"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...

Bull****. You stated that more jobs were created. You did NOT indicate
at
what income levels they were created. 95% may have been jobs which pay
minimum wage. Or not. You don't know. And, you don't know where those
employees came from before. Were they unemployed? Did they leave other
jobs
for reasons other than money, like travel distance or job satisfaction?
You
have no idea. Therefore, you cannot argue that there was any gain or
loss,
or that it has any political significance whatsoever.


Doug, do you really believe that all these people were hired at minimum
wage,
and no supervisors were hired, or promoted? Why not get a little bit
real?

I never made any numerical claims. I'm pointing out that this particular
statistic is meaningless without other information. You must know a few
math
teachers who enjoy statistics. Ask some of them.


Well, then you must also believe that denigrating the jobs as 'low paying'
is
also meaningless. True?

John, the past few years have brought new testing procedures to be sure our
kids are up to speed in terms of reading comprehension. Have you tried
taking any of the sample tests?

I specifically said that the stats presented by NOYB are meaningless. I did
not say the jobs "created" were low paying jobs. If you disagree, please cut
& paste my text, and tell me why you think I made any claims.