Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DriveInDriѵeOut" data-source="post: 4955176" data-attributes="member: 44954">No this is wrong. This is dishonest nonsense.Democrats are delusional.&nbsp;Anyone who wants a job can get one. Businesses are desperate for workers.That is objective reality.For the United States, economist William T. Dickens found that full-employment unemployment rate varied a lot over time but equaled about 5.5 percent of the civilian labor force during the 2000s.[5] Recently, economists have emphasized the idea that full employment represents a &quot;range&quot; of possible unemployment rates. For example, in 1999, in the United States, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) gives an estimate of the &quot;full-employment unemployment rate&quot; of 4 to 6.4%. This is the estimated unemployment rate at full employment, plus and minus the standard error of the estimate.[6]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DriveInDriѵeOut, post: 4955176, member: 44954"] No this is wrong. This is dishonest nonsense. Democrats are delusional. Anyone who wants a job can get one. Businesses are desperate for workers. That is objective reality. [I]For the United States, economist William T. Dickens found that full-employment unemployment rate varied a lot over time but equaled about 5.5 percent of the civilian labor force during the 2000s.[5] Recently, economists have emphasized the idea that full employment represents a "range" of possible unemployment rates. For example, in 1999, in the United States, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) gives an estimate of the "full-employment unemployment rate" of 4 to 6.4%. This is the estimated unemployment rate at full employment, plus and minus the standard error of the estimate.[6][/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification