People are understandably skeptical about the reported unemployment rate. The rate is produced by the Household Labour Survey which interviews 15,000 households. Each quarter, an eighth of the total sample is replaced by new households. A couple of years ago our household was required to be part of the survey, so I have experienced the questioning firsthand.
The following is the official definition of an employed person;
Employed: All persons in the working-age population who during the reference week worked for one hour or more for pay or profit in the context of an employee/employer relationship or self-employment; or worked without pay for one hour or more in work which contributed directly to the operation of a farm, business or professional practice owned or operated by a relative; or had a job but were not at work due to: own illness or injury, personal or family responsibilities, bad weather or mechanical breakdown, direct involvement in an industrial dispute, or leave or holiday.
An unemployed person;
Unemployed: All persons in the working-age population who during the reference week were without a paid job, available for work and had either actively sought work in the past four weeks ending with the reference week, or had a new job to start within the next four weeks.
These two groups combined make up the Labour Force. The unemployment rate is the number of unemployed persons expressed as a percentage of the labour force.
Note then, people not actively seeking work are not counted as unemployed; people with family responsibilities doing unpaid housework and childcare, people attending educational institutions, retired, permanently unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities are not counted as unemployed.
So, we have this seeming conundrum between twelve percent of the working-age population being on a benefit when the unemployment rate is only 3.7 percent.
But it can be seen from the above that in countries with less generous benefit systems there will be fewer people in the group that is not counted eg without the DPB there would be fewer people not counted because they have family responsibilities.
So, although the HLFS is used in other countries we compare ourselves to, because social security systems vary so much, we are still comparing apples with oranges. Claiming to have the lowest unemployment rate in the OECD begs qualification.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Satellite spies
The British government has instructed council- tax inspectors to use satellite photography to find out if people have added extensions or developments to their properties, thereby adding value which should be taxed at a higher rate.
How low will they go......or high, as the case may be.
How low will they go......or high, as the case may be.
Water on the brain
Is there a better example of irrationality than the craze for bottled water?
The Earth Policy Institute of Washington says;
The global consumption of bottled water reached 154 billion liters (41 billion gallons) in 2004, up 57 percent from the 98 billion liters consumed five years earlier. Even in areas where tap water is safe to drink, demand for bottled water is increasing—producing unnecessary garbage and consuming vast quantities of energy. Although in the industrial world bottled water is often no healthier than tap water, it can cost up to 10,000 times more. At as much as $2.50 per liter ($10 per gallon), bottled water costs more than gasoline.
Friday, February 10, 2006
Heading in the wrong direction
Roger Kerr, NZBR, assesses economic growth, freedom and outlook in this article;
"New Zealand greatly improved its rankings for economic freedom as a result of reforms that were implemented 10-15 years ago. Since then governments have lost their way. The 2006 rankings, just published by the Heritage Foundation in conjunction with the Wall Street Journal, saw New Zealand fall from 5th equal position in 2005 to 9th equal with Australia. Both government spending and taxation are continuing to surge. By 2010 government taxes and levies are projected to be $14,400 per capita, nearly 70 percent higher than the 2000 level of $8,500. A very large proportion – around 60% – of the ‘growth dividend’ is being appropriated by the government."
...and Super sanity
By contrast, here is what the Scotsman is saying about old-age pensions. Unfortunately the full article is premium content but you get the gist.
What is the truth about your pension?
THE vast majority of the population will find it virtually impossible to save enough money to maintain an average standard of living in retirement, The Scotsman can reveal.
Millions of people face old age on the breadline because plugging the pensions "black hole" is simply unaffordable - a fact that will have a hugely detrimental, direct...
What is the truth about your pension?
THE vast majority of the population will find it virtually impossible to save enough money to maintain an average standard of living in retirement, The Scotsman can reveal.
Millions of people face old age on the breadline because plugging the pensions "black hole" is simply unaffordable - a fact that will have a hugely detrimental, direct...
Brash back to welfare
Good on Don Brash for putting the focus back on welfare.
National are pledging to "put some flesh" on the bones of welfare policy by 2008. Does that mean their 2005 policy was a bit thin? To be honest I wasn't paying that much attention. Once they dropped the idea of time-limits I lost interest.
National are pledging to "put some flesh" on the bones of welfare policy by 2008. Does that mean their 2005 policy was a bit thin? To be honest I wasn't paying that much attention. Once they dropped the idea of time-limits I lost interest.
Super silliness
A survey shows 88 percent of Kiwis believe the state should provide for their retirement. The capacity of the human mind to fly in the face of fact never ceases to surprise. But politics is about exploiting such shortcomings. Population projections show our 65+ group growing by 73 percent by 2051 - that's an extra 1,325,000. The workforce on the other hand will increase by a mere 7 percent. And 0-14 year-olds will decrease. Do the maths. State super is unsustainable, with or without the Cullen fund.
(And on the subject of shuffling off this mortal coil, did anyone see the final episode of Six Feet Under last night? What an eerie ending.)
(And on the subject of shuffling off this mortal coil, did anyone see the final episode of Six Feet Under last night? What an eerie ending.)
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Good News
From the good news files;
From the Adam Smith Institute's We Told You So department comes the news that serious violent crime has fallen by over a fifth since the UK's pub licensing laws were liberalised. Police in cities, seaside resorts and market towns alike are reporting dramatic falls in alcohol-fuelled assaults since the new laws came in.
Of course, the anti-liberalization lobby had claimed that such crime would rise. And that people would drink a lot more, thanks to the later opening hours. That has not happened either – brewers report only a tiny increase in sales.
In fact, a lot of the argument over the liberalization plan was simply uninformed. Scotland dropped its strict 10pm closing regime in the late 1970s, and in some places the pubs were permitted to stay open round the clock. Suddenly, Scotland's pubs changed from being grim male drinking dens into relaxed bar-restaurants where families are welcome. Alcohol-related crime fell – with staggered closing times, the police were no longer stretched too thinly to control the crowds streaming out of the pubs – and alcohol-related disease and accidents fell too.
The benefits were so clear that the Scottish political economist Douglas Mason advocated exactly the same liberalisation for England in his ASI report Time to Call Time. It prompted Mrs Thatcher's government into bringing in a degree of liberalization, and now Tony Blair has taken things a step further. It was always obvious to anyone who had studied Mason's report that more flexible pub opening hours would bring a general improvement. Why did it take the politicians so long?
From the Adam Smith Institute's We Told You So department comes the news that serious violent crime has fallen by over a fifth since the UK's pub licensing laws were liberalised. Police in cities, seaside resorts and market towns alike are reporting dramatic falls in alcohol-fuelled assaults since the new laws came in.
Of course, the anti-liberalization lobby had claimed that such crime would rise. And that people would drink a lot more, thanks to the later opening hours. That has not happened either – brewers report only a tiny increase in sales.
In fact, a lot of the argument over the liberalization plan was simply uninformed. Scotland dropped its strict 10pm closing regime in the late 1970s, and in some places the pubs were permitted to stay open round the clock. Suddenly, Scotland's pubs changed from being grim male drinking dens into relaxed bar-restaurants where families are welcome. Alcohol-related crime fell – with staggered closing times, the police were no longer stretched too thinly to control the crowds streaming out of the pubs – and alcohol-related disease and accidents fell too.
The benefits were so clear that the Scottish political economist Douglas Mason advocated exactly the same liberalisation for England in his ASI report Time to Call Time. It prompted Mrs Thatcher's government into bringing in a degree of liberalization, and now Tony Blair has taken things a step further. It was always obvious to anyone who had studied Mason's report that more flexible pub opening hours would bring a general improvement. Why did it take the politicians so long?
Think-tank expands its operation to include NZ
The Australian think-tank, the Centre for Independent Studies has announced the establishment of a NZ arm. It will initially focus on tax and welfare reform.
Blinkered bureaucrats
Professor David Fergusson is in the news for reporting findings about the incidence of partner violence. Fergusson should be commended for his work, which has been extremely wide-ranging over the years. But what do we do with it?
Look at this report from a recent select committee hearing. Here is an excerpt;
"Recently we heard evidence from Professor David Fergusson, from the Christchurch School of Medicine, and Associate Professor Richie Poulton, from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, on our inquiry into factors contributing to poor outcomes for children........On the use of their studies by policy makers the two professors commented that there was a need for the rich data to be used effectively by policy makers. Too often they experience difficulty in getting policy makers to listen to their findings. It appeared to them that policy people in the ministries were politically astute gatekeepers, who accepted pieces of work from the studies if they fitted the current policy paradigm and discard the rest."
Look at this report from a recent select committee hearing. Here is an excerpt;
"Recently we heard evidence from Professor David Fergusson, from the Christchurch School of Medicine, and Associate Professor Richie Poulton, from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, on our inquiry into factors contributing to poor outcomes for children........On the use of their studies by policy makers the two professors commented that there was a need for the rich data to be used effectively by policy makers. Too often they experience difficulty in getting policy makers to listen to their findings. It appeared to them that policy people in the ministries were politically astute gatekeepers, who accepted pieces of work from the studies if they fitted the current policy paradigm and discard the rest."
Sexual differences in moral judgments
Ronald Bailey describes how MRI testing reveals men enjoy retribution more than women.
This kind of information about how men and women tend to differ in their moral judgments (or feelings of righteousness) will certainly be of interest to, say, lawyers when they select jury members.
This kind of information about how men and women tend to differ in their moral judgments (or feelings of righteousness) will certainly be of interest to, say, lawyers when they select jury members.
Welfare American-style (2)
Brief history. In 1996 President Clinton scrapped AFDC, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (think DPB) and replaced it with TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). The big difference was a moral one. People were now expected to find work or get involved in some activity in return for the assistance they received.The legislation was passed at a federal level. Federal funding going to states to provide welfare was then controlled or limited according to the application of these new rules. That's how the local bureaucrats were incentivised.
The results were that by the end of the nineties caseloads had dropped nationally by 60 percent. But because the targets has been reached the pressure went off and the TANF caseloads have become static once more.
Now Congress has re-authorised the reforms with its latest budget. States are required to move 45 percent of the new caseload levels into work within the next year. The second wave begins.
What have we done over the same period? Fiddled.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Miraculous
Diver, Robert Hewitt , has been found alive after spending 72 hours in the water. Fantastic. Here's hoping he makes a full recovery.
Welfare reform reduces teenage pregnancy
Unlike Tariana Turia, I do not think teenage pregnancy is a good thing.This is a link to some research which is back in the US news today. Incidentally, Paul Offner passed away last year, although you wouldn't know it from the news release.
Employment slowing
Just released from Statistics NZ comes the December 2005 quarterly employment survey.
Of note is total paid hours worked has hardly changed in the past year. First time this has happened since 1998.
But the growth in hourly earnings has increased by 5.4 percent. (Not mentioned in the press release is growth in the public sector earnings was higher at 6.7 percent -what's that about inflation Mr Cullen?)
So employers are paying out more for the same amount of production.
And Sue Bradford wants, on top of the extra weeks holiday that kicks in this year, a further rise in the youth and minimum pay rates. (I notice Peter Dunne, the new champion of business is going to vote to send her bill to select committee.)
Add to this Treasury's prediction that thousands of jobs will be lost this year and the Green's campaign looks reckless.
UPDATE The Maori Party have also come out in support of raising the minimum wage. If anyone can understand what Pita Sharples is inferring with his reference to WFF in this release, let me know.
Of note is total paid hours worked has hardly changed in the past year. First time this has happened since 1998.
But the growth in hourly earnings has increased by 5.4 percent. (Not mentioned in the press release is growth in the public sector earnings was higher at 6.7 percent -what's that about inflation Mr Cullen?)
So employers are paying out more for the same amount of production.
And Sue Bradford wants, on top of the extra weeks holiday that kicks in this year, a further rise in the youth and minimum pay rates. (I notice Peter Dunne, the new champion of business is going to vote to send her bill to select committee.)
Add to this Treasury's prediction that thousands of jobs will be lost this year and the Green's campaign looks reckless.
UPDATE The Maori Party have also come out in support of raising the minimum wage. If anyone can understand what Pita Sharples is inferring with his reference to WFF in this release, let me know.
Heard on radio....
useful acronyms;
SINBAD
Single-income, no boyfriend and desperate.
SITCOM
Single-income, two children, oppressive mortgage.
And word meanings according to children:
Benign - that's what you are after you been eight.
Artificial Insemination - when the farmer does it to the bull instead of the cow.
SINBAD
Single-income, no boyfriend and desperate.
SITCOM
Single-income, two children, oppressive mortgage.
And word meanings according to children:
Benign - that's what you are after you been eight.
Artificial Insemination - when the farmer does it to the bull instead of the cow.
Smoking
New research from Finland examines the contribution of lone parenthood and economic difficulties to smoking. 15 percent of married mothers smoked compared to 26 percent of lone mothers.
Smoking really is a catch 22. It causes economic difficulties which then cause one to smoke more which worsens the economic difficulties....
(As an aside, the Janice "don't blame me" Pou case is good money after bad and according to a report I heard yesterday, it's being funded by legal aid.)
Smoking really is a catch 22. It causes economic difficulties which then cause one to smoke more which worsens the economic difficulties....
(As an aside, the Janice "don't blame me" Pou case is good money after bad and according to a report I heard yesterday, it's being funded by legal aid.)
Young Nats Notice
The Young Nats have also noticed the new Working for Families ad and issued this press release.
"Most young people will recognise what this policy means for them: the burden of a high tax rate so others can benefit from Labour's election bribes."
They should be talking to the Old Nats whose policy is to retain the WFF programme.
"Most young people will recognise what this policy means for them: the burden of a high tax rate so others can benefit from Labour's election bribes."
They should be talking to the Old Nats whose policy is to retain the WFF programme.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Modern day welfare
My eleven year-old is bent over his guitar working on Joe Walsh's riff from "Life in the Fast Lane". He does this constantly but quietly while the TV is on. A Working for Families ad comes on. Family scene plays out. "If your family is struggling there might be extra money available." Son looks up, and says, in passing, "Don't look like their struggling. She's got an ipod."
He's got a point.
At its birth, government controlled income redistribution was about getting money to the aged with no family to rely; to the most destitute with no prospects of working; and to soldiers maimed by war.
Haven't we come a long way.
He's got a point.
At its birth, government controlled income redistribution was about getting money to the aged with no family to rely; to the most destitute with no prospects of working; and to soldiers maimed by war.
Haven't we come a long way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
