>...from this morning's WSJ:
>
>[1] In a contrast of Bush-1 and Bush-2, it's said that according to the
>BLS, "1.4 million civilian jobs have been created in the past year ...
>[in] 1990 and 1991, civilian jobs declined by 1.4 million" (p. A18). Is
>that so?
Dunno where the 1.4m figure comes from. According to the BLS's survey of households, employment has risen by 1.1m over the last year. According to the survey of employers (the "establishment" survey), employment has declined by 35,000. According to the BLS, the establishment survey is more reliable (larger sample than the HH survey, and there are great difficulties involved in expanding the HH sample into national figures, because of changes in the population between decennial censuses). Normally the difference between the two surveys is pretty small, but the discrepancies over the last year or two have been unusually wide.
>[2] "...Greenspan warned that if China were to let its currency float
>immediately ... it could ... threaten the world economy" (p. A2). But
>isn't the administration's policy to draw down the dollar relative to
>trading partners' currencies? Another embarrassment from the Fed chair?
I think the key word is "immediately" - a sudden rise in the yuan would be very risky (the Chinese financial system might not be able to handle it). A gradual adjustment is another story. Greenspan has a typically elegant speech on the current account and related matters out today - <http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2004/20040302/>.
Doug