m Proposed external link to tariff section of Market Access Map database |
Poeticbent (talk | contribs) →Businessweek article: comment |
||
Line 179: | Line 179: | ||
:[[WP:RSN]], [[WP:OR]], [[WP:NPOV]].[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer Marek]] ([[User talk:Volunteer Marek|talk]]) 14:07, 22 May 2014 (UTC) |
:[[WP:RSN]], [[WP:OR]], [[WP:NPOV]].[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer Marek]] ([[User talk:Volunteer Marek|talk]]) 14:07, 22 May 2014 (UTC) |
||
:* In order to learn how poverty looks like in leading world economies, for example in Canada and the U.S., one needs to travel the world, and stop aggrandizing his own sorry ass. See also: [[dumpster diving]]. [[User:Poeticbent|<font face="Papyrus" color="darkblue"><b>Poeticbent</b></font>]] [[User_talk:Poeticbent|<font style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;background:#FF88AF;border:1px solid #DF2929;padding:0.0em 0.2em;">talk</font>]] 15:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC) |
|||
== Misrepresentations == |
== Misrepresentations == |
Revision as of 15:24, 6 November 2014
Poland C‑class Top‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Economics C‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Discrepancy between table and text
In the right-hand table, the figure for people in agriculture is 16%, vs 27% in text.
Debt
Public debt Is the 231 billion the right number? On the Finance Ministry page states that public debt is 461 160,5 mln PLN which is equal to 146 billion US dollars.
- It is likely that the article uses outdated info - feel free to be bold and correct the article (and please cite sources like you did above).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Greatest success story
I severely doubt the validity of the statement "Poland has steadfastly pursued a policy of economic liberalization throughout the 1990s and today stands out as the greatest success story among the former communist states." Besides the fact that it's unsourced, it also seems very POV. Firstly, other post-Communist economies are better off than Poland, including virtually all of the new EU member states (particularly Czechia and Hungary). Also, Poland does not do astoundingly well at any other indicator, such as foreign investment, to make it "the" greatest success story. In fact, even though the region as a whole can be seen as a success story, I'd say Poland, particularly in the last few years, has done less well than could've been possible. Countries such as Slovakia and Estonia are more potent "success stories", as are the Czech Republic and Slovenia. Sure, Poland has come a long way, and has often been a pioneer in economic liberalisation in the region, but that alone does not warrant it being called the greatest success story in the region. Ronline ✉ 08:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I dont see any other post-soviet block country reach GPD top 20. Poland did. enough said.
- Indeed, see Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. -- Beland 05:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Ronline
Also This is dubious: Poland is the only member of the European Union to have avoided a decline in GDP, meaning that in 2009 Poland has created the most GDP growth in the EU --Polysophia (talk) 20:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Agriculture GDP stat
The contribution of agriculture is given variously as 2.8% and 3.8%, and neither instance has a citation. -- Beland 05:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
GDP history
European Union has countries ranked by per-capita GDP. It would be interesting to see the history of Poland's per-capita GDP to judge the influence of various political changes. -- Beland 05:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Source
It seems the text has been copied verbatim from another source (in example, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2875.htm). Could you please specify as reference the site from where the text was taken? The article is currently listed at Suspected copyright violations, and it would help to know exactly the source. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 16:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Completeness
There is some information on the Poland Page under economy that seem to go further than what is written here? Is a extension of this article necessary?
Recent reforms?
What about recent reforms? Wasn't there a change in income tax brackets? 90.190.225.121 (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- The government promises to lower income tax rates beginning with January 2009 (from 19/30/40 to 18/28). This year, only social insurance rate has been lowered. Sliwers (talk) 20:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Net Salary Higher than gross salary?
Does poland have negative taxes? :D TyronX (talk) 18:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.133.191.140 (talk)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.76.168.10 (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
"Poland is the largest producer and exporter of apples in the entire world, surpassing China"
It is not true according to this -93.125.67.187 (talk) 21:53, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Exporter is not the same as producer what your link suggests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.129.185 (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Largest economy in Eastern Europe
As of 2012 the top ten largest economies in Europe, excluding Russia and Turkey, from the 10th to the 1st are:
Poland POL GDP 4.89795E+11
Norway NOR GDP 5.0003E+11
Sweden SWE GDP 5.23942E+11
Switzerland CHE 6.31173E+11
Netherlands NLD 7.7006E+11
Spain ESP GDP 1.32211E+12
Italy ITA GDP 2.01338E+12
United Kingdom GBR 2.47578E+12
France FRA GDP 2.6112E+12
Germany DEU GDP 3.42593E+12
Source: World Bank Development Indicators.
So as long as we're not counting Russia, Poland does have the largest economy in Eastern Europe. The closest Eastern European country is the Czech Republic with 1.96446E+11 in GDP (at 18th place).Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
And if we don't count other countries its position would be even higher.However, these countries won't cease to exist in the real world.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand. What other countries? Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Interestingly, this source [1], Poland's economy is 6th largest in EU, not 10th as I have it above. This probably has to do with whether the GDPs are compared at market exchange rates or adjusted for price differences.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- This source, from 2013, says "The Czech Republic, Central Europe's third biggest economy after Poland and Austria," - so the ranking among Central European countries (which here doesn't include Germany) is Poland, Austria, Czech Republic.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes by excluding different countries we get different results. But I am sure these countries do continue to exist in real world.
MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- The only country we're (or actually, sources) excluding is Russia, since it's, well, Russia.
- Last time I saw, Russia still existed.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- And last time I checked, the sources don't include it in the definition of "Eastern Europe" when discussing economic size.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Last time I saw, Russia still existed.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- The only country we're (or actually, sources) excluding is Russia, since it's, well, Russia.
Largest in Eastern Europe?
This is obviously false. Russian economy is larger.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- See above. Of course you're right that Russia's economy is larger. But lots of sources consider Russia as its own "region" rather than part of "Eastern Europe".Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- This should be simply clarified by a note. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- The source you used does use a different phrasing and doesn't say Poland is the biggest economy in Eastern Europe actually.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Fast GDP growth, but what about unemployment?
Is it largest in ex-communist EU Europe as well? [2] MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:36, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Link broken, or at least id doesn't work for me.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:43, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Link fixed.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:45, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Overall, Poland's unemployment rate is below the EU average (about 9.7% vs 12%). It's about at the median [3] From among the post communist states Latvia, Lithuania, Croatia, Bulgaria, and Slovakia all have higher unemployment rates.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Overall, Poland's unemployment rate is below the EU average (about 9.7% vs 12%)." Polish unemployment is 13,5% according to Polish government though, not 9%. It is possible to calculate the average unemployment rate for the past two decades after implementing reforms recommended by the West using data here[4], and it should be done. Interestingly both Belarus and Russia have lower unemployment than Poland, with Russia having higher GDP per capita as well.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 10:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, but there are differences between countries in how they measure unemployment. So the 13.5 vs the 9.7 numbers reflect the fact that Poland measures unemployment differently than other countries. In order to make any kind of international comparisons, you need to measure something in the same way, otherwise it's like comparing someone's height in centimeters to someone's height in inches. So we can only make these kinds of statements based on reliable sources which measure things the same way, not by comparing individual governmental statistics (which is WP:SYNTH).
- Also, in regard to this source [5]. You simply cannot use editorials - which is what this appears to be although I'm having trouble accessing it - for factual information. We need to use hard data and scholarly sources, not the scare mongering of some opinion writer.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- I am sure you will be able to find Dziennik Gazeta Prawna in a library. And I am sure that many countries use different methods of measuring unemployment, perhaps Polish one would be over 20% if we were using their methods. And no Marek, government sources are not WP:SYNTH and are actually reliable sources. And no, not confirming to image of Poland being a success story is not scare mongering MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- No, it wouldn't be "over 20%" if we were using their methods, it would be 9.7%, like in the source I gave above, which actually does use the same definition. And yes, taking different government sources to put together international comparisons IS WP:SYNTH (which is a different issue than reliability) since they do not all use the same methodology. And yes, it is scare mongering in an editorial.
- Data and scholarly sources, not editorials.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- No, it wouldn't be "over 20%" if we were using their methods, it would be 9.7%, like in the source I gave above
Please don't pursue Original Research.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- There's absolutely no original research on my part here. You're the one violating SYNTH.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:33, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
editorializing in the lede
In addition to the issue with the editorial from Dziennik Prawny mentioned above, we have this source being used to support this claim:
Despite its GDP growth, Poland faces numerous economic issues; it has chronic high unemployment, low wages despite significant increase of productivity, massive flight of educated population abroad, low level of innovativeness and highest number of people working for minimum wage in European Union
What the source actually says is "But challenges loom on the horizon, including high unemployment, rising inflation, and growing fiscal deficits. ". That's different. Yes Poland has high unemployment, just like rest of Europe. But the source doesn't say anything about "chronic". There's nothing in there about "low wages despite significant increaese of productivity". Nothing about "massive flight". Nothing about "low level of innovativeness" and nothing about "highest number of people working for minimum wage" - which doesn't even make sense. There is no "minimum wage" in Europe. They all have different (if any) minimum wages. That claim is just nonsensical.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
This source also doesn't support the claims. First it's talking specifically about the situation in the summer of 2012. Second what it says is that unemployment fell, but not as much as in the summer 2011. Third it actually supports the contention that unemployment rate in Poland is below the EU average. It also discusses the fact that unemployment rates have to be calculated according to the same methodology. The source is good, it's just not being used in a good way.Volunteer Marek (talk) 12:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Rise of debt after 1989
How large percentage wise was the rise of Polish public debt after 1989? I am looking for figures.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Around 1995 the debt-gdp ratio was about 50%. Currently it's about 55%.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Here is source for current levels in Europe [6]. Poland's debt-gdp ratio is very much below European average, which is above 90%.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- That's not what I am asking about. How much has the value of Polish debt increased since 1989? How much did Poland owe in 1989 and how much does it owe now?MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Stats for 1989 are crap. It would take some more involved research. Also, that kind of statistic is essentially meaningless, due to inflation and economic growth. If you owe 10000$ when your annual income is 500$ that's a lot worse than when you owe 1000000$ when your annual income is 1000000%. Hence the practice in scholarly and reputable reputations is to use the debt-gdp ratio.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Also 1989 is a weird year because there was debt default (essentially) in that year and a debt forgiveness program (as part of the economic reforms). So it depends whether you're talking beginning of 1989 or end of 1989.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Don't worry Marek, if you don't know, that's not a problem, I already found sources.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Actually I did find data for the debt-gdp ratio here [7]. In 1989 it was 62%. It fell to about 39% in 1998. Then it rose again to the present day value of 55%. All of it is much less than European average.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Not an answer to my question I am afraid. But thankfully I have the answers now.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:51, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Economy of Poland
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Economy of Poland's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "eurostat":
- From European Union: "Population on 1 January". Eurostat. Retrieved 23 October 2010.
- From Economy of Italy: "Regional GDP per capita in the EU in 2011" (PDF). Eurostat. 27 February 2014. Retrieved 7 March 2014.
- From Economy of Bulgaria: "Research and development expenditure". Eurostat.
- From Economy of Belgium: "GDP per inhabitant in 2006 ranged from 25% of the EU27 average in Nord-Est in Romania to 336% in Inner London". Eurostat.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Businessweek article
I am seriously considering removing the Businessweek article.I read it, and it presents such a distorted, completely false image of Poland that I have trouble accepting it as a reliable source.As a person living in Poland all my life, I can assure that you are more likely to see people trying to scavange food from trash cans(in fact I can see them every day in my home town) and lines of people in tattered clothes lining up to unemployment office with despair in their eyes rather than people driving in Ferrari's. This article isn't even a fairy tale, it's complete fantasy. MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- WP:RSN, WP:OR, WP:NPOV.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- In order to learn how poverty looks like in leading world economies, for example in Canada and the U.S., one needs to travel the world, and stop aggrandizing his own sorry ass. See also: dumpster diving. Poeticbent talk 15:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Misrepresentations
This source [8] is from 2006. Yes, at that point the unemployment rate was at 17.7% and yes, it was one of the highest in EU (this was before crisis). However, you can't use that to source the statement "Polish unemployment remains one of the highest in EU" since that is no longer true. The claim is also blatantly false, per the source I've already provided. Currently, the unemployment rate in Poland is below the EU average.
This is POV pushing, plain and simple.
The claim that "(unemployment in) Poland and has been growing since years" is also misleading. It is based on this source which is probably not reliable. Putting that aside, the source actually says: " The unemployment rate has been growing successively in the recent years: in 1998 it was 10.6 %, and in 2002 almost 20%. That unfavourable trend changed in 2003. The biggest drop of the unemployment rate took place, however, in 2006 when the unemployment rate fell below 15%, reaching 8.9% in September 2008. It was the effect of an economic boom which brought more work offers and the growth of the number of working persons. In January 2012 the unemployment rate amounted to 13.2%. In an analogous period of the previous year the unemployment rate amounted to 13.1%.". If you look at the trend [9] (that's a quick source) then yes, it's increased slightly since 2008 (you know, there was a big world wide financial crisis and all). But that's after a huge drop in 2006-2007. Without the context the claim simply misrepresents actual data.
Again, this is just POV pushing.
That's just for starters.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:09, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
The sentence "Unlike in the rest of Europe, during and since the global recession of 2009, Poland's economy continued to expand" was changed to "Since the global recession of 2009, Poland's GDP continued to grow." The edit summary claimed: "removing false information that is unsourced".
The source actually says "Poland was the only country in the union to see its economy grow, by 1.6 percent. The EU economy as a whole remains smaller than it was at the beginning of 2009 and isn’t expected to recover its losses until the end of next year. In that same period, Poland is projected to enjoy a cumulative growth of more than 16 percent. “Poland didn’t feel the crisis, really,” says Ringer.".
Hence this is sourced. Please refrain from using false edit summaries.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
There is no sentence in your quote saying "unlike in the rest of Europe". You are engaging in Original Research.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Poland was the only country in the union".
- "The EU economy as a whole remains smaller than it was at the beginning of 2009 and isn’t expected to recover its losses until the end of next year. In that same period, Poland is projected to enjoy a cumulative growth of more than 16 percent"
- Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Again nothing in the text that would support the sentence that you tried to push through.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Poland was the only country in the union".
- "The EU economy as a whole remains smaller than it was at the beginning of 2009 and isn’t expected to recover its losses until the end of next year. In that same period, Poland is projected to enjoy a cumulative growth of more than 16 percent"
- WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT.
- Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:19, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Pasting the same sentence several times won't change the fact that nothing in it supports you false claim Marek.Please try to find a source that you can use to support the claim, this one doesn't.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Please articulate how the above sentences do not support the claim, because I have no idea what you're talking about.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Pasting the same sentence several times won't change the fact that nothing in it supports you false claim Marek.Please try to find a source that you can use to support the claim, this one doesn't.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Again nothing in the text that would support the sentence that you tried to push through.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Too much focus on GDP growth not enough on other values
GDP growth is just one indicator of economy and currently too much is spent on it in the article. Other economic values like unemployment, gdp per capita, inequlity need to be expanded in the article. Otherwise we get a very misleading view that Poland is somehow economically in good condition.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:08, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Since population growth in Poland is essentially zero, the GDP growth figures and the GDP per capita growth figures are pretty much the same. And we already talked about inequality at the other article. I have no objection to including info on it here, but based on reliable sources, not some made up impressions and prejudices.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:16, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Actually sources show that Polish GDP per capita is one among lowest of post-communist states in EU. I will add them, don't worry.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- [10]. Czech Republic and Slovakia have higher GDP per capita (PPP). Estonia and Lithuania about the same. The rest is below.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Actually sources show that Polish GDP per capita is one among lowest of post-communist states in EU. I will add them, don't worry.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Another false sentence in the text-"making it the fastest growing out of all the former Soviet bloc states"
This is false, which can be easily demonstrated. According to this list of countries by real GDP growth rate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_real_GDP_growth_rate Post-Soviet states such as Turkmenistan, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan have much, much higher GDP rate than Poland. I will thus remove this false claim.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- You can't use Wikipedia as a source. But of course you know that.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- They can't be used as source of articles, but can be used in discussions on topics on discussion pages.
Anyway here you go[11], I will now delete this sentence as it is false.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- How about instead of deleting it, you add the clarification "Europe's" as in the source. That'd be constructive.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- That would be false,since Moldova,Azerbaijan,Armenia and Latvia are in Europe.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Here's what the source says: "Poland will post the fastest growth this year among the European Union’s largest former communist members as falling unemployment and slow inflation fuel domestic demand". That's what the article should say.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- That would be false,since Moldova,Azerbaijan,Armenia and Latvia are in Europe.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Mediation proposal by Piotrus
It seems to me that there's a serious dispute here between User:MyMoloboaccount and User:Volunteer Marek. I'd like to help you mediate and reach and agreement. Here's my analysis of sources and facts:
- the reviewed edits were at first highly constructive, with informative edit summaries reflecting the spirit of WP:BRD
- regarding [12], I agree with VM that it is not a source sufficient for the lead, however I think such opinion pieces can still be discussed in the text, where they should be properly attributed (to the author or newspaper). The unemployment issue is certainly worth discussing, and with this source I think it may be included in the lead (through in a shorter version, most details and refs should go into their own section).
- [13] this edit was not good, as I don't think that it's fair to summarize the 1989 changes as directly leading to incrase of debt]. The sentence would be more neutral if it said "the debt increased from x in 1989 to y in 2014. A graph would be nice. And are we sure this is the best section for this sentence?
- [14] this new section by VM seems well referenced, and does discuss the raising unemployment rate
- [15] while the removal of this by VM was not discussed in the edit summary, removing unreferenced and potentially POV/promotional info like this is good policy
- new content added at [16] and [17] by VM seems fine
- regarding this edit by Molobo, he is right that the source did not justify the assertion that the unemployment rate started to raise in 2012. The source mentions a raise in 2012, yes, but the accompanying graph at [18] suggest it was raising at least since 2011. The source added by Molobo - [19] - seems reliable and pretty good for expanding on the trend. However, the statement that "Polish unemployment remains one of the highest in EU" sourced to [20] is problematic. The source is from 2006, and so the sentence should be clarified with "as of 2006". [21] seems an ok source for the argument that high unemployment rate is a problem, despite high growth GDP wise.
- [22] this is fine, the source states " The policies left millions out of work"
- [23] is a good clarification for why our two statistics differ
- [24] ok source for 2 millions who migrated, but I am a bit uneasy using this for the "expected to cause trouble". We should attribute this (to Polish Radio 1 journalist, Sylwia Zadrożna), otherwise it's somewhat of a journalistic editorializing.
- [25] seems like a valid fact to add
- looking at the source, [26], the figure 46% is correct, but which part is used to justify the claim "especially problematic in Poland"? Compared to what?
- [27] comparing purchasing power parity seems reasonable, through as I noted earlier this source should be attributed. I am having trouble accessing the article, can anyone post a working link?
- [28] attribute. It's possible some content should be split off into subarticles. We really need unemployment in Poland. And perhaps labor market in Poland?
- [29] correct
- [30] hmm, I think VM phrase proposed at the end of #Another_false_sentence_in_the_text-.22making_it_the_fastest_growing_out_of_all_the_former_Soviet_bloc_states.22 seems fine
- image seems fine
Overall, I really don't see what you guys are quarerling about, you are expanding this article in a good way. What's the problem with [33]? I agree the caption should have remained as it was, but the discussion of junk contracts seems relevant to that of minimum wage? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
External link to tariff data
Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC616%7cPoland&source=1%7CITC Market Access Map) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by Poland. Visitors can easily look up market access information for Poland by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated