Bit of good news re employment
 

Unemployment has dropped to 3.8% - lowest it’s been since 1974 it seems.

Quite, Clive. Remarkable really, considering how so many leaders of industry seem to lack faith in our ability to forge our own futures. Not to mention highly experienced financial gurus and elevated bank managers.

On just about every scale our sheer resilience, taken together with UK’s inestimable reputation for excellence, seems to triumph. Given enough doses of reality and persistent obstinacy we are on course for a massive revival of our fortunes – not seen since 1973/4. Rule Britannia!

I don't want to be gloom and doom, but are the figures calculated using the same methods each time. I recall many years ago, ytp participants and other temporary employment govt funded scheme participants were not counted, which seemingly dropped the figures overnight.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Exactly, schemes and non qualifying persons for jobseekers get removed from the figures.

Indeed. I would be somewhat sceptical about such claims over such a long time. The methods used must have changed over time.

Try this: ://fullfact.org/economy/unemployment-lowest-1975/


Source is reputable.

The nearly 3m and increasing number of people on zero-hour contracts are also not included!

Anyone looking for a job will tell you how difficult it is to find one that pays a living wage.

I still cannot put faith into this either, consider the numbers of food banks and the people availing of them. 20 years ago, I thought food banks were a thing of yesteryear.

I have no facts figures, nor even interest in finding out, however, a bit of good sense would make someone question how the country could be doing better than before. 25 years ago, the basic income tax allowance was £3.5k, now it is somewhere around £10.5k, with more coming. Great, more disposable income, and yes (but obviously not £7k due to inflation, cost of living and general greed etc), there is, as well as minimum wages etc. But there is also the extension to pension ages, the lack of NHS resources (I know that is NI related). The 'encouragement' to buy into private pensions (and now I believe it is compulsory), as well as the increase of private healthcare and relevant insurance, all point to a poorer society overall. Another example, infrastructure investment or lack of (which again was not designed for the use it gets now). The reason you have fewer bin men, and wait for 6 weeks for an MOT, is because of the cut backs because the govt. dont have the finances to pay for the staff etc.

At the end of the day, it is about how these figures are calculated, using whichever figures is relevant to spin a pretty picture to it.

I do fear this is all done to distract or soften the blow of what has happened with the loss of British industry, etc.

You are correct this is not about the B word, leaving or staying (although I think EU partially relevant, as it was partially responsible for the loss of our industries and increased costs - but that is too late now, the EU in my view could be a safety net of sorts to allow our population the opportunity of finding work as an example).

In saying all that, I sound like a conspiracy theorist, do not take it so. I am not. Just a realist, and one who believes the population voted, the majority won. As a democratic society, we should deal with our lot, and work our way through it. Change it, but dont waste time trying to find blame for it.

For some, the commitment to a view is deadly serious while to others the same subject is not only boring but banned (!). In these days of deceit, the wilful refusal to bend and the ever-present sanction of censorship, it’s not surprising that clashes arise. Deservedly, all trust has gone.

At one time, when wider knowledge was limited to the ‘upper’ classes, they got away with it. Then Wat Tyler et al came along and spoiled everything. Oscar Ameringer (Socialist organiser) had it about right when he said the ‘Pol’ word was the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other. He meant it.

So, hence my preferred route through the maze of respected outlets for balanced views on news that might be disputed. I know I’ve changed my own mind on some things through seeking wider perspectives.

Which is why I wonder why my earlier post (number 7) has received neither criticism nor acceptance in what I thought was a valid reply to the OP. I’m not trying to persuade anybody of anything, just offering evidence - whilst at the same time trying to avert premature closure. If evidence is undisputed what's the point?

Your fact checker in black and white is perhaps correct, but, how these figures are gathered and differ between then and now, are not disclosed. Are people who claim whatever the current name for DLA is, counted on these unemployment figures? In the 70's I have been led to believe that to meet the requirements to obtain the 70s equivalent was much more stringent, therefore more unemployed. Nowadays if you stub your toe you can get it (am not complaining about those who deserve/need it by the way). So therefore those people are no longer unemployed ........

In the 70's retirement age was 60 and 65, so those of pension age were not counted, yet now these figures have changed (currently 66 and 66), along with the school leaving age being more common at 15/16 before, whereas now it is 18, yet I dont believe this is actually counted until 19, at which point you have more people I believe in university, so they dont count, even though some of those will work and pay tax (which will skew the figures).

Another potential anomaly (on a much smaller scale) to consider, is in the 80s and 90s, the benefits system was a lot more open for abuse, which would affect the numbers the opposite direction when perhaps those who 'did the double' (claiming and working at the same time). So back then, the unemployment rate may have been lower than it was in the 70s.

I am not saying they are wrong, nor have I got an inclination to find out, but there simply are too many variables in terms of measurements to make it a worthwhile declaration aside for the feel good factor (which there is nothing wrong with either!).

On a positive note a major employment announcment from the company i work for today ...



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48269171


:)

that's good news for the employees, and I hope the management style continues. I always got the impression that Richer Sounds had a family run feel to it. Having worked in corporate and family run retail business, I know which one is best, for both employees and customers. I really hope it stays that way. (In the past 6 months we have had 6 TVs amongst the family from them)

The Belfast one due to parking restrictions will even pay for parking nearby - it is little things like that, that give the feel good factor.

All the stores do that if they don't have their own parking. We also Give out free umbrellas if it's raining, hand warmers if you have to queue outside in the winter sales and stuff like that :D

Oh and we actually try to be honest with our customers too :o Makes it easier to work in sales!

that it does. Owning a problem too is another must. If you mess up, hold your hands up, and say how you intend to resolve an issue is another way. It shocks people too so they dont go off on one.

One of my colleagues sold a weighted telescope to a woman for her 8 year old to open from Santa. She just took it home and wrapped it up, only for her daughter to find an empty box with two weights inside, 'is Santa' having a joke with me?'

:o:o:o:o:o

I was in charge (was not a manager) on Boxing Day when she returned to store. The mother was livid understandably, but also concerned that we would not believe her. I knew where it was, because our records showed none left, but we still had one on display for the previous three days - which we knew had to be 'out there'. What can you say to that? Hold your hands up, 'we messed up, I am sorry' refunded and given the telescope was all I could do (along with the refunded receipt stating 'Santa Claus - deliver to ***** street' on it ;)). Area manager was not pleased, but it was our mistake and they went out with a thank you and a smile.

We are told when we first start with the company that you won't ever get into trouble for trying to help a customer :)

Hmmm spinning incomparable data figures is a superb benefit to being part of the eu.........

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

So the company’s London Bridge shop was the first to open in 1978, and has for more than two decades held the Guinness world record for most sales per square foot of any retail outlet, now that's impressive. :bowdown:

So the preparation of the trust is to make sure his wife doesn't have to oversee the process, what a wonderful man. He seems to think he will die early like his father, taking into account he cycles around London and reckons he could die unexpectedly, I do hope not. :shrug:

I still think it is wrong to be sucked into the hype. For like 'project fear' it is hype. The simple fact that more people (at least publiscised -which in itself could be an issue as far as figures go) rely on food banks, is enough to suggest that on paper the economy may indeed be better but the population is not (the figures simply cannot prove this for the reasons stated before).

To put it into a car analogy, my car on a rolling road states it produces 195 bhp, whereas your identical in every way, produces only 145. Why? Different rolling road, different software, operator, etc etc.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

CLF.



Oh, I see! Even the facts are lies now!

How far back should we go? WW1, WW2, Civil War, 1066? Alternatively, choose any period or era that comes to mind, there is no real comparison to make because each new era brings its own standing social conditions together with its challenges.

The best and most accurate measure of comparative growth/prosperity is to compare a country’s performance with others of a similar kind, both legal and political, and proximity that trades under similar conditions. Now, where would we find one like that? Like Europe for instance! Go on, try that!

EU unemployment overall (including UK lowest since you-know-when) as at 1/3/2019 - 7.8% (from 8.6% in 2018). Take UK low figure out of the ‘28’ because it weights the answer and their figure, which is the nearest fair comparison to UK, becomes around 8.5%. Then, you look at youth unemployment on its own in Europe. It is frightening.

I take your point, things for many of the least well off have changed in a big way but they always have and always will. Until the revolution, that is.

If you believe them to be lies then you can, I neither said they were nor believe them to be. I did say the figures were not comparable to be able to make a claim of lowest unemployment figures. They are measured differently.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Living in this small town of mine,i find it difficult to believe that unemployment has gone down. This is because of my observations when i walk up my High street and see so many youngsters walking around with a bottle of beer or sitting outside of the pubs ALL day.????. Unless of course they all work Night shift and don't need any sleep.:D

Perhaps they are employed but working zero-hour contracts?

It's the new way of being employed withought much work being involved. ;)

Maybe I can help. Reliable stats are here: www.livehere.co.uk/statistics-Rhymney. They say: Figures come from Dept. for Work & Pensions.....

"The rate for Rhymney is both higher than the average and higher than the national average suggesting finding a job in the area may be hard...… it does not have a significant immigrant population. Figs are from the latest available source ie Census 2011. Jobseekers Allowance 4.6%, Incapacity Benefits 3.9%, Any Benefits (in work benefits) 21%."

It seems Caerphilly has a disproportionate reliance on in-work benefits and that it may be due to the influence of a devolved government although that would be highly speculative. There is also a very significant difference in age groups for unemployment in the area which also might be speculative. HTH.

Judging by the amount being drunk,seems like a good job.:D

I didnt get a chance to respond to this. 'The best and most accurate measure of comparative growth/prosperity'

NO! No it is neither the best nor is it even accurate. The only way you can accurately compare anything, is to accurately measure. Using words like 'similar' and 'proximity' throws accuracy out the window! COMPLETELY! :duh:

What you could do accurately to compare growth, would be to take one figure from a country (or anything) then the same sample from another country. As an example count ALL living 30-35 year olds - eligible and ineligible to work, able and not, counting who is in work, and who isnt, on a particular date. The reason for including all, is to eliminate each country's ability to skew figures by how they categorise or sideline numbers. Then each year, use the same method to count. Divide the number of total number of people by the total in work, multiply by 100, and you have a simple, accurate figure that you can compare with anywhere without resorting to similar or approximate situations. This way you/they can measure a like for like growth or fall for that group. Youth unemployment in Europe is frightening yes, but it is just as frightening here, depending on how you care to measure it.

Comparing figures now to 40 years ago is not going to compare anything accurately or even similarly, for reasons which I am not going to repeat. The only reason to make such a pointless comparison, is to try to make a positive spin on something in times of austerity or other critical times (another reason could be to distract the population from other issues - but that is me being even more cynical lol). It is not a bad thing necessarily, but it should be taken with a pinch of salt, especially at election times and not just elections, but it can be anytime someone wants support, be it a politician or a company wanting shareholder support for something, etc.

These types of figures mean nothing, of any practical note anyway. They are bragging rights, that is all.

Sadly though current conditions mean it is beneficial to them to seek work abroad, and that leads to the influx of foreign staff coming from other countries (this is not a racist rant by the way - just stating experiences told to me by a few nurses I know). It is a domino effect. Our nurses go elsewhere to get better money and conditions, then they are replaced by nurses from elsewhere who look to get better pay and conditions to what they had.

Incidentally you can equate that to the British car industry in the 70s and 80s.

Greed, a basic human condition. Public (equate to nurses) want a better made car, they find one from Datsun etc - the 70s remember not now (Dubai hospital). Then those that cannot afford a Datsun etc (equate these to hospital administrators, who now work to tighter budgets) , seek a cheaper alternative adequately made car, eg Lada, Skoda etc (these are the foreign nurses - who still do a fantastic job by the way). All this then leads to a decline of locally produced product (nurses) as they are not selling as you can get better value designed but built elsewhere (foreign nurses trained and paid for on foreign soil before coming here).

But this thread is not about any of that, rather about how the positivity of figures presented to the public.

It is not just GPs. It was pointless for my father, a telecoms engineer, to work beyond 57, as he reached his maximum pension contribution, and only working on to get a wage 'til his pension kicked in at 60 - he had saved and invested to allow him to retire at 57, though. He didnt work beyond 56 due to medical conditions, though.

I believe this was a genuine but naive attempt by those in charge (in the 60s and 70s), to make life better for the retired and to give the population something to look forward to and believe in.

Apportioning blame though, especially now is both pointless and unproductive. As a nation we need to look forward learning by the mistakes of the past.

The current levels of employment are even more impressive if you consider that over the last ten years let’s say the population of the UK has grown by net 500k (give a take a 100k:}) folks a year, that’s 5mn extra souls squeezed into Englandshire in the last 10 years.

How comparable are these figures to each other and the UK. Add in, the welfare and social care systems within them are different to each other. This is the danger of using other countries to compare. It simply serves no purpose. It serves no purpose even if it was an accurate like for like comparison. What benefit is there to the people to compare the data, aside from keeping a few statisticians and pr people off the data?


Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

A little Tangent.
Spain 14.45% unemployed. My wife came out with this whilst in Benidorm a few weeks ago. "I haven't seen one Charity Shop.":D

From my point of view, I am not, not accepting the figures, but questioning their relevance. As mentioned before, there were no zero hour contracts, youth development and employment schemes etc in the 70s. A like for like comparison is the only way it can accurately reflect on the differences. I would bet this has not been done (likely impossible too). To me, unless evidence of a direct comparison is made, the figures may be correct and improved, they are useless.

A country to country comparison is just pointless and serves no purpose other than bragging rights at the un.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

You dont have to accept anyone's opinion, just accept that they can have one, and a differing one to yours. By all means try to change theirs by showing and demonstrating why you believe it to be wrong.

I am of the opinion that everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it is different to mine, just because they are wrong, doesnt mean they cannot have one :p:

making 'assumptions' and 'making account' of data, will not produce accurate figures. These assumed figures could project numbers that are 0.1 or 0.2% up and down, which allows those declaring the figures to effectively lie about them. I do take your point where they try to make these allowances, because I believe it would be impossible to manage a direct comparisons from the past to now. But that is another of my points, the past is irrelevant and to promote increased employment in this way, in my cynical mind serves two purposes. The first, to make the current ruling party (cant avoid politics in this one - sorry) look good leading up to an election or during a rough patch in their tenure. Each party will claim the credit for doing it, even though it has come from previous years' of effort. The second reason is slight of hand, make the population feel good about something and then hit them with something uncomfortable.

But back to the figures, which is my issue. As I said, I have no interest in looking up anything about it, (there are many .gov statistic and research sites that break it all down into neat little Excel Worksheets/books, out there - I am not taking my work home with me:}). A 0.1% movement is all it takes for those in charge to claim an improvement, however that 0.1% can change in a couple of months and will likely change over the next few years. (let's not go there lol:eek:)

In the 80's how the count was conducted was changed. From the unemployed to those claiming unemployment benefit. Because of that, it would not be unreasonable to believe that during the 90s when there was a major overhaul of the benefits system (supplementary benefit/Jobseekers Allowance etc), that these figures could all be adjusted out by as 10-20% (of the numbers claiming unemployment benefit) in one swoop! As those claiming supplementary benefit would no longer be eligible, and were moved onto a different benefit, which removed them from the stats.

I am not even going to think about other countries figures, as whilst they are supposed to follow the same guidelines, they too will have their own benefit system, allowances, and their terms of claiming them.

But John, that is opposite of what the figures are saying. Unemployment going down whilst population is increasing, makes it look like there are even more jobs out there. My point (repetitively stated) is the figures do not incorporate the different status the authorities place upon people.

PIP benefits or whatever they are called now, will also reclassify people who claim benefits now.

exactly, and with these figures, they have been, each time they changed the benefits. The measurements, I have since discovered, remain the same, it is the categorisation of the claimants that has changed.

Cut and paste of numbers in situations such as this is not proper analysis, unless it is made clear what each number represents.

As I pointed out in post #13, the UK numbers do not include people on zero-hour contracts, especially people on such contracts and offered relatively low hours. Adding these doubles our roughly unemployment rate relative to Germany, for example, where such contracts are not a feature of employments contracts. The same applies in about a dozen European countries.

https://www.globalworkplaceinsider.c...ts-in-germany/

To use statistics such as these as a measure of the country's financial and employment well being, the measure should have at least three dimensions - employment percentage, worked hours per working-age head and average wage per hour. Another useful measure would be the percentage of people in employment who supplement their income with employment benefits.


In reality far more to China, India and the far-east.

Opening a thread that describes those who may have a differing viewpoint as "Doom and Gloom Merchants" is an interesting but characteristic approach to "mature debates" by certain individuals. :bowdown:

Purely in the interests of making sure you do not have the last word, your interlocutor has indicated his dissatisfaction with threads such as this on a club forum such as this. In support of his decision he has earlier pressed for closure. That’s a shame and to be regretted. His contributions were interesting and some were lengthy and well worth reading.

However, a conclusion is that there might be other reasons for his departure. He implies car forums are not suitable for these subjects in spite of the threads being well supported, including by his own contributions. Also, and curiously, there seems a general absence of the dreaded 'censor' bar over inappropriate profanities that so often pollute threads.

A very brief glance at his posting history from his first one shows an extensive contribution to car-related threads as well as an equally extensive history on a variety of subjects other than cars. Indeed many of them concerning what might be classed as socio/politico/national matters. It is a shame he feels unable to continue and I would wish him well for the future.

This is a strange event. One would never have expected Wraymond to post expressing is full, unequivocal and unreserved admiration of DD's postings (or vice versa)! :D;):getmecoat:

Wot, did someone mention cliques? There are no such things on this forum.............:cool:

Just very quickly, adding the percentage to each other would be incorrect. Add the 780000 to the number of unemployed then divide that by the number eligible to work, multiply by 100. Probably will add half to one per cent.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

I am being a broken record, but those figures would.be enough to make.the figures look more positive than they actually are, and dispel the claims. How many zero hour contracts were included in 1974?

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Something to do with yeuo know what?

I am.not bothered by unemployment in any year, as it is a stat. That few can control. (I know the importance of having unemployment figures though).

There is no point to comparing any unemployment figures with past ones (and definitely no point to compare to foreign), except to allow one particular group, be it politicians or civil servants, to claim how well they have done. It is a feel good exercise, nothing more. And a feel good exercise is a useful distraction at certain times.

Incidentally, whilst the data collection may indeed remain the same 18 months ago, the benefits system has changed, dramatically. Re pip

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Food poisoning takes no prisoners. :p: :getmecoat:

1000 redundancies. Wow.

Jamie Oliver’s Restaurant chain has collapsed. I can't say I ever saw one of his restaurants I don't think there were very many. I think they suffering in a market from an oversupply of restaurants. In the last few years there's been so many new chains opening up, there's only so many meals out people can afford.

British steel in liquidation, although still trading atm

Please, esteemed colleague, try not to confuse the thread with facts and alternative viewpoints.

If not curtailed, you will next be asking us to not to keep reiterating just the £80m that the EU loaned Ford to move the transit factory from the UK and also consider that at the same time they loaned Ford £410m to set up an engine plant in the UK producing engines for the whole of the EU.

You really must accept the one version of one person's truth on the forum and not try to cloud the one viewpoint debates with alternative viewpoints.

Next, you will be wanting to discuss cars on the forum! :duh::shrug::getmecoat:

Oh, how nice would it be if contributors played the ball rather than the man and stopped trying so hard and failing miserably to inject sarcasm. Smart it ain't. They just lose any credibility they might, might, have had.

How nice it would also be if we could trust the auditors who investigate the auditors who investigate the auditors who investigate the investigators. Is there anyone in any way associated with big business, government or the media that can be either trusted or forced to tell the truth? I'm not really interested in whether or not it's biased, as I haven't yet lost my marbles I can make my own mind up, but the truth would be a start down the road to recovery. Or is everyone determined to ridicule us?

For sure tragic. There’s no doubt about that, however they are deemed the great unwashed “Dirty” jobs and the jobs that the Eco flatutulent want rid of long term. All that will happen is that they will shift the production somewhere else less in your face around the world while we end up one big retirement home feeling smugly satisfied that we have done our bit for the planet.

I would suggest that we "eco warriors", "green Taliban", or whatever people wish to call us on the forum, are somewhat more sophisticated than this comment implies. In fact, many of us possess and regularly exercise multi-dimensional analytical and reasoning capabilities. ;):D

This is not a political post. This is about a commercial venture closing. The decision to change location of the proposed plan to make electric and hybrid engines at the plant was purely a commercial one. Why would you make an engine, only to have to ship it half way around the world to install it in the car? That is pure British Leyland management. No commercial sense.

This decision was undertaken apparently in 2014! So no Brexit issues! The reduction and cessation of a Ford supplied engine to a competitor that no longer used the engine was the deciding factor. Blame the local manufacturer. Who have to design for the buyer, blame the public.....for not buying the product...




Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

A bit like flying politicians across the globe for a climate change conference then.

That should read, a bit like having politicians at a climate change conference ;)

It doesn't matter where lol they shouldn't be at them.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

What's the betting Magna Carta was written by Disney.

It’s probably always best to take official figures with a substantial fistful of salt. Most of my working life has been governed by the phrase ‘Past performance is no guarantee of future growth’ and it’s very true.

I’ve always tried to get a balanced view and then modify according to the sources from which the information comes. In the case of the OP figure, so long ago now it tends to fade, it was unemployment falling to 3.8%, the lowest for generations. Some doubt was expressed as to the validity of that figure and to a general rejection of the facts as presented.

Given the figures were all issued by the Treasury with the approval of the Bank of England, and received no argument that I could find from the ‘business community’, you then think about the historic (well, the last three years anyway) opinions of the individuals involved.

Those individuals were Chancellor of the Exchequer Hammond, Bank of England manager Carney and any number of grade A establishment figures. It is therefore only possible to assume that the figure is the worst projection possible, even if true.

Every one of those sources have consistently offered as black a picture as could remotely be credited and with widespread doubt about their interpretation. Therefore to accept the figures at face value is doing them a favour and a rather large one at that.

For the supporters of the ‘side’ that produced the figures to charge them with overstating the good news is a bit shot-in-foot with unerring aim. I’d say the figures are entirely credible. At the very least.

Oh dear, those gnomes working in the bowels of the Ministry for Lies, Untruths and Funny Handshakes are at it again.

New figures are now on the wires showing that unemployment is now down by 1.3 million to 3.3 million in the 3 months up to April. Taken together with average earnings rising by 3.3%, it’s most odd considering the forensic interest in any government statistics. They really are brave in their efforts to kid us all that we are strong.

It depends on whether it’s a bad day for good news or a good day for bad news. Or, depending on the effect you were trying to spin to a gullible electorate, it takes 60,000 women to do ...er, no, I can’t even think it. But I’ve no doubt some of them would.

Celia gave up work when our first daughter was about to delight us with her presence. I say gave up work but we both found out it had only just started.

I took a second job to cover the income drop. I was lowly then and could get away with it from a physical point of view. She then looked forward to her state pension on the back of my contributions. Unfortunately, as she is three years older than me, hers did not become payable until she reached 68. After 11 years it still rankles. There is nothing guaranteed about pensions, it’s a small worm on the hook with many barbs and can be cast on the waters at any election. A pocks on all their houses.

Edit: my darling was in the room when I was writing so I had to judge her seeing distance and moderate the type size at the critical point.

Very interesting but sadly I don't have the information to comment on this. I shall stay within my boundaries of experience and knowledge.

Thread closed at request of OP