unpakwon
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Korean
- Home Country
- South Korea
- Current Location
- South Korea
I can't follow the logic in the following in red.
Unemployment has also been higher as a consequence of the declining dollar. During the World War 2 gold standard era, from 1947 to 1970, unemployment averaged less than 5%. Even with the economy's ups and downs, it never rose above 7%. Since Nixon gave us the fiat dollar it has averaged over 6%: it averaged 8.5% in 1975, almost 10% in 1982, and around 8% since 2008. The rate would have been higher had millions not left the workforce.
Is this saying "The unemployment rate would have been higher if millions of people had not stopped working"? Acyually the rate wasn't higher because millions left the workforce (quit working)? It sounds strange.
Thank you.
Unemployment has also been higher as a consequence of the declining dollar. During the World War 2 gold standard era, from 1947 to 1970, unemployment averaged less than 5%. Even with the economy's ups and downs, it never rose above 7%. Since Nixon gave us the fiat dollar it has averaged over 6%: it averaged 8.5% in 1975, almost 10% in 1982, and around 8% since 2008. The rate would have been higher had millions not left the workforce.
Is this saying "The unemployment rate would have been higher if millions of people had not stopped working"? Acyually the rate wasn't higher because millions left the workforce (quit working)? It sounds strange.
Thank you.
Last edited: