in terms of free trade...I asked you which president was a Conservative,in your lexicon;not in terms of free trade, or any other terms either,just Conservative. But okay,I'll take the answer, FWIW,as given and thanks for playing. :-)

[FreeReign]

I'm sorry. I meant to say China has a GDP per capita of $4,400. That's U.S. dollars, which means it's already adjusted.

Nope, look up purchasing power parity.

No you are wrong. You look up PPP.

[sarcasm]

4,400 American Dollars can purchase considerably more in China than in the United States - that is the essence of purchasing power parity. BTW, I doubt that your figure is correct.

[sarcasm]

I asked you which president was a Conservative,in your lexicon;not in terms of free trade,

Any Republican before Eisenhower.

[nopardons]

ROTFLOL!

Even the ones who were totally useless?

[sarcasm]

Even the ones who were totally useless?

The only one I would consider "useless" would be Harding.

[nopardons]

Good old Teapot Dome Harding.:-)

Anyone else you'd care to exclude?

[FreeReign]

China has a GDP per capita of $4,400. That's U.S. dollars, which means it's already adjusted.

4,400 American Dollars can purchase considerably more in China than in the United States - that is the essence of purchasing power parity.

Wrong, PPP is based on the "law of one price". By definition it sates that "competitive markets will equalize the price of an identical good in two countries when the prices are expressed in the same currency."

GDP in U.S. dollars for China is based on U.S. purchasing power because it is based on the U.S. dollar.

BTW, I doubt that your figure is correct.

I doubt you have ever looked in the CIA world fact book on the subject of China and GDP per capita for the year 2003.