Talk:Unemployment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Unemployment was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
October 23, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Sociology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Employment growth by top tax rate image[edit]

I've started a centralised discussion here regarding File:Employment growth by top tax rate.jpg, which is used in this article. Gabbe (talk) 09:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! Vilonermo (talk) 16:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

There is an additional discussion of the deleted graph at [1] and the subsequent section. EllenCT (talk) 01:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

technology[edit]

The word technology appears only once in this entire article. I think it goes without saying the relationship between technology and unemployment deserves its own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

hidden unemployment?[edit]

"Official statistics often underestimate unemployment rates because of hidden unemployment" remove, or clarify and source.

Add the following:

"these statistics almost surely undercount the number of unemployed, particularly as some governments like theUnited States consciously under- estimate unemployment (Goolsbee 2003)

Goolsbee, Austan. 2003. The index of missing economic indicators: The unemployment myth. The New York Times, November 30. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 03:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Matching[edit]

In modern macroeconomics, unemployment (i.e., the labor market in general) is explained with a search-and-matching model as developed by Diamond, Mortensen, and Pissarides (see, for instance, the New Keynesian DSGE model by Blanchard and Galí). The three were awarded the 2010 Nobel Price in Economics, which underlines that this approach is now mainstream in economics. Why is it, that this article does not mention this approach? --bender235 (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

@Diannaa: the text you removed isn't in the pages you said it was in the edit summaries of [2] or [3]. What gives? EllenCT (talk) 03:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The one from China Daily in this diff is too-close paraphrasing of the second-last sentence of the first page of the source. The other one has a wrong url in the edit summary, it was from here. Sorry for the mistake. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:32, 29 August 2014 (UTC)