Stalled recovery?

Apropos of nothing in particular, here is the current state of unemployment. In terms of pre-GFC it's not pretty, particular for females.

Not to mention the rates for Maori and Pacific which would require a much taller graph.

The current Maori unemployment rate is 12.6% and Pacific is 11.3% (June quarter).

One thing I would note is that pre-GFC unemployment levels were unusually low. That's the only positive (spin) I can find. Oh, and NZ is still faring relatively well internationally. Though I doubt that is much consolation for the unemployed.

Asian upward mobility?

Statistics NZ released the latest Income Survey last Friday.

From the tables, the following caught my eye.

Asian median incomes are rising fast. Over the 2011 - 2015 period, their income from self-employment was also growing at the fastest rate; income from government transfers was the lowest and declining (largely reflecting a younger population).

In part the increases across all groups represent a recovery from the GFC but the Asian increase is a stand out.

('All people' = 15 and older.)

Bennett's biggest contribution

I had cause to make the following graph so thought I would post it here. The drop in Maori teenage birth is quite phenomenal. Though untested, the Youth Parent Payment reforms must be a factor. The point I was making to my correspondent was, I consider this Paula Bennett's biggest contribution as Social Development Minister. (The 10-14 years-old rates barely register but using Infoshare data I couldn't easily or quickly remove them.)

More political bias from DomPost

Page two of the DomPost has a large headline:

Complaints blamed on greater demand: MSD
 "A staggering increase in complaints by Work and Income clients have been written off by a government ministry which blames the increase on more Kiwis using its services.
Since National took office in 2008, the number of complaints about incorrect information being provided by Work and Income has risen by 122 percent - from 537 complaints in 2008 to 1197 this year."

Here is the table:

The first thing I notice is that the number of complaints requiring action has actually dropped from 2,298 in 2008/09 to 2,233 this year. If I were to look at a similar table depicting CYF notifications, I'd be primarily interested in the substantiations as an indicator of actual problems.

The journalist completely ignored the top line though and focused on the worst line - the one that would provide the biggest % increase. Even then, we cannot draw a conclusion because there is no breakdown of the complaints that actually required action.

Next, a journalist seeking to provide balanced information would have requested and published statistics from the  period prior to  National becoming government.(She may have but they didn't suit her purpose?)

At least  each parliamentary representative - government and opposition - was asked for comment.

Carmel Sepuloni duly provides and not unusually shoots herself in the foot in the process.

And it wasn't only beneficiaries having a tough time with Work and Income. "There's a whole lot of New Zealanders out there...like hardworking New Zealanders who should have access to things like childcare subsidies that are getting inaccurate information."[my emphasis]

Could that be 'deserving' New Zealanders?

To be fair the DomPost should be awarded some neutrality points for publishing that comment. Once again it highlights Labour's identity crisis. Who do they represent?