Unemployment highest since 1994

[Barry Ster]

Well give credit where it's due. Cameron's not wasting his time in doing what Tories do best!

 

You beat me to it!

[Barry Ster]

I blame David Cameron, he's been prime minister for like 2 days and he's already got the highest unemployment for over 15 years...

 

ME TOO!

 

 

OH.....and Dick Clegg too!

[Wildcat]

Well give credit where it's due. Cameron's not wasting his time in doing what Tories do best!

 

And in the case of unemployment one of his first actions has been to not include the Employment Minister in his invites to Cabinet Office meetings.

 

A change from the practice that has been adopted since the start of the recession, a worrying indication of Tory priorities.

 

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2010/05/12/Tory-LibDemGov.pdf

[Grandad.Malky]

Credit where credit is do. Browns legacy will live on.

 

Yep its been announced today that repossessions in the first quarter this year are lower than last years first quarter but you will not see that in the Sun or Mail.

[Greybeard]

I suppose Cameron could resort to the Thatcher tactic of transferring the bulk of the unemployed onto the IB register

[Blackbeard]

It is nice to know that we are still doing better than the "power house of Europe" Germany

 

UK jobless rate measured by International Labour Organization jumped from 7.8 per cent to 8 per cent.

http://topnews.co.uk/24417-uk-unemployment-rises-251-million

 

In related news, it recently emerged that the German unemployment rate fell sharply in April to 8.1%, from 8.5% the previous month.

http://www.financemarkets.co.uk/2010/05/12/german-economy-expands-by-0-2-in-q1/

[Wildcat]

I suppose Cameron could resort to the Thatcher tactic of transferring the bulk of the unemployed onto the IB register

 

That would be the exact opposite of their published plans. I wouldnt be surprised to see unemployment doubling with people that realistically probably are unemployable

[Bruno]

The phrase "Unemployment highest since 1994" is misleading because it doesn't take into account the vast increase in population since Labour came to power. The key measure should be "what percentage of the working population is unemployed".

 

Who were in power then! the conservatives:hihi:

[Rupert_Baehr]

Given that employment figures are fudged, they're meaningless.

 

If you're aged between 16 and 18 and you don't have a job, you are (amazingly) 'Not unemployed'

 

If you're aged between 18 and 65 and you don't have a job but you are not eligible to claim benefits (and there are more reasons for that than you might imagine) then you are not unemployed, either.

 

I suggest that if you want the real figure, find the figure for the percentage of the work force which is employed, take that figure from 100 and that will give you the percentage of the work force which is not employed.

 

Official unemployment figures The total number of people out of work rose by 53,000 to 2.51 million in the three months to March, the highest total since the end of 1994, according to the Office for National Statistics... The unemployment rate held at 8% in March, as expected.

 

Those are the 'fudged' figures - Figures the recently-departed Labour government should be ashamed of, but nevertheless, the figures they hope you will accept.

 

From National Statistics Online employment figures (and the latest I can find is for March, before the unemployment figures showed the recent surge) Employment Rate falls to 72.0 per cent

 

8% are unemployed (and in March that was about 7.8%) but only 72% were employed in March.

 

If 72% were employed then 28% were not employed (which is, of course, not the same as being 'unemployed'.;)

 

That 72% employed includes those people who would only have a part-time job. You may not have enough to live on, but if you've got any sort of job at all, you are employed.

 

28% of the work force in the UK have no job whatsoever.

 

From National Statistics Online (March): "The number of people in employment fell by 76,000 on the quarter to reach 28.83 million. The number of full-time workers fell by 103,000 over the quarter but the number of part-time workers increased by 27,000. The number of employees and self-employed people working part-time because they could not find a full-time job increased by 25,000 on the quarter to reach 1.07 million, the highest figure since comparable records began in 1992."

 

There are more people in the UK than there are jobs.

 

There are more people in the UK than can be fed by locally-produced food.

 

(Wildcat will no doubt say: 'Ah, but we don't need to produce our food. - We can buy food from elsewhere and export goods to pay for it.')

 

Really?

 

The trade gap increased by £3.7 billion in March, compared with a deficit of £2.2 billion in February.

 

How are you going to pay for the food you can't grow? - You're buying more than you are selling.

 

The Pound has fallen dramatically against the Dollar (and has even managed to fall against the Euro, which isn't doing too well.)

 

Oil is priced in US Dollars. Oil prices are rising (seasonal, but there may be other reasons for price surges ... BP?) If oil prices in dollars go up, oil will cost more. If the pound goes down (and it is going down steadily - I suspect we'll see worse or equal to £1.00 = $1.30 by August) then oil will cost considerably more by the end of the summer. - Petrol at £1.50 a litre may well be cheap.

 

That will probably please the Green Party. Unfortunately, not only will it mean that the 'petrol heads' pay more for their pleasure, but everybody who buys any goods or services which travel by road, rail, sea or air will pay more - considerably more - too.

 

If next winter should happen to be a cold winter, then gas, heating oil and electricity will cost more. Much more. - And that's even before the government adds in the 'carbon penalty fees' which the lying Scotsman and the Millipede committed the country to at Köbnhavn.

 

... You hadn't forgotten that the pair of them (Laurel and Hardy) committed the UK to a 42% reduction in CO2, had you? The original goals were somewhat lower. Brown's advisors had told him that if he went for a greater reduction it could only be made by imposing severe additional burdens on ordinary families in the UK. - People who weren't too well off anyway.

 

That didn't stop him! He had the courage of his convictions! He knew that if he was to make a name for himself (one with more than 4 letters) he would have to make a generous (or ridiculous) commitment and he knew you would be more than happy to put your money where his mouth was so he went ahead!

 

Why should he care anyway? - He can afford it.

 

If you want Green electricity, you can have it! ... but it will cost you. El Gordo and the Millipede say you're more than happy to pay.

 

According to a friend of mine in East Anglia (I got this from him a couple of weeks ago) his average price for electricity during the last quarter was 5.75 pence per KwH.

 

That's the dirty brown electrickery you Brits use. - Made with oil, gas and that new, cooler stuff.

 

The Germans use lots of 'green' electricity. - Well, they would, wouldn't they?

 

Wind turbines everywhere (half of them standing still - just like those in the UK.)

 

Solar panels (not very efficient, but the electricity companies are obliged to buy the electricity from the households at twice the price they sell it.)

 

Needless to say, they pass that price back to the customers.

 

Electricity in the UK: 5.75 pence per KwH

Electricity here: 20 pence per KwH.

 

Don't worry! - El Gordo and the Millipede have arranged for you too to pay the new, higher prices.

 

And it will all be blamed on the Tories.

 

:hihi: