Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The good news is – it is NOT AS BAD AS we think!
UK jobless total at 12-year high
UK unemployment rose to 2.261 million in the three months to April, the highest since November 1996, the Office for National Statistics said.
Posted by peter_2008 @ 10:58 AM (1939 views)
17 thoughts on “The good news is – it is NOT AS BAD AS we think!”
Add a comment
- 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
paul says:
Typically lame BBC attempt at spin on bad news.
need-a-crash says:
I agree, article is desperately trying to maintain the “we’re in the recovery phase now” despite the continued rise in unemployment.
Not sure about others on here but I keep meeting people who’ve recently been made redundant in the recruitment, property and finance sectors (all property owners as well, by the way) and I’m pretty sure none of them will have “signed on” yet, so as far as these stats are concerned they don’t exist.
Cynicalactuary says:
In my small circle of friends (I am, after all, an actuary) no fewer than five have lost their jobs – four in the last month or so. Some are still working out their “consultation” period and none has signed on yet. Most of the brown stuff is still in mid-trajectory on route towards the spinning thing.
Ftb 2b says:
Does anyone know when the new graduates and school leavers will be added to jobless number? it isn’t a great time to enter the market.
Chris says:
What a surprise. My friend went to the Job Centre yesterday, and was told that there was nothing. Literally. By a Job centre employee. It’s all going down the tube.
watchman says:
need-a-crash said: and I’m pretty sure none of them will have “signed on” yet, so as far as these stats are concerned they don’t exist.
As well as that, these stats are comparing themselves to 12 years ago, when it was much easier to sign on and get paid a cash-in-hand job at the same time without getting caught. So don’t we have to assume that the real number of unemployed 12 years ago was in fact lower than today?
51ck-6-51x says:
RE: BBC spin
– Not this time.
The expectation for the change was 60,000. The actual was 39,000.
If it’s spin it’s ONS spin.
RE: Start of Recovery
– Doesn’t a recovery start whilst unemployment continues to rise?
Growth certainly does (at least usually) and growth is the usual measure of recovery.
Caveat:
A return to growth is not necessarily a return to health!
eyeoftheweasel says:
And of course, since Labour introduced Jobseekers Allowance, which is exactly the same as the old Unemployment Benefit except claimants only receive it for 6 months instead of a year, that means a lot of people who are unemployed more than 6 months suddenly drop off the stats. Unless they qualify for Income Support that is, which has become increasingly difficult. E.g. anyone with savings of more than £4,000 doesn’t qualify (if I remember correctly), and that limit hasn’t been increased at all in line with inflation for at least the last 15 years.
51ck-6-51x says:
watchman said, “these stats are comparing themselves to 12 years ago,” – no they are being compared across the entire period, 12 years of data.
Fair enough point however – some adjustment could be made retrospectively. So go for it and let us know the results.
peter_2008 says:
You CAN have high growth AND extreme hardship for the majority of people as the same time, as it has been proven in most of third world countries – Zimbabwe’s GDP grow nearly 3% in 08/09, BTW.
The media keeps making (delibrately?) the same mistakes as they made on housing data. You can’t judge where it is going based on the trend of one or two indecies. Has BBC questioned why was the figure less than expected? No.
Is it because companies are holding off hoping for recovery? Is it that the public sector is recruiting even more recklessly? Or maybe just because April is the usual recruiting season?
39,000 people lost job. Is it greenshoots or not? It all depends. That’s like whether you should buy the shares of a company, which are sacking people. RBS, GM, BMW, the answer will be different.
stillthinking says:
the way that savings are used to exclude access to benefits is a scam. the amount is 16K though. basically if you have 200K equity in your house you qualify for benefit. if you are saving for a house, then your savings take the place of benefit. or if you rent, then you housing benefit accrues directly to your lucky landlord, whereas with a mortgage housing benefit, although interest only, essentially reduces your debt in real terms.
have a look at this
http://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free_legal_information/private_housing/privhf13.html
another thing which is fairly irksome is that although we all know that equity has been used throughout the land to fund consumption, despite buying a new car or whatever, the debt magically stays associated with housing. so a personal loan used for the same car purchase would not attract interest relief but equity withdrawal does.
against all that, we all know the rules so it is fair (! in that applies the same to everyone although the rules themselves are biased) and also of course housing is plummetting in price, collapsing, so swings and roundabouts. win some, lose some.
The unemployed can console themselves because even sitting watching daytime tv is equivalent to 30K a year salary subtracted from any future housing debts, which seems reasonable.
mr g says:
need a crash@2 said “I keep meeting people who’ve recently been made redundant in the recruitment, property and finance sectors”
I cannot think of 3 more slimy and duplicitous sectors than these, they’ve had it coming.
george monsoon says:
I am totally confused now.
How can we already be in recovery, following the biggest mitigated disaster since the great depression..?
Our economy is in its death throes.. Earlier statements by bloggers make no sense whatsoever.
Yes, unemployment is on the up and I have to concede that historically there have been events whereby recovery starts while unemployment continues to rise, but not this time.. no way. The fundamental issues facing everyone negate any argument for recovery.
Best estimate.. unemployment will probably top 4 million by the end of next year and house prices are going to follow the path down.
green shoots.. WTF ? what are these green shoots.. these are weeds growing through the ever widening gaps in the UK GDP…
Sorry, Im actually chuckling now, because although there are some extremely well educated people posting on this site, they obviously have absolutely no idea about reality.
watchman says:
666 – if I was a statistician I’d have a go, unfortunately that’s not the case as you probably know by the way you picked me up on “comparing to data 12 years ago” and not “over the last 12 years”…
51ck-6-51x says:
george monsoon said, “I am totally confused now.”
– Don’t worry. The comments from the two bank analysts at the end of the article are pretty clear: “It looks like a recovery, but don’t be too sure.”
Typically the stock market rallies for three months before a recovery starts, and keeps going for three months after, at which point the stats say when the recovery started and then the market may continue up, go sideways or down. Not surprised there is so much talk of recovery, but it’s definitely too early to say, and as peter_2008 said, “Is it because companies are holding off hoping for recovery?” (his other questions would have been factored in by the consensus opinion much more easily I feel).
51ck-6-51x says:
watchman said, “if I was a statistician…”
and
“So don’t we have to assume that the real number of unemployed 12 years ago was in fact lower than today?”
I agree that over the last 12 years there have been changes in measure which would tend to understate the number of people out of work now as compared with then, yes.
symo says:
Long live Gordon Brown’s recovereh, not only is he going to get the jobless total higher than any government (won’t even need to include those not on that list but out of work) but unlike the Tories with 3 million but a control on public spending, this idiot fritters away all the cash like wino in an off license.