Unemployment hits 2.6m. Over 1m 16-24 year olds out of work

worldtraveller

ILW wrote: »

India, China, Brazil, Russia for starters.

If we can come up with products and services that people want to but, they will buy them wherever they are.

In fact most of Europe would go on buying whether we were in the EU or not.

I seem to remember reading somewhere recently that the UK exports more to Ireland than it does to China, Brazil, Russia and India put together and I agree that that situation probably needs to change if we have any chance of getting out of the economic doo-doo that we are in.

nembot

setmefree2 wrote: »

Nembot I've been reading this board for a long time (too long) and there were a large number of MSE posters who cheered on a recession. I do recall one post in which a poster said that they "thought it was about time the UK had a recession and it would do us good". The shocking thing was that the post got a huge number of "Thanks".......

I remember wondering whether posters were so foolish as not to realise that a great deal of people were about to lose their jobs...

...so yes I do think that Hamish has a point tbh.

Setmefree... Where exactly do you think we'd be right now if the good times carried on?

We did need a recession (and we were pretty close) back in the early nougties, instead we got almost free credit for 7-10 years.

Do you not see a problem here, do you think this would work and everyone would be fine when the problem began to arise?

Don't blame those who saw this coming, but the people responsible for making it happen.

We're in a global financial crisis and all we've done is put plasters on the wound and take painkillers, the recovery is far away, far away.

worldtraveller

Even as the number of jobless people rose to its highest in nearly 20 years, employment among foreign citizens rose by more than 6 per cent.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics showed that unemployment was 2.62 million in the three months to September.

Youth unemployment passed 1 million, prompting warnings of a “lost generation” of young Britons.

But even as overall unemployment rose, foreign workers continued to prosper.

The number of non-UK nationals in British employment was 2.56 million, up 147,000 from the same period year earlier.

The figures fuelled concerns that, facing a slowing economy, British companies are choosing to hire experienced foreign staff instead of meeting the higher costs of hiring young British novices.

Telegraph

Maybe in many cases it's also just a lack of the skills required in many of the youth of today in the UK. How often I've heard of employer's saying that people in this age group are lazy, have a bad attitude, are uneducated (is that really a surprise though with the appalling record of the last Labour Government, when almost two in five children entered secondary school without a firm grasp of the basics of reading, writing & maths?), can't speak coherently, or simply just don't want to work.

dawyldthing

Generali wrote: »

What should the parties in power do in your opinion?

Consumption drives most employment. More borrowing (if you can find a lender) will just bring even more consumption forward from a later tomorrow and make the problem worse in the end.

Bring wages into a more realistic level. Its rediculous that someone can earn 20 million a year and others are lucky to walk away with 10,000 a year. There should be a minimum (15,000 ish) for all people working to earn. Things should be more in proportion, I personally think universal credit is a good idea as the idea of having 4,000 a month rent is astounding tbh, and if they can't afford it then they should move to more realistic renting areas of the country. We seem to reward the wrong people.

Education - everyone should be given a 'pot' that they can put towards training at any age, say 3k, for their working lives so that they can get the training to get a job.

Less paper chasers, and embrase online features like for hospitals and the like so we can make appointments online. I think doctors, teachers and the like are worth their weight in gold, but apart from head teachers there should be a cap of about 35,000. If it brings some out of the system then its obvious that they are in it for the money. The reduction in wages can help employ more teachers to reduce class sizes so we have the skills needed for the wider scale in society that we need. We also need to reward businesses for choosing England - tax breaks for them that employ x amount of people. Why? Because when in work you have self worth, have something to look forwards to, companionship and it benefits us all. The business would potentially be more inclined to employ more people which would help.

Give young people something to work towards. I do think there should be reduced wages until 21 as at the end of the day if your getting trained up it could help seven fold in the end.


But i also think as a society we should be taught loyality as its not fair on businesses to pay x amount on training then people leave not long after. This includes everyone in the public services, as it costs thousands to train soldiers, police, medics, teachers and many do leave the profession so there should be an incentive to stop this but also a charge if you don't stay in the profession for that long as i'd love to know the statistics for some of these above that train then leave within 3 years.

savepete

Britain's unfortunate concentration on casino banking means that almost a third of the GDP is now generated by financial transactions, largely in and around London. This sector is great for French mathematicians and Arab and German millionaires, but does not provide the opportunities for young people in the Midlands or the North of England. A pitty how a bunch of Billionaires from Eton is running our country.

ILW

savepete wrote: »

Britain's unfortunate concentration on casino banking means that almost a third of the GDP is now generated by financial transactions, largely in and around London. This sector is great for French mathematicians and Arab and German millionaires, but does not provide the opportunities for young people in the Midlands or the North of England. A pitty how a bunch of Billionaires from Eton is running our country.

No reason why a Northener could not be a city trader.

Jimmy_31

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Totally agree.

Of course what's even more appalling is that some people still cheer on and hope for a double dip recession and rising unemployment in a misguided attempt to get a cheaper house.

Or that some people cheer on high house prices and high rents which completely fcuk over the younger generation.

I wonder how long all this can carry on for.

Going4TheDream

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Sadly...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15747103

I do wish the party in power now would stop doing themselves the injustice of blaming whatever is going on at the time. This is a UK issue. The 1.02 million 16-24 year olds out of work is appalling.

It just seems ironic that this is all in the year when they abolished compulsory retirement age.

I cant help but wonder if that has had/will have an impact at all (people not moving up the ladder in to those jobs and making vacancies at entry level for the kids etc)

I wonder how many older people are carrying on working either full or part time and how that compares with youth unemployment numbers

Graham_Devon

Going4TheDream wrote: »

It just seems ironic that this is all in the year when they abolished compulsory retirement age.

I cant help but wonder if that has had/will have an impact at all (people not moving up the ladder in to those jobs and making vacancies at entry level for the kids etc)

I wonder how many older people are carrying on working either full or part time and how that compares with youth unemployment numbers

Very true. Trouble is, many can't afford to retire.

Think how bad the problems will be when they do retire and in 20 years time, it's expected that todays unemployed 25 year olds will pay into the tax system to keep the older generation living.

It's all a right mess.

Jimmy_31

kabayiri wrote: »

I agree with something a caller suggested to bbc radio this morning.

The apprentice route should more closely align with the academic route in terms of funding.

What they meant by that was that the apprentice could be a skilled person already, but they would have some element of 'deferred salary' to reflect their lack of experience. As they built up experience with that company, say over a 5 year period, their contribution should increase in value, and the deferred element of salary would then be repaid.

The employee-apprentice would have a mid-term income target; the employer would be guaranteed an incentive for the employee to remain and repay the investment and risk shown by the employer.

There was at least one employer on the radio who would not take graduates on, because of their suspicion that the employee would leave in a year or less when conditions improved.

It will of course have limitations and be open to some level of abuse I am sure.

The way it works with apprentices nowadays in the construction industry needs looking at asap.

Lots of lads are just being put on a course for a couple of weeks and then being placed with a firm who uses them for cheap labour till the day their apprentiship ends, thats the same day they also lose their job.

They are rarely given any proper training to learn their trade, they are just there to do the 5hit jobs or because the firm was told they had to take some apprentices on.

The young lads are also having to compete with 50 year old men who decide to be a mature apprentice because they cant find any work so decide to get a "trade".