UK unemployment

[El Cid]

Not much discussion about this, the Tories were asking the Tories questions about it today, in Westminster. Rather unethical.

 

I get the impression that they are trying to say its the sign of good times, but it was at a similar rate from 2005-08

 

How much has the total number not working changed?

Its better if people are working, but are peoples lives better.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33162403

[ricgem2002]

people getting sanctioned are not on the list so nudging the figures to make it look like unemployment fell

[Obelix]

people getting sanctioned are not on the list so nudging the figures to make it look like unemployment fell

 

Yes they are included despite your fervent wishes that it were not so.

[Anna B]

Yes they are included despite your fervent wishes that it were not so.

 

Can you verify this please? I've heard from job centre employees that they are not.

 

Also we have record numbers who are self employed, I wish them the best of luck of course, but remember being self employed doesn't mean you are necessarily earning any money, certainly not a living wage, or even minimum wage.

[Obelix]

It's up to ricgem to prove his assertion Anna not me to disprove it.

 

Anyway I thought you'd huffed off and said you were never talking to me again. I knew it wouldn't last though

 

For the record - sanctions are not on the claimant count. They are in the unemployment count. The UK uses the ILO method of working it out.

[ricgem2002]

It's up to ricgem to prove his assertion Anna not me to disprove it.

 

Anyway I thought you'd huffed off and said you were never talking to me again. I knew it wouldn't last though

 

For the record - sanctions are not on the claimant count. They are in the unemployment count. The UK uses the ILO method of working it out.

but you did try and disprove it without any evidence :hihi:

[Obelix]

but you did try and disprove it without any evidence :hihi:

 

As I said - you've made an assertion which has been challenged. It's up to you to prove it.

[ricgem2002]

As I said - you've made an assertion which has been challenged. It's up to you to prove it.

oh here we go then http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ids-government-under-fire-massaging-4575637 :hihi:

[Obelix]

Where does it say that they are excluded from the unemployment figures?

 

It doesn't. It's very carefully and weaselly worded, as you'd expect from a lefty trash rag like the Mirror. So as expected you fail to even get that right

 

This tells you how they are calculated, and why sanctioned people ARE included in the unemployment figure, in direct opposition to your erroneous statement above.

 

http://www.detini.gov.uk/stats-labour-market-ilo-claimant-count

[ricgem2002]

Where does it say that they are excluded from the unemployment figures?

 

It doesn't. It's very carefully and weaselly worded, as you'd expect from a lefty trash rag like the Mirror. So as expected you fail to even get that right

 

This tells you how they are calculated, and why sanctioned people ARE included in the unemployment figure, in direct opposition to your erroneous statement above.

 

http://www.detini.gov.uk/stats-labour-market-ilo-claimant-count

wheres it say where sanctioned people are not in the figures