Friday, February 08, 2008

Record high spin

Once again Lindsay Mitchell puts the spin about "record low unemployment figures" into perspective.

"In 1970 under 2 percent of working-age people were on welfare and more than half of those were widows."

In 1986 "under 7 percent of working-age people relied on welfare."

"Today, however, over 10 percent of working-age people rely on welfare." I don't think half of them are widows.

So when one-in-ten working age New Zealanders isn't working, how can you can call that "record low unemployment."

Labels: ,

6 Comments:

Blogger Cactus Kate said...

Has anyone done a study about working people receiving working for families such that the amount they pay in tax is lower than what they receive under WFF plus other benefits?

These people are by definition beneficiaries as well.

2/09/2008 04:10:00 am  
Anonymous Hanso said...

In a sense, nobody (with the exception of the prime minister, and a few others) recieves more frrom the government than they pay in tax.

My reason for this statement is that the capital that is created by New-Zealanders and stolen and misused by the government, could, if used wisely, be formed into wealth far greater than that which it is now.

2/09/2008 11:39:00 am  
Blogger Dave said...

So when one-in-ten working age New Zealanders isn't working, how can you can call that "record low unemployment."
Easy. Just confate "record low unemployment" with record low unemploymenht rate" after pushing more women into work to support their partners in our low wage high cost economy

2/09/2008 02:20:00 pm  
Blogger Dave said...

Nobody (with the exception of the prime minister, and a few others) recieves more from the government than they pay in tax.

As I have argued that is bollocks.

Those with three kids on 45k get more from Working for Families than they pay in tax.

2/09/2008 02:25:00 pm  
Blogger AngloAmerican said...

Dave, I'm sure you didn't read Hanso's reason for his statement. I read it to mean if all the tax was invested wisely instead of wasted on the DPB, sickness benefits etc then we could, in theory, get back more than what we put in.

2/09/2008 06:07:00 pm  
Anonymous Hanso said...

You read correcetly angloamerican. As has been pointed out by PC in the past, money does not equal wealth.

2/09/2008 10:41:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home