Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Realistbear

Alarming Analysis Of Latest Unemployment Figures

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../ixcitytop.html

the CBI said more than 7,000 factory jobs a month were being lost as the high cost of raw materials and energy forced companies to trim their staff bill.
The number of people on the dole also rose during December, by 7,200 to 909,100. The claimant count has now been
rising steadily over the past 11 months
.
His view was echoed by Vicky Redwood at Capital Economics. She said she expected "to see further falls in employment in the coming months" because companies will react to the recent sharp rise in their costs by shedding jobs.
John Butler, an economist at HSBC, said: "The monetary policy committee has been using the robust employment data as a reason to doubt the weakness in economic growth. That argument seems less compelling and suggests the weakness is finally being felt through a weaker employment outlook
."
The rise in unemployment was also reflected in
lower pay rises than were expected
. The three-month average pay-rise level dropped from 3.6pc in October to 3.4pc. In November, wage growth dropped from 4.6pc a year ago to 3.2pc for private sector companies.
The news on unemployment will come as a blow to Gordon Brown
, shortly after a survey from the Conference Board showed the UK's productivity, or the efficiency of workers, is falling further behind the United States. The growth of UK productivity fell from 2.3pc in 2004 to just 0.9pc last year.

The above is, in short, a catalogue of disaster. There is indeed a gathering storm of a great magnitude that will not only pop the grossly inflated housing bubble but place the economy in danger. We appear to be paying dearly for Gordon Brown's inflationary policies which his most notable success, high house prices, will not be able to save.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rising unemployment figures in the wealth creating arena have been masked by a huge government recruitment. Without that we would be another million on those figures.

Problem is now that all the manufacturing jobs are going, we can't afford the government jobs we have, let alone another 100,000 this year, if they wish to continue to keep unemployment low!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the CBI said more than 7,000 factory jobs a month were being lost as the high cost of raw materials and energy forced companies to trim their staff bill.

But don't worry: the BoE can cut rates to devalue the pound and make our exports cheaper, and everything will be happy and fluffy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is now that all the manufacturing jobs are going, we can't afford the government jobs we have, let alone another 100,000 this year, if they wish to continue to keep unemployment low!

Gordon Brown has pillaged the economy. We are now on a slow downward spiral that seems to be accelerating.

The national health service has run out money again. Operations are getting cancelled and beds are closing.

Tescos commented this week that their rates bill was becoming a serious problem. If supermarkets are struggling with taxes, what is like for other companies?

Has any economy ever been quite so royally screwed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any economy ever been quite so royally screwed?

Not since Ol Labour in the 70's

Gordon Brown - Dennis Healey's heir apparent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some government official was on the box this morning dealing with questions about rising truancy. They put forward that the preferred measure of school attendance was actually rising!

It would appear that the preferred measure of total in work over unemployment idea has caught on.

You really can't take anything that they say at face value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../ixcitytop.html

the CBI said more than 7,000 factory jobs a month were being lost as the high cost of raw materials and energy forced companies to trim their staff bill.

Here`s an idea instead of cutting jobs, why not "trim" obcene profits and pay for the fat cats.

After big business has fleeced all the sheeple, taken what equity they had in most cases their only asset, their house, publicly related them into huge amounts of debt and now say we cant afford to employ you any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Higher unemployment is great for house prices as it means lower interest rates.

In fact, in an ideal scenerio everyone would be unemployed, interest rates would be zero and house prices could rise forever! amen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Riser

But don't worry: the BoE can cut rates to devalue the pound and make our exports cheaper, and everything will be happy and fluffy!

Lowering the rates will reduce long term yield and increase the pension deficits, good job the courts ruled last week that companies can now scrap their final saleys schemes for existing workers.

Poor old Brown, what should he do next? sacrifice long term stability for a short term delay of the inevitable recession?. Of course he will, no one can accuse him of not being consistent in his destruction of the UK economy, rates will come down next month and be justified by the need to support manufacturing. The real motivation of course will be to pump a few more gasps of hot air into the rupturing housing bubble without which Brown is well and truly stuffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the CBI said more than 7,000 factory jobs a month were being lost as the high cost of raw materials and energy forced companies to trim their staff bill.

I was trying to work out how much this cost

7000 jobs – all go on the dole and get at a guess £5000 a year

7000 x £5000 = a cost to the tax payers £35,000,000 a year

But I am presuming that this is more than offset by the increasing population which is twice that amount (I think it’s about 15000 ish a month)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to work out how much this cost

7000 jobs – all go on the dole and get at a guess £5000 a year

7000 x £5000 = a cost to the tax payers £35,000,000 a year

But I am presuming that this is more than offset by the increasing population which is twice that amount (I think it’s about 15000 ish a month)

Seen somewhere it cost £500 for every £100 of benefits paid out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon Brown has pillaged the economy. We are now on a slow downward spiral that seems to be accelerating.

The national health service has run out money again. Operations are getting cancelled and beds are closing.

The PFI fuelled spend-a-thon over the last few years has left a long term burden on these NHS Trusts. Nice shiny new hospital today, 30 years of paying over the odds (because the cowardly government don't want the debt on their 'official' books)

That fact that the NHS can't cope financially despite the biggest increase in its income since it was founded just shows what a laughable 50-year old anachronism it really is.

This era will be defined by a people and a government living the dream on borrowed money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But don't worry: the BoE can cut rates to devalue the pound and make our exports cheaper, and everything will be happy and fluffy!

Whilst making imported oil and energy even more expensive and contributing to our already burgeoning trade deficit by making imports more expensive, the retailers would just love that affect on their margins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PFI fuelled spend-a-thon over the last few years has left a long term burden on these NHS Trusts. Nice shiny new hospital today, 30 years of paying over the odds (because the cowardly government don't want the debt on their 'official' books)

That fact that the NHS can't cope financially despite the biggest increase in its income since it was founded just shows what a laughable 50-year old anachronism it really is.

This era will be defined by a people and a government living the dream on borrowed money.

You are talking rubbish about pfi. Generally it is better for the taxpayer despite cost of gilts because of the old 70% cost and time ovverruns on public procured infrastructure. The burden is on Govt. Noone talks about gilts being a burden on the country but they are. PFI is not the reason the trusts are in crisis - that is because the central funding in the NHS is not being properly put to use.

Anyway, the point of my post was going to be general, RATES WILL NOT FIX THIS when they are already so low.

Debt capacity has been used up at current rates - a 0.25bp cut in rates is a 5.5% reduction in cost of borrowing. Even two or three of those (ie 15% reduction in cost of borrowing is not going to be enough to save businesses/consumers who are overstretched. To stave off the coming recession you'd need rates at 1-2% and there is no way of that happening given the cost push inflation (esp on services and energy that is on the cards).

Rates too high - HPs stuffed. Rates too low - HPs stuffed. Same result very different underlying reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PFI fuelled spend-a-thon over the last few years has left a long term burden on these NHS Trusts. Nice shiny new hospital today, 30 years of paying over the odds (because the cowardly government don't want the debt on their 'official' books)

Indeed, nobody can borrow money more cheaply than the government (especially when they also force pension funds to buy their gilts), so what's the point of borrowing money at a premium that has to be raised in the market from a private company?

You are talking rubbish about pfi. Generally it is better for the taxpayer despite cost of gilts because of the old 70% cost and time ovverruns on public procured infrastructure.

So private companies don't like wasting their own money, this is what it comes down to, cost over-runs become their problem (in theory) and not that of the government. Of course this problem could be solved by using decent contractors and some civil servants that actually know how to draft proper water tight contracts, look at Wembley Standium and the Multiplex Group, they're having to build the stadium at a loss, that's what the contract set out... if they got their original quote wrong then tough titty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking rubbish about pfi. Generally it is better for the taxpayer despite cost of gilts because of the old 70% cost and time ovverruns on public procured infrastructure.

According to commentators on the radio last night, the terms of the PFI deals were disastrous and will cripple the health service indefinitely. I have a suspicion as to how Gordon Brown will get out of this. He will privatise the national health service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to work out how much this cost

7000 jobs – all go on the dole and get at a guess £5000 a year

7000 x £5000 = a cost to the tax payers £35,000,000 a year

Don't think so. Unemployment increased by 110000 in three months, but only 7200 more are signing on. Only very few people can get jobseekers allowance.

Edited by FollowTheBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bart of Darkness
Some government official was on the box this morning dealing with questions about rising truancy. They put forward that the preferred measure of school attendance was actually rising!

My preferred measure is to use my eyes.

Truancy, something else that doesn't seem to be enforced any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(because the cowardly government don't want the debt on their 'official' books)

Grrrr, I hate this kind of thing! Wherever there are ugly numbers, the first measure is to pull some kind of accounting trick to make the numbers look better, instead of deciding what needs to be done and focusing on getting best value. Whenever there is a nasty statistic, the first approach is to change the way the statistic is compiled, instead of tackling the underlying problem. Grumble, grumble.

Edited by Night Owl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking rubbish about pfi. Generally it is better for the taxpayer

There are lots of people who would disagree. Nobody can borrow money as cheaply as the governmet. Private companies exist to make money. The situation really is a joke. I'd compare it to someone who buys a brand new car with a £99 deposit on a finance deal. Looks great for a few months, then 3 years down the line you paying a fortune for a crappy old car. That's what our NHS trust will be doing in a few years.

Read this article about the Queen Elizabeth NHS Trust: http://society.guardian.co.uk/privatefinan...1668724,00.html (It's in the bloody Guardian FFS)

The problem was particularly severe at Queen Elizabeth because it was locked into a PFI deal which added about £9m a year to the costs met by an equivalent hospital built with money borrowed from the government
In the first two years the trust's underlying deficit was masked by support payments from the health authority and a Treasury loans discount.
They found the Queen Elizabeth's long-term financial prospects insoluble without external support.
Annual deficits could accumulate into a sum so large it could never be paid back to the Treasury.
if it closed, the PFI operators could reclaim a £140m bond from the health secretary
But the deal, approved by the Treasury, locked the trust into an annual £20m payment which it cannot afford.

Have a look at this link:

http://www.london.nhs.uk/modernising/candc...talbuilding.htm

I counted over a billion quid in London alone on PFI spends. These will leave a burden on the NHS long after Gordon Brown's short spell as PM is over. Yet another example of money spent today, to be paid back over a long long time.

Oh and guess who advised the government on PFI? Arthur Anderson! Yup the auditors who OKed Enron's books and have been blasted out of existence.

Who championed PFI (admitedly used by the Tories, but not on this scale) Former Paymaster General, Geoffrey Robinson! Another one of Tony Blair's crooked backers.

Can't be arsed to write anymore. What exactly makes you think PFI is a good idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.