In trade-jobs debate, the fine art of misleading data
When opponents of the trade pact with South Korea say 59,000 jobs would be lost in Washington state, how factual is that claim, and where does it come from?
(Page 2 of 2)
So there is an important responsibility that should weigh on all organizations active in the public forum to get their set of facts right. This doesn’t mean setting aside political agenda, but it does mean clearly stating the assumptions on which estimates are based. It also means accurately describing the results; that whatever a job “at risk” is, it’s not a job “lost.”
Topics:
Port of Seattle,
Business
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Thu, Sep 15, 11:54 a.m. Inappropriate
In other words, we don't know what the effects of KORUS will be, so why do it? We do know that the effects of NAFTA were bad for both the US and Mexico (I don't know about Canada), so let's withdraw from it. Also, at a time of concern about unemployment and the government deficit, don't forget tariffs. They raise some prices, but they encourage domestic production and increase government revenue.
Posted Thu, Sep 22, 11:37 a.m. Inappropriate
So when Dick Nelson's job writing about trade with South Korea is exported to South Korea, he didn't lose his job, it was "displaced." Yeah right Dick, this agreement sucks rocks. "Fair Trade" not "Free Trade".
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.