250,000 jobless and counting

Written By: - Date published: 10:49 am, January 25th, 2010 - 28 comments
Categories: national/act government, unemployment - Tags:

28 comments on “250,000 jobless and counting ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Peter Johns 1
    25 January 2010 at 10:53 am

    and you want the min wage increased to $15PH?
    Global Depression is also not helping, look how our export markets are going.
    [no evidence that increasing the minimum wage increases unemployment. Export markets are growing faster than us esp our largest ones: China, US, and Aussie]

  2. Adrian 2
    25 January 2010 at 10:56 am

    It may have taken a year but the cartoonists are getting restless. It’s never a good sign.

    • Mac1 2.1
      25 January 2010 at 7:49 pm

      Did anyone ever tell Brash that “It’s not a trumpet, it’s a bloody euphonium!”?

      Quote from Harry in Brashed Off.

      • logie97 2.1.1
        25 January 2010 at 8:19 pm

        That cartoon in today’s Herald just about sums Key up. Just a point. Do you think Jonboy is welcome enough to join a Ratana band yet?… I wonder if he will wear his folksy t-shirt at Waitangi this year. And what prizes for predicting Emerson’s cartoon?

  3. quenchino 3
    25 January 2010 at 11:02 am

    Yes. The often overlooked fact of NZ unemployment figures is the overwhelming portion who do not qualify for a benefit because their spousal income is too high… and are missing from the headline figures.

    • rainman 3.1
      25 January 2010 at 12:19 pm

      I agree with you – this is a big problem which I’m all too aware of. Was made redundant a few months ago, been trying to manage on my partner’s income until that went away too. No fun, no interest from anywhere in govt to help me back into work, at least until I’m on the bones of my arse. The system seems designed to foster dependence. No wonder people bitch about the tax they pay.

      However, I understand from earlier postings here that the methodology for gathering the numbers is more survey-based, so should catch those who are unemployed but not eligible for UB. Last I looked the number of UB recipients was much lower than the headline unemployment rate.

  4. burt 4
    25 January 2010 at 11:07 am

    The failed policies of the 00’s are really coming home to roost now aren’t they.

    • quenchino 4.1
      25 January 2010 at 11:12 am

      The failed neoliberal experiment of the last four decades is the only critter roosting here buster.

      (Or are you suggesting that somehow NZ Labour’s policies of the last decade were responsible for the crisis in the USA, UK, Europe… and everywhere else in teh world?)

    • Eddie 4.2
      25 January 2010 at 11:12 am

      come on, burt. explain that too us.

      go beyond the braindead slogans and show us how Labour caused the number of jobless to increase by 80,000 in the first nine months of Key’s government. Facts, not slogans.

      captcha – identify

    • ghostwhowalksnz 4.3
      25 January 2010 at 11:44 am

      Compare the 00s with the 90s.
      A similar 9 year period . Same country different government

      http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/keygraphs/Fig9.html

    • lprent 4.4
      25 January 2010 at 11:52 am

      You mean the rising employment levels?

      Or the really stupid push by idiots (like you burt) to diminish the tax take that Cullen held off for so long? This would all be a lot easier to manage if the government wasn’t steadily sliding into debt

    • Jimnald 4.5
      25 January 2010 at 1:02 pm

      The more precise and honest focus, in terms of time-period to which we can mainly attribute the particular economic state now (given the unique circumstances of credit crunch, global meltdown, etc), is what was done (or not done) in late 2008-early 2009 by the outgoing Labour Government or incoming National Government.

  5. Andrei 5
    25 January 2010 at 11:18 am

    Perhaps we should start using our mineral wealth, that would create jobs in the mining industry as well as in peripheral industries.

    Win win

    • quenchino 5.1
      25 January 2010 at 11:25 am

      Modern mining industries employ very few people. It’s all highly mechanised and automated…. Loose.

      The mining companies will overwhelming be overseas owned who will exacerbate our balance of payments problem sucking the profits offshore…. Loose.

      The bulk of the minerals are located in National Park wilderness. The mines and roads will be a massive PR hit on our tourism industry’s unique selling proposition… Loose.

      It will create a massive backlash against the govt… WIN !!!!

    • Draco T Bastard 5.2
      25 January 2010 at 11:39 am

      And when it’s all gone, which wouldn’t take long, we’ll be right back where we started. In fact, we’d probably be worse off as we’d be down all those resources.

  6. tsmithfield 6
    25 January 2010 at 11:47 am

    Look at the amount of jobs heading off shore to the likes of China. Could that have had an effect on the unemployment rate?

    If so, what is the government to do about the international carry-trade that is pushing up currencies such as the Aus and NZ dollars and making our industries uncompetitive locally?

    • quenchino 6.1
      25 January 2010 at 11:54 am

      Explain how come China is the only major trading nation that is allowed to fix it’s currency’s exchange rate at a fraction of it’s real worth?

      Who wrote that rule?

      • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1
        25 January 2010 at 4:08 pm

        The Americans* after the 2nd World War in the Bretton Woods Agreement. The system was supposed to fix all currencies to the US$ and then have the US$ on the Gold Standard making it the reserve currency. With the US unilaterally dropping the Gold Standard and floating the US$ in 1971 the system broke. Most countries followed with some sort of currency float but China didn’t and maintained it’s peg to the US$.

        * Ok, fine, it wasn’t technically the Americans by themselves but there was only one world power at the time.

  7. tsmithfield 7
    25 January 2010 at 12:02 pm

    At present China is pegging its exchange rate to the US dollar. They are a sovereign nation, so I don’t think they need any particular permission from anyone to do this.

    The carry-trade is more to do with large investors borrowing in US dollars at virtually 0 interest rate and reinvesting in higher yielding assets. Its sort of like money for free at the moment.

  8. tc 8
    25 January 2010 at 12:08 pm

    Shock horror….is that dissatisfaction in the MSM for the erstwhile policies (i.e they must be former policies as they haven’t worked so new ones required) of our nice guy PM and his job creation summit etc etc

    Must be back from Holiday where they were forced into observing what’s happening in real NZ as that’s where the bach is and not their insular world of fellow scribes/artists/management around the CBD……damm that reality I was so loving the laid back ‘everything is fine’ line, in fact I already drew up the first months cartoons.

  9. tsmithfield 9
    25 January 2010 at 12:23 pm

    quenchino “So why doesn’t we just fix our currency at a competive rate? NZ is a sovereign nation isn’t it?”

    Yes, but a very small one.

    The reserve bank had a go at influencing our exchange rate recently, if you remember. But it was like pissing in the sea. All that was created was an entry point for other buyers and the rate went up higher than it was previously.

    Note that China hasn’t fixed their exchange rate. They have pegged it to the US. So it can go up and down, but in concert with the US dollar. This may change soon, as China is trying to cool down its economy so they might well break the peg and let their currency rise independently.

    We could do something like that such as adopt the US dollar as our currency or whatever. However, any such moves can have unintended consequences so it is a good idea to think these things through fairly carefuly first.