Unemployment FALLS for second month in a row

macaque_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Unemployment fell by 3,000 to 2.46 million, official figures showed today.

Despite a minor blip up in the new claimant count, total unemployment has now fallen for the second month in a row.
I think we can all agree this is good news.

A government spokesman announced yesterday that chocolate bar rations will be increased from the current 200 grams a week to 250 grams a week as of March 1st.

In other news, the government standards agency announced that as of March 1st the mandatory minimum weight for chocolate wrappers will be increased from 10 grams to 100 grams.

chucky

macaque wrote: »

A government spokesman announced yesterday that chocolate bar rations will be increased from the current 200 grams a week to 250 grams a week as of March 1st.

In other news, the government standards agency announced that as of March 1st the mandatory minimum weight for chocolate wrappers will be increased from 10 grams to 100 grams.

that's quite amusing because Colgate did something similar with toothpaste tubes.

they made holes the toothpaste comes out slightly wider so more toothpaste was used - many complained that it was wrong and started using a different brand.

unfortunately they didn't get enough toothpaste on their tooth brush and they ended up with bad teeth.

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

Surely it is normal for unemployment to climb for around 18 months post recession ?
Although I have a feeling that they were fairly lean before the recession so this may not be nearly as bad as previous, in the private sector anyway. The public sector, well that is a different matter, it looks like they will be the main contributor to any increases, maybe it is a positive rebalancing of the economy ( its an ill wind that blows nobody any good).

This time it's different?:D

It's tough to put current times in the UK as being analagous with any other recession so frankly who knows what will happen? I don't.

My gut feeling is that taxes and more especially Government spending and employment are way too high and thus can't be sustained.

Time, as you imply, will tell.

abaxas

Forget where..

But isnt something stupid like 21.3% economically inactive? Didnt that go up last month...

If anyone can help where I spotted that... ta.

Graham_Devon

abaxas wrote: »

Forget where..

But isnt something stupid like 21.3% economically inactive? Didnt that go up last month...

If anyone can help where I spotted that... ta.

The percentage of people neither employed nor looking for work, and who are not counted as unemployed by the ONS, rose to 21.3%.

It's on the BBC news article.

abaxas

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's on the BBC news article.

Thanks for getting the info!

jetta_wales

Hamish can I ask how has this recession negativly affected you?

chucky

abaxas wrote: »

Forget where..

But isnt something stupid like 21.3% economically inactive? Didnt that go up last month...

If anyone can help where I spotted that... ta.

what have these numbers looked at over a larger period?

i imagine it went down with more women/mums working but am intrigued to see it over a longer period.

abaxas

chucky wrote: »

what have these numbers looked at over a larger period?

i imagine it went down with more women/mums working but am intrigued to see it over a longer period.

Cool idea.

The ONS will have it, but their website was designed by 16 year old work experience no armed web designer. So having difficulty here.

Post anything you find!

boomerangs

abaxas wrote: »

Forget where..

But isnt something stupid like 21.3% economically inactive? .

No, it's closer to 30% economically inactive. i.e. the true unemployment figure. :eek: