Thursday, Jul 16, 2009

Labour won't take their pain...

Market Oracle: UK Unemployment Record Rise, a Jobless Debt Fuelled Economic Recovery?

''...the mainstream press focus has been on the headline unemployment data and the benefits claimant count, however the real number of unemployed stands far higher when taking into account all those of working age (16 to 64) as illustrated below with the total at 7.915 million...''

Posted by hpwatcher @ 05:44 AM (693 views) Add Comment

11 Comments

1. flashman said...

“however the real number of unemployed (7.15 million) stands far higher when taking into account all those of working age (16 to 64)”

This article lifts its figures wholesale from the National Statistics office but it implies that some insight has gone into acquiring the 'real' number of 7.15 million unemployed

My wife does not work and nor does my sister or my brothers wife. They do not want to work but they are pretty far from economically inactive. I know many people who have happily taken early retirement and several people who are taking a sabbatical from work. Adding these people to an unemployed statistic makes no sense. The same goes for the disabled, people in jail, people travelling the world, the idle rich, the idle poor, students, househusbands and housewives

The official statistics are flawed but they are more useful than this 7.15 million number

Thursday, July 16, 2009 09:23AM Report Comment
 

2. flashman said...

sorry, I meant 7.915

Thursday, July 16, 2009 09:29AM Report Comment
 

3. paul said...

Will Hutton suggested in "The State We're In" (1996) that the real rate of unemployed (or economically inactive) is roughly three times the unemployment rate at any given time.

He's still not far off the mark according to Market Oracle.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 09:44AM Report Comment
 

4. flashman said...

paul: The Will Hutton thing infers that a very high proportion of the economically inactive rejoin the workforce in boom times. i.e if the unemployment number is 1 million then the economically inactive number reduces from 7 million to 3 million. If it is true then 4 million of the currently inactive don't really want to be. Thats a lot of frustrated people

Thursday, July 16, 2009 10:23AM Report Comment
 

5. icarus said...

Flashman - and why count only those aged 15-64 as economically active or inactive? There are many fit people over 65. Some racehorse trainers are in their 70s (one gets up before 4am and works 10-12-hour days, others have strings of 100+ horses) and at least one is in his 80s. The thing that dies at age 64 or younger is the will to work for somebody else.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 10:43AM Report Comment
 

6. flashman said...

icarus: true enough. God knows how this demographics thing will pan out. We cant afford to support the retired, so they've got to carry on working....but there wont be a any jobs for most of them. I think the highly skilled older folks will be asked to work until they drop and the less skilled older folk will cause the government to consider a euthanasia bill

Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:02AM Report Comment
 

7. icarus said...

flashman - nor can we afford......better stop there or we'll be into a different subject (the words 'bank bailouts' and 'military', especially with regard to the US, spring to mind).

Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:28AM Report Comment
 

8. Hpwatcher said...

Governments have been hiding the real unemployment figures for years.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 04:36PM Report Comment
 

9. shipbuilder said...

The truth, of course, is that we can afford to support the retired and indeed all of us could work shorter hours, just not under our current system, where increases in productivity go into a few pockets rather than increasing the 'leisure' time of all of us. It's just whether we choose to do things that way.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 10:26PM Report Comment
 

10. shipbuilder said...

[img]http://idlenest.freehostia.com/images/race.gif[/img]

Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:11PM Report Comment
 

11. shipbuilder said...

I guess that didn't work.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:12PM Report Comment
 

Add comment

Username   Admin Password (optional)
Email Address
Comments
  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies