Talk:Economy of Israel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Article text very dated

The text of this article is clearly taken from a 1997-8 source and so its references to current situations and trends is not relevant. It needs a good clean-up.

"Two developments have helped to transform Israel's economy since the beginning of the decade."
"Until the last decade, Israel's trade with the Arab world..."
Which decades are these?24.64.166.191 05:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

U.S. Financial Aid To Israel: Figures, Facts, and Impact

Summary Benefits to Israel of U.S. Aid Since 1949 (As of November 1, 1997)

Foreign Aid Grants and Loans $74,157,600,000

Other U.S. Aid (12.2% of Foreign Aid) $9,047,227,200

Interest to Israel from Advanced Payments $1,650,000,000

Grand Total $84,854,827,200

Total Benefits per Israeli $14,630

Cost to U.S. Taxpayers of U.S.

Aid to Israel

Grand Total $84,854,827,200

Interest Costs Borne by U.S. $49,936,680,000

Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers $134,791,507,200

Total Taxpayer Cost per Israeli $23,240

Special Reports:

[edit] POV statement

"Israel's strong commitment to economic development and its talented work force led to economic growth rates during the nation's first two decades that frequently exceeded 10% annually."

My comment: how can we say "talented work force"? Compared to who? References? I get associations to "Ubermench" here. Ugh. I suggest we delete "and its talented work force".

Also: Should there not, in all fairness (when mentioning the high growth rate in this period), be a reference to the compensations payed to Israel from Germany in this period? Huldra 19:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but that compensation from Germany was not charity. Is was owed to a substantial percantage of Israelis who had assets stolen during WWII.

Israel has the highest percentage of engineers and physicians per 1000 people in the world, Israel has the most patents per 1,000 people in the world. Do you need anymore confirmation? Just google it and you'll see.

[edit] US aid to Israel

Unbelievably, there is not a single reference to the total US economic support to Israel. The last numbers I saw, (from 2001) was UD$ 2800 mil. For 1 year. And that is not an unusual year: 2-3 billion US$ pr. year has been the average these last few years, as far as I know. That´s serious money, in my world! Still: nowhere, absolutely nowhere (as far as I can see) under ANY of the articles about Israel (in Wikipedia) is this total mentioned!! Incredible. (If I´m wrong, and I´ve missed the information somewhere in an article about Israel on wikipedia, please inform me, and I´ll gladly retract my words.) (Yes, I see that the article says: "Economic aid - recipient: $662 million from US (2003 est.)" ...but that is without the greatest part of the aid! (-namely the military aid), as far as I can see.)

And when one user had included some statistics on this aid a short time ago (admittedly, not all very relevant), then another user:Humus sapiens deletes it all with the (POV) comment "crap"!

A couple of billion dollar every year cannot be ignored! If such basic facts are sensored out from Wikipedia, then Wikipedia becomes absolutely useless and meaningless as an informationsource on the Middle East. Btw, where I live (in Scandinavia) broadcasters on the state media (who are payed to be NPOV) routinely term the US as "the paymasters of Israel". Nobody (to my knowledge) has objected; it is accepted as a matter of fact.

Sooooo: I propose: either we get these facts into this article, or: we create a new article, named, say: US aid to Israel. Actually, the subject is so large that perhaps it should be a separate article...inf. I would like to see is: when did economic support really start "big-time"? (wasn´t it in the 60´s?) ..a histogram/graph showing how the amounts of aid has developed over the years could be informative. Also: how much to the military, how much to civil use?

Anyway, as this article stands now it is a disgrace to Wikipedia. IMO. Huldra 19:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC) PS: and nooooo: I´m not proposing an article with the name: US: the paymasters of Israel. Thought I should make that clear :-D

Huldra, I agree: foreign aid on the order of 2-3% of GDP per year warrants mentioning. There should probably also be a separate article on US aid to Israel (or at least the US-Israeli relationship), because it does constitute approximately a third of all US foreign aid, and this for a nation of just 6.5 million. Marsden 19:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
...yes, and that for a nation which in no way is among the poorest in the world. The US-Israel relationship/aid is certainly also an important project. However, I think one should start with one article, and I suggest the US: the paymasters of Isr.. oooooopsh, I mean: the US aid to Israel-article. 8-> Do you have any good references? Easily available? Huldra 22:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Don't let Humus put you off. The only place he gets neutral is the transmission of his car. I think the way to proceed would be to write a more up-to-date section on US aid to Israel, clearly an important part of the Israeli economy, and then break it out into another article if it gets too long. Don't fill it full of bumph though. Just clear, straight facts. If Humus reverts it, RfC it. If he gets support in an RfC, it's time to leave Wikipedia to the Zionists, because let's face it, if you are willing to suppress facts such as a $3 billion subsidy, we're just another hasbara organisation.


I note also that "aircraft parts and other defense equipment" is an interesting way of stating what Israel imports from the US. The CIA factbook is rather more blunt. It says "military equipment". Grace Note 01:31, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

There is an over-arching problem on Wiki of what I'll call the "Hasbara Mafia," who team up to perpetrate the fraud that the Israeli government (or sometimes even the Netanyahu branch of Likud ...) position on matters concerning Israel is the NPOV. We've all seen it. They can generally muster about five people to participate in an edit war, so I don't think there's much point in trying to do anything directly to oppose them unless similar numbers can be found to support it.
A lot of what the Hasbara Mafia does is actually positive, and certainly their positions should be noted within articles. What really bothers me is that they have sometimes -- as in this article -- thoroughly censored information that they don't like, and in other cases (see Occupied territories) they have hijacked articles so as to avoid the use of terms that they don't like.
What I'd like to see would be for the Hasbara Mafia to stop relying so heavily on winning editting wars: from what I have seen, when they are confident they can win an edit war with their prefered position, that is what they will do; when they are less confident, they'll stall and try to outlast their opponents; and when they see they have little chance, they can be quite reasonable. In an enterprise like Wikipedia, it is naturally very easy for an interested minority to take control of areas in which there is no coherent opposition, and that, in my opinion, is what has happened here. A coherent opposition needs to be formed.
Marsden 16:18, 27 September 2005 (UTC)


Well, I will not comment on the "Hasbara Mafia," (frankly, I´m unfamiliar with the name), but I can tell you this: my reason for interest in this field is the following: in 2001 I travelled in the Middle East (not Israel) for several months -(visiting historical sites etc). Now, what stunned me & suprised me most during these months was the low opinion of local people towards the US (of course, they had an even lower opinion of Israel, but that was a more well-known/expected attitude.....). Again & again & again I met people who expressed an intense hatred of the US. Why? Always the same answer: because of US support for Israel. (And I´m not talking moral support here: no, I´m talking cash, $, money.) And these were relatively well-educated people (spoke English, for a start!). When I returned to Scandinavia (=home) I started reading more about modern history of the region, and understood more. Then came 9/11, & I´m sad to say: I was´t very suprised.
(Now I always laugh (laud!) when I hear Bush et al. claim that the US was/is attacked because "people hate our freedom and democracy". I have never met a single person who hate the US because its "freedom and democracy". Not a single one. Actually, people in the Middle East don´t give a damn (mostly) about the internal policies of the US, (just like the people in US don´t give a damn (mostly) about internal policies in the Middle East.))
At the same time: people I met in the Middle East also expressed wildly different opinion about these matters: some seem to think that 90% of Israels income came from the US(!) (no, I´m not joking!). Then imagine my suprise when, browsing Wikipedia, I do not find a single reference to what so many people consider the most important issue regarding the US & the West & Israel! Not only that; I find that references to this is "edited" (read: censored) out with comments like "crap"! Well, I think we are all loosers here. Actually, I suspect Israel/US will (possibly) be the biggest loosers in the end: when real information is not found easily, a lot of false information will thrive and blossom instead.
What I propose is this: instead of meddeling (too much) with this article: lets have a general statement like: "Israel also recieves substantial aid from the US." Let us link this this statement to the n ew article. Let us then get all facts, figures /years into this article AND: the sources! Very, very important. We have to document every single number. (Actually, I´m always very "ad fontes" when I edit articles...it is in "discussion"-pages I´m "huldra"! :-)). Anyway, let us start as a "stub", and expand it. How about it?
PS: and if people who like to think that Israel manages on its "talented work force" alone deletes such an article; well, I think it will be worst for them, It will only mean that there are people in Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc.+ some in the West who will continue to believe that Israel gets 90% of its income from the US, even after they have consulted Wikipedia.... Sigh. Huldra 21:50, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

For more general discussion of Wikipedia, please email me at huldra999@hotmail.com. Please! regards, Huldra 21:50, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

CERTAIN people want to single Israel out. Truth is that a lot of countries have benefited from US taxpayers more than Israel. Jordan and Egypt each receive more US aid (economic and military) than Israel does (%of GDP). you can put a "US AID TO ...." section for a substantial amount of countries. The Marshall Plan, South Korean, the Mexican bailout, aid to Egypt and Jordan, etc.

And this garbage about Israelis get 90% of income from US. It sounds more like someone made up the number. What is that even based on? It doesn't even make any sense. Why does Israel have $18 billion in FDI this year (foreign direct investment-for those less than intelligent wanna be "Palestine is great, Israel sucks" economists)? why does Warren Buffet make his only major foreign acquisition in Israel? Why does Israel have the most companies on the Nasdaq (outside of US)? Why does Israel in the top 5 every year in patents? Why does Donald Trump build skyscrapers in Ramat Gan? Why is Israel growing at 5% a year (in a war year) when Portugal has a growth rate of 0% (from ECB).

Another fact: Israel is the largest purchaser of American products in the world (per capita)

Lets get this straight once and for: Israel gets $2.4 billion in Military aid, which can ONLY be spent in the US. Which is why Boeing and Lockheed Martin are very much in favor for Israel getting aid. This also adds income and jobs in these industries, AND the US gov't gets 35% back in taxes. SO BOTH SIDES MAKE OUT WELL. Israel gets $600 million for "economic aid", but in reality this money is used to pay back loans Israel made from American banks in the 1970's - although this is peanuts compared to the $58 billion that the US gave South Korea in 1998 and the untold billions the US gave Mexico for a bailou, all at US taxpayer expense.

I will put some facts into this part of the article.

Sources:

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel - CRS Report for the Congress

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

Israel: Background and Relations with the United States - CRS Report for the Congress

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33476.pdf

Bpgergo (talk) 00:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted you addition, due to the mixing of civilian and military aid. The civilian aid is direct aid to the economy, basically cash money. The military aid can only be used for purchases in the US, effectively subsidizing the US economy (see above). I have no objection to mentioning the military aid as well, but I don't want the two types to be mixed up this way. okedem (talk) 07:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] substantial government ownership

"Israel has a diversified modern economy with substantial government ownership". I want to insert the information that most of the land is government owned and rented only to jews.24.64.166.191 05:21, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Whatever you add: make absolutely sure that you have a source for it, and then give the ref. to that source. Regards, Huldra
I'm all in favour of sources.
"Ninety-three percent of the land in Israel is owned or controlled by the government, the Israel Lands Authority, or the Jewish National Fund. Some 2.8 percent is privately owned by Jews and 4.2 percent by Arabs. Rarely is public land leased to Arabs."
"Farming remains a major endeavor for Israeli Arabs who work on privately-owned land. They are allocated 2.3 percent of the water quotas ... . In contrast, Jews are allocated state-owned land if required and receive over 97 percent of the water quotas"
Gerald B. Bubis

[edit] GDP

The GDP table (even if sourced) is blatantly wrong. A GDP of 1 million NIS in 1965 would imply that each person generated about 40 agorot per year (I know the currency has changed since then, but the broad point remains). I'll look for a more credible alternative... Pontificake 18:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Year GDP
(millions
of NIS)[1]
1965 1
1970 2
1975 8
1980 111
1985 28,437
1990 106,475
1995 269,718
2000 470,732
2005 580,000

Good, good. I'm not sure what the base price is, but the table at the source ([1]) seems to forget to take into account inflation, leading to ridicules thing like 395% growth in GDP in 1984 - which was a horrible year, with 400% inflation. It's like they took today's money, and tried to list all of the previous years' GDP in today's Shekels, only by inflation, and not by actual worth (currency was exchanged for rates like 1:1000 at times), thus mucking everything up. I couldn't find another source, but [2] it says that "While the GDP per capita was only 30% of what it was in the United States in 1948; today it stands at 65% of the American level." (this is at 1998, Israel's jubilee). okedem 19:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton57/st14_01x.pdf seems to have various useful data series. What's best to use - per capita (very relevant given the population growth), total in real terms, total in NIS terms, total in dollar terms? We could, of course, use more than one. Pontificake 20:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, the CBS. Why didn't I think of that? I tried to find data in the Bank of Israel website, but got nowhere. Well, the problem with NIS terms remains, it's quite meaningless. I also don't really understand how the two tables - of total GDP, and per capita GDP, can coexist - they don't add up. I don't understand what they mean by "At current prices" on the total GDP, and why, when that one looks ridicules, the per capita table (at 1995 prices) seems reasonable. I think the per capita is the most relevant, but we could use all of them, though I wouldn't bother writing something as silly as the entire Israeli nation has a GDP of 47,000 NIS in 1950... okedem 21:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lead-in - GDP and 500 million by Germany

1. Has anybody a link to the German annual payments. As far as I know there are compensation payments, but not to the State of Israel nor in the amount stated in the lead-in.

2. The GDP comparison with European countries is misleading. The only countries that have a lower GDP per capita in "Western Europe" are Greece and Portugal. Spain has a higher GDP per capita. Themanwithoutapast 19:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the immigrants from former USSR contribution to the Israeli economy.

I hear it too many times: that with out the Russian immigration the Israeli economy had it much harder to go forward. But this is factually false: by now, the immigration cost to Israel more than it benefit from it, i.e., Israel spend tens of billions of dollars to absorb the new citizens. More, most of the new immigrants don’t work in the high-tech sector and the famous abilities of this sector was notable much before they came here in a military projects, as well as many other. The peace processes, which field, pushed the Israeli economy forward.--Gilisa 17:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

That is your own opinion, supported by no facts. There is no doubt that the immigration from former USSR contributed much to the economic boom of the 90's, much more than the peace process - most of the growth occurred before the Oslo agreement> Benjil 08:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Net Foreign Transfers

Dfalao I think that you are giving the wrong link or that you are confusing a few things. The link that you give is about the Net Balance of Payments of Israel, it mainly deals with the foreign trade balance and not the US military aid. Israel is now receiving a $3 billions US military aid (not economic aid) for the next 10 years. I personally think this is a huge mistake but that's not the issue. I do not know how much Israel receives from other sources like private Jewish donators, but anyway you need to separate the money that goes to the Israeli budget (if any) from what is given to private institutions. Benjil 09:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The figure I gave was net transfers, which is not part of the balance of trade, but is part of the current account, which in turn is a part of the balance of payments. Transfer payments are unilateral transfers included in the current account, e.g., gifts and support payments. The figure includes military aid, or indeed any other unilateral transfers. It would appear that you are not familiar with balance of payment statistics. The total net transfers to the government amounted to $4.4 billion in 2006, while net current transfers to the rest of the economy were $3.0 billion, for a total of 7.4 billion US dollars.
The information and figures I gave were accurate and relevant. As it stands, it appears Israel receives only 0.12 billion, which is completely misleading. Too bad you chose to censure the relevant information.
Further information, for the interested: http://www.cbs.gov.il/hodaot2007n/09_07_045e.pdf http://www.bankisrael.gov.il/deptdata/mehkar/indic/eng_c09.htm http://www.bankisrael.gov.il/deptdata/pik_mth/ex_debt/define.htm
Dfalao 15:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
So let's do that again: the Bank of Israel link does not say what you say. The data you quote is from the CBS link and it also does not say exactly the same thing because $3 billions out of the $7.4 go to the private sector. So the aid that Israel received was, according to this, $4.4 billions, an increase of $1.4 billion from $3 billion of military aid in 2005, probably the special aid after the war or something like that. If someone knows the details, he is welcome to give more explanations. 07:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I specifically say above "The total net transfers to the government amounted to $4.4 billion in 2006, while net current transfers to the rest of the economy were $3.0 billion, for a total of 7.4 billion US dollars." The Bank of Israel doesn't split the sum into different sectors of the economy like the CBS, but reaches the same grand total. Thus, 7.4 billion was the net transfers to Israel in 2006, which is a significant sum. It is certainly worth reporting, for anyone who wants NPOV articles in Wikipedia. Dfalao 16:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] German aid to Israel

Aside from the complete misrepresentaion of the scale of US aid, why is there no mention of the massive amount of German aid?

KBuck

Because Israel doesn't receive aid from Germany. It did, a long time ago (up till 1965), but even then it wasn't "massive" (but lets not debate semantics). okedem 16:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

That's funny because according to everyone else eg

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

" But there also has been extensive German military assistance to Israel during and since the Gulf war, and a variety of German educational and research grants go to Israeli institutions. The total of German assistance in all of these categories to the Israeli government, Israeli individuals and Israeli private institutions has been some $31 billion or $5,345 per capita, bringing the per capita total of U.S. and German assistance combined to almost $20,000 per Israeli"

For some reason this page isn't prepared to mention either the proper scale of US aid or German aid at all. What's the problem?

KBuck

You're mixing very different things here. The bulk of the assistance was in the form of reparations given to the Israeli government from 1953 to 1965. 1965, mind you, was 42 years ago.
The other major part is money given directly to holocaust survivors - this is not "German aid to Israel", but given directly to the survivors, and thus is not mentioned here.
Other major assistance - German shipyards built 3 submarines for Israel, which only had to pay for one, and the German government financed the other two - this is direct military assistance, and has nothing to do with the economy.
Research grants? That's peanuts, and not worthy of mention. Aid in this form has negligible impact of the economy.
Just to give some scale - your link says the sum total of Germany's aid, in all these forms (some of which irrelevant to this article), was $31 billion. Israel's budget for the year 2008 will be around $70 billion, and its GDP for 2006 was $135 billion. So while German aid was useful, most of it was a long time ago, and even then it wasn't what kept Israel going. What is relevant today is not in the form of economic assistance, and thus isn't mentioned. okedem 13:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


That's funny... I've never heard anyone saying military aid and expenditure is nothing to do with the economy before... everyone else seems to think its a part of the economy. The aid given to Israel - from the US/Germany/Jews abroad is all part of the economy. To claim otherwise is ridiculous. As is your attempt to paint $5,345 per capita - money which in large part built Israel's infrastructure, as a small sum. As is giving the impression that the only aid Israel gets from the US is the relatively small sum labelled economic rather than the $billions of military aid every year. A completely misleading piece of propoganda.

KBuck

I demand you take back your accusations, and apologize for them.
I only wrote about aid from Germany. I haven't said a word about US aid, not civilian, nor military. Whatever you thought I said, is your problem. Don't attack me for things you imagined, and throw around words like "propaganda" if you want to be taken seriously.
Giving a submarine as a gift isn't economic aid, in that it has no economic impact, and is not a part of the budget. It's military aid. It's not military budgets, to be spent rather freely, as the US gives (although it can only be used for American equipment). Even if you do include it, it's not worth that much, relatively.
I gave the numbers for scale. I say again, for the last time - the major economic aid was given over 40 years ago, and what is given today is given to individuals, and has relatively little impact. okedem 14:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


What accusations - "Propoganda" was a reference to the impression given in the article that US aid is small "120 million, or about 0.07% of Israel's GDP." Totally misleading. As for your odd position that military aid isn't economic - even Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer says exactly the opposite in todays announcement of $30 billion from the US for Israel over the next 10 years.

"We have an exceptionally heavy defence burden... The fact that the United States is willing to share a significant part of that burden ... is a critical element in the budget."

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/56F1803E-796B-4ACD-A9E3-0F03338F46D6.htm

KBuck

Your quote doesn't support your claim. And if you don't want to be perceived as attacking people, try phrasing your sentences better. okedem 16:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
The article said that yearly US economic aid to Israel is $120 million - and this is already wrong. It is 0. But it is true that the article does not include the $2.4 billion and from next year $3 billion military aid. So I propose to add it. But we need to explain that it hurts the Israeli economy as much as it helps it, that this is mainly a US subsides for its military industry, and that NATO countries get lower prices when they buy US weapons, while Israel pays the full price - so this is just the way to do the same thing. Benjil 06:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
It's just outdated. The economic aid has been decreasing year by year. I support your suggestion. okedem 10:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] absorption of former USSR immigration

The immigration imbibition has cost to israel much more than Israel earn from it in an economic terms-eacj family that immigrate cost, in average, about 60,000$-70,000$ (there is a study on that matter that been done at haifa university). More, the vast majority of the hi-tech workers and etc are still veteran Israelis. There is no single grounded study that support the claim that the former USSR immigrationgave Israel "strong upward push"-this is more asaying than a fact. The storng upward push came from the former workers of the weapon industries and from other economical changes which occur in Israel.--Gilisa 05:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Misinterpretation of the Balance of Payments

Article previously stated that Israel receved 7.4 bil$ from US. This give an impression that US gave the money, wile this in reality is a trade surplus. To whoever added this in the first place: please be carefull to understand the sources before adding them to WP. -- Heptor talk 02:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg

Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg

Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg

Image:1 New Israeli Sheqel (1994-1995).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Trade

2006 the volume was 4,9 Mrd. US$. Being 8,26 % (3,2 Mrd. US$) of Israels Imports and 5,58 % (1,7 Mrd. US$) of Israels Exports. [3]

Might be good to mention not only the US ex and import but the first two or three partners.--Stone (talk) 14:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)