Unemployment falls again

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well yes, good news. But you appear to have forgotten to mention that the new claimant count for April rose 12,400.

The unemployment figures are over 3 months. The April figures for new claimants is rising..

Turns out the number of employed people increased.

Most of the increase was in full time jobs.

And the increase in claimant count was down to people being transferred from benefits to JSA under the new rules.

So good news all around really.:beer:

Pimperne1

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Turns out the number of employed people increased.

Most of the increase was in full time jobs.

And the increase in claimant count was down to people being transferred from benefits to JSA under the new rules.

So good news all around really.:beer:

Great stuff, this is a great country to live in.

Le_Chuck

Unemployment up again in the North East, well thats about the only promise the ConDems have kept - to screw the NE again

shortchanged_2

So is this the piece of positive news before unemployment rises again this year with the full force of the public sector cuts.

Lets hope the private sector can do the mopping up job that the government is hoping.

Mr_Mumble

Anyone know why the ONS has pay estimates for public & private sector employees for the latest quarter but the employment count split between public & private sector employees lags by 3 months?

Anyhow:

The number of people in public sector employment was 6.20 million in December 2010, down 45,000 from September 2010. The number of people in private sector employment was 22.96 million, up 83,000 from September 2010.

Ex-financial the number of public sector employees fell to under 6m (5.98m) at the end of 2010. From these stats it looks like private sector job creation is easily compensating for public sector redundancies. :T

nutsohazelnuts

Mrs Thatcher moved people wholesale onto Disability benefits to massage the unemployment figures. Does moving people onto Job Seekers Allowance do the same thing? Are job seekers not the same as the unemployed then?

bpm_2

Has no one researched unemployment or looked at the figures? You cant compare these figures to the 90s recession as they now calculate it differently. Unemployment is not at the % stated as they "massage" the figures.

For instance there are approximately 62million in Britain.
They only count 37 million of these as they are between 16 and 64, of which the last unemployment figures state 2.5 million unemployed. So about 7%.
BUT 1.45 million are jobseekers which are NOT included so actually nearer 11%
BUT 9.33 million are "inactive" so they are NOT included bringing the total to almost 36%.
Then theres all the others they do NOT include as they are on allowances like disability so therefore not included.

Its easy to say we are cool as its only 7% or that one figure has reduced, but the truth behind the figures (which are all available on the national statistics website if you search) show that actually more than 1/3 of the population do not work and this is only working age! In total it is actually over 60% of the entire population.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

bpm wrote: »

actually more than 1/3 of the population do not work and this is only working age! In total it is actually over 60% of the entire population.

Quick, force all the students, housewives, charity volunteers, retired people, children, etc to get a job right away!!!!

Or not....

Generali

Le_Chuck wrote: »

Unemployment up again in the North East, well thats about the only promise the ConDems have kept - to screw the NE again

The NE of England had 70% of her economy based on Government spending taxpayers' money. Unfortunately that would always make the region very vulnerable to Government not spending increasing amounts of money.

If the Government increased spending at the same pace as inflation, the private part of the economy would have to increase at about twice the pace of the economy in the rest of the country just to keep up.

Ultimately, the NE needs to grow a real economy based on people creating things that other people want to buy. If they don't then there's always a risk that people in other parts of the country will vote for a Government that is less generous with their money.

wherediditallgothen

ess0two wrote: »

More unemployment means cheaper houses,repo bargains to be had.

As long as you remain one of the employed.