Produce your source. Here's what I find:
Jobs rise at twice the rate expected
chron.com
300,000 new jobs in three months
suntimes.com
Both of which are dated today and both of which mention Challenger, Gray, and Christmas.
Now there was also this:
If you just look at the numbers, Challenger, Gray and Christmas, an outplacement firm, said that there were 171,874 layoffs in October. The Bush administration, under the cover of the Labor Department, said 126,000 new jobs were added (mostly in the low-paying service sector industry) in October. On BuzzFlash's planet that means there were 50,000 MORE Americans without jobs.
buzzflash.com
Or maybe not. It depends on what ACTUALLY happened, not on what that biased author wishes to believe. If there were 171,784 layoffs and something like 300,000 new jobs created, you get the 300,000 figure mentioned above.
You're letting your biases blur your vision, Lizzie.
Is the government starting to change their statistical methods to include Larry Kudlow's "household employment" as a job?
Um, you DO know changes in methodology like this are announced, right? I searched the Federal Register and found nothing to indicate such a change. You may do so yourself if you wish.
gpoaccess.gov
NOW: Globalization was your hero Billy Clinton's pet, remember? He shoved NAFTA down the Democratic Party's throat, remember? There were large protests about it, remember (Seattle)?
Offshoring is an inevitable and predictable result of globalization. If you are a businessperson, you should be able to reason well enough to get to that conclusion. Ross Perot ran for the Presidency based largely on expected on losses caused by globalization, remember?
If you can get engineers in India for $20,000 a year or pay $100,000 here, what are you going to do if you are a businessperson?
So what EXACTLY is YOUR solution to this problem? Withdraw from WTO? Abrogate NAFTA? What?
And does Bill Clinton join your devil category because of this? |
