Difference between revisions of "Talk:New Zealand"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Unemployment statistics wrong)
(Unemployment statistics wrong)
Line 27: Line 27:
  
 
: That's very different from the number reported in the content page.  Could that be due to how unemployment is measured in New Zealand?  E.g., are many people simply dropped off the rolls after 6 months, even though they continue to be unemployed?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:19, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
 
: That's very different from the number reported in the content page.  Could that be due to how unemployment is measured in New Zealand?  E.g., are many people simply dropped off the rolls after 6 months, even though they continue to be unemployed?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:19, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
 +
::The latest OECD standardised unemployment rate (SUR) for NZ is 3.7%[http://stats.oecd.org/WBOS/Default.aspx?QueryName=251&QueryType=View]. The  SUR counts those of working age who are without work, available for work and actively seeking work and is a sound basis for comparing unemployment rates in different countries.[http://stats.oecd.org/mei/default.asp?lang=e&subject=10].--[[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 12:36, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 10:36, 17 May 2007

Very well written. The only part I would possibly dispute is your statement that the Maori Party are in opposition to the government. While this would certainly be true on issues such as the seabed and foreshore legislation, it is a bit of a stretch to say they are in opposition. They have voted with the government on sevveral issues, and it is important to bear in mind that the Maori electorate traditionally votes on a slightly more left of centre basis. Despite this minor detail, I thought it was a well written and well balanced article. - Tom.

You know what i find funny? the fact that conservapedia claims to be better than Wikipedia and yet it used wikipedia as a source, check the external links for this article, one is for wikitravel, a part of wikipedia, how are you supposed to be better than someone else if you get your info from them?. - John.

Entirely True, i applaud the work of this historian

Doesnt make sense

Is their any support at all that Japan and Russia came to New Zealand before america was found? and that they founded a city called "Vodka City" and that australia, in 1796 invaded these two "capitals" and defeated a nation that has been established for many years? makes no sense nor is their any factual backing.

-I think it depends on who you refer to as the Australians, Japanese and Russians at that time. These states were very different before the late modern period. The history of the area isn't as well documented as say the American colonial period.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wikipedia, you do need to take information from it with a pinch of salt however and it definitely should not be used for serious research purposes. I hope i did my country justice by writing this article -gilltm

thanks for correcting me or for any constructive editing

Unemployment statistics wrong

The figure of 8.3% unemployment is very out of date. The Labour (centre-left) led government elected in 1999 has reduced the unemployment to something more like 3% and New Zealand has among the lowest unemployment rates in the world.

Can you provide a citation for your number?--Aschlafly 20:01, 20 April 2007 (EDT)
The unemployment rate data from the last quarter of 2006 is 3.7%. The information is from the statistics New Zealand website. http://www.stats.govt.nz/top-20-stats.htm plqgnmv 6:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I find it hard to believe that a liberal governement like this one would have such low unemployment - must be a mistake. Delete maybe? Ferret 08:16, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
Here]. No ideological deletes, especially when so ill-informed. 3.8% in 2006 as a whole. --WikinterpreterLiaise with the cabal?
That's very different from the number reported in the content page. Could that be due to how unemployment is measured in New Zealand? E.g., are many people simply dropped off the rolls after 6 months, even though they continue to be unemployed?--Aschlafly 10:19, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
The latest OECD standardised unemployment rate (SUR) for NZ is 3.7%[1]. The SUR counts those of working age who are without work, available for work and actively seeking work and is a sound basis for comparing unemployment rates in different countries.[2].--Jalapeno 12:36, 17 May 2007 (EDT)