A Key Underpinning Of H P I Is Eroding Rapidly

[Realistbear]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article...._page_id=2&ct=5

Jobless total approaches 1m

Dan Atkinson, Mail on Sunday

11 June 2006

THE government's flagship economic achievement - bringing unemployment below 1m for the first time since 1975 - is under threat, figures this week are expected to show.

Job losses in the private sector and a slowdown in the state sector recruitment boom have seen dole queues lengthen from 813,800 in January 2005 to 945,500 in April this year.

May's figure, due on Wednesday, is expected to show

the trend continuing

. If the next few months see similar losses, the 1m mark would be breached by the end of the year.

Job vacancies across the economy have shrunk

by 3.4% in the two years to April 2006, from 619,900 to 598,700.

But vacancies in education, health and public administration - nearly 70% of which are estimated to be in the public sector - have dropped more sharply, by 4.9%, from 142,400 to 135,300.

The EAs claim that continued low unemployment and IR are underpinning a strong house market. Looks like both underpins are about to be washed away? What's left holding the bubble togther? Affordability--no chance--FTBs are almost extinct with the result that chains are breaking everywhere they form. The last underpin is sentiment--the sheeple are still largely ingnorant.

[Guest grumpy-old-man]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article...._page_id=2&ct=5

Jobless total approaches 1m

Dan Atkinson, Mail on Sunday

11 June 2006

THE government's flagship economic achievement - bringing unemployment below 1m for the first time since 1975 - is under threat, figures this week are expected to show.

Job losses in the private sector and a slowdown in the state sector recruitment boom have seen dole queues lengthen from 813,800 in January 2005 to 945,500 in April this year.

May's figure, due on Wednesday, is expected to show

the trend continuing

. If the next few months see similar losses, the 1m mark would be breached by the end of the year.

Job vacancies across the economy have shrunk

by 3.4% in the two years to April 2006, from 619,900 to 598,700.

But vacancies in education, health and public administration - nearly 70% of which are estimated to be in the public sector - have dropped more sharply, by 4.9%, from 142,400 to 135,300.

The EAs claim that continued low unemployment and IR are underpinning a strong house market. Looks like both underpins are about to be washed away? What's left holding the bubble togther? Affordability--no chance--FTBs are almost extinct with the result that chains are breaking everywhere they form. The last underpin is sentiment--the sheeple are still largely ingnorant.

and a lot of these "new" jobs created over the last few years have been in the public sector...that's where most of the re-investment money has gone...paying "consultants" huge wads of dosh to create a stupid report.

wasted millions

[Realistbear]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jh...6/11/do1103.xml

Superficially, to be sure, the British labour market is more flexible than, say, the French. But British Government statistics are deceptive. Officially, only 920,000 people claim unemployment benefits. However, more than five million adults of working age - nearly 15 per cent of the workforce - depend on benefits, and nearly half of them have been on welfare for more than five years. The reason they don't show up in the statistics is that many of them are counted as unfit for work rather than jobless. Every day, 23 teenagers in Britain sign up for incapacity benefit.

Worse still, many do not show up in the stats. Bottom line is that there is not much holding the Miracle Economy together and its fragility is underscored by the BoE's inability to hike rates in line with the rest of the world--despite obvious inflation in the economy. It will be interesting to see how sterling holds up this coming week.

[BuyingBear]

1m? How about the 2.5m on incapacity and disability, the millions in subsidised 'New Deal' jobs, those hidden from the stats by endless "retraining", the thousands of youth unemployed 'studying' for useless degrees, or the thousands of rubbish inspectors and countless other Very Important public sector jobs?

1m? Hrm :-

In July to September 2004

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1012' rel="external nofollow">

, just under 8 million people of working age in the United Kingdom were either not looking for, or not available for, work and were therefore classified as being economically inactive. The working-age inactivity rate stood at 21.5 per cent for this period, 16.5 per cent for men and 26.9 per cent for women. This compares with 21.2 per cent five years earlier in 1999 when it was 15.5 per cent for men and 27.3 per cent for women.

The main groups classed as economically inactive are those looking after the family and home, students and those who are long-term sick or disabled.

The number of economically inactive people increased by 360,000 in the five years to July to September 2004. Students accounted for the largest part of this increase (310,000). The number of long-term sick grew by 10,000 in the same period.

[werewolves]

1m? How about the 2.5m on incapacity and disability, the millions in subsidised 'New Deal' jobs, those hidden from the stats by endless "retraining", the thousands of youth unemployed 'studying' for useless degrees, or the thousands of rubbish inspectors and countless other Very Important public sector jobs?

1m? Hrm :-

In July to September 2004

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1012' rel="external nofollow">

, just under 8 million people of working age in the United Kingdom were either not looking for, or not available for, work and were therefore classified as being economically inactive. The working-age inactivity rate stood at 21.5 per cent for this period, 16.5 per cent for men and 26.9 per cent for women. This compares with 21.2 per cent five years earlier in 1999 when it was 15.5 per cent for men and 27.3 per cent for women.

The main groups classed as economically inactive are those looking after the family and home, students and those who are long-term sick or disabled.

The number of economically inactive people increased by 360,000 in the five years to July to September 2004. Students accounted for the largest part of this increase (310,000). The number of long-term sick grew by 10,000 in the same period.

Why does your John Prescott picture look funny? Has he been to the same plastic surgeon Michael Jackson used?

[Robbrent]

1m? How about the 2.5m on incapacity and disability, the millions in subsidised 'New Deal' jobs, those hidden from the stats by endless "retraining", the thousands of youth unemployed 'studying' for useless degrees, or the thousands of rubbish inspectors and countless other Very Important public sector jobs?

I read what you say, however the amounts on incapacity were about the same under the last government, nice trick, can you imagine it under the Tories we could have has 6 million unemployed if it was not.

As for public sector jobs, well look at it another way, I read on here that we had a good economy and the world was right under the Tories, but we had consistently 3 million unemployed throughout their period in government, so it looks like giving tax breaks to the rich does not do the trick in getting people back to work, you can call this government for many things but at least they have reduced unemployment in this country, which in my opinion was one of the biggest social evils, but of course if your a Tory it was a price worth paying (as long as it was not you who was suffering)

[BuyingBear]

Why does your John Prescott picture look funny?

Maybe some incensed secretary decided to lamp him with a croquet mallet?

I read what you say, however the amounts on incapacity were about the same under the last government, nice trick, can you imagine it under the Tories we could have has 6 million unemployed if it was not.

Oh quite, it's a nice statistical trick that has been carried forward by this government with vigour, it makes our OECD performance data appear better and our economy less sclerotic compared to France and Germany, despite the underlying trends being exactly the same. However, they're starting to wake up as they realise these unsustainable trends need to be paid for.

However, a rose by any other name...

[FollowTheBear]

Not to mention unemployed people who can not claim any benefits at all because their partners work. Despite my modest income my missus could not claim a penny during her recent unemployment which cost us both a lot of money. You pay your taxes but the state won't help you out.