To: NormsRevenge
In the United States, the promise of more jobs proved elusive, the study noted, with NAFTA contributing to the most anemic employment recovery in recent history.Pfffft. What is unemployment 4.7%, 4.8%? I thought under 5% is considered full employment.
8 posted on
09/27/2006 2:28:17 PM PDT by
rhombus
To: rhombus
I thought under 5% is considered full employment. Pre-NAFTA, it was considered to be 6.5%.
16 posted on
09/27/2006 2:33:53 PM PDT by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: rhombus
most anemic employment recovery in recent history. So they add the crime of lying to their obvious propagandizing. Prior to NAFTA we had not achieved "full employment" at all during the 1970s and 1980s. Since NAFTA we achieved full employment for the last 2 years of the Clinton Admin and then after the 0911 recovery we have it NOW. So the authors of this supposed study is knowingly lying about the data. So if they lied to us here, what else are they lying about?
32 posted on
09/27/2006 3:14:10 PM PDT by
MNJohnnie
(Say Leftists. How many Nazis did killing Nazis in WW2 create? or Samurai? or Fascists?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson