2nd highest unemployment in the country, are we surprised?

[love_rat]

Labour were only elected in 1997, but I agree with you that we always get mass unemployment when the Conservatives are in power.

 

 

 

You can't count the non jobs as a boom, nor can you count the ever growing army of people without contracts, that thrived under the New Labour years.

 

Under New Labour, this country was not the land of milk and honey, although for some it was.

[Scozzie]

why is the focus on youth unemployment?

 

What about the rest of us? Do we not matter because we aren't the mass advertising 'target market'?

[love_rat]

Go on then, name the "non jobs" that were created.

 

Typical Tory, never happy unless the unemployment figures are at an all time high. And then they wonder why the economy is doing so poorly.

 

 

 

Inclusion Officers, Play experts, culture and diversity officers, youth workers, drug councillors etc. etc.... the list goes on.

 

Many of which have been booted onto the dole, and rightly so

[monkey69]

why is the focus on youth unemployment?

 

What about the rest of us? Do we not matter because we aren't the mass advertising 'target market'?

 

ha.. tell me about it, i worked for the last twenty odd years, i was made redundant 16 months ago, and i cant find a job to date. i am very scared if this recession continues i will be left on the scrap heap until i draw my pension. not a good outlook i can tell you.

[love_rat]

Lets not also forget that under New Labour, there were 8million inactive people (ie, people not actually working).

 

These people were on training schemes, on the sick, in university that expanded, some people did not qualifiy to get onto the unemployment list.

 

At least with the conservatives, we are getting a more honest picture of where we stand.

 

Or we can elect Labour and let them fiddle the stats again

[chem1st]

ONS publishes estimates of employment by both country of birth and by nationality. The number of non-UK born people in employment is greater than the number of non-UK nationals in employment, as the non-UK born series includes many UK nationals. The estimates relate to the number of people in employment rather than the number of jobs. These statistics have sometimes been incorrectly interpreted as indicating the proportion of new jobs that are taken by foreign migrants.

 

The number of UK nationals in employment was 26.60 million in the three months to September 2011, down 280,000 on a year earlier. The number of non-UK nationals in employment was 2.56 million, up 147,000 from a year earlier.

 

The employment rate for UK nationals aged from 16 to 64 was 70.7 per cent in the three months to September 2011, down 0.6 percentage points on a year earlier. The corresponding employment rate for non-UK nationals was 68.3 per cent, unchanged on a year earlier.

 

The number of UK born people in employment was 25.08 million in the three months to September 2011, down 311,000 on a year earlier. The number of non-UK born people in employment was 4.08 million, up 181,000 from a year earlier.

 

The employment rate for UK born people aged from 16 to 64 was 71.1 per cent in the three months to September 2011, down 0.5 percentage points on a year earlier. The corresponding employment rate for non-UK born people was 67.3 per cent, down 0.5 percentage points on a year earlier.

[Jim Hardie]

Labour were only elected in 1997, but I agree with you that we always get mass unemployment when the Conservatives are in power.

 

Maybe one day the penny will drop and one or two Tory MPs will be voted in.

[ricgem2002]

Lets not also forget that under New Labour, there were 8million inactive people (ie, people not actually working).

 

These people were on training schemes, on the sick, in university that expanded, some people did not qualifiy to get onto the unemployment list.

 

At least with the conservatives, we are getting a more honest picture of where we stand.

 

Or we can elect Labour and let them fiddle the stats again

and what are the figures for these people on traing schemes,on the sick,in university under the condems

[Guest sibon]

Maybe one day the penny will drop and one or two Tory MPs will be voted in.

 

In total? ....

[Rupert_Baehr]

About 50 years ago, when I was in secondary school, my colleagues ad I were told by our teachers that a new scientific age was dawning. Hi-tech jibs were going to be the norm, people wouldn't have to do so much hard physical graft (I knew all about that ... I spent the summer of 1961 picking radishes) and we would have far more leisure time than our parents had enjoyed.

 

We were warned, however, that if we wanted to enjoy the new technological age we would have to work hard and to gain the knowledge and skills to master the technology.

 

If that was common knowledge 50 odd years ago, when did people forget?

 

There are far,far fewer unskilled and very low skilled jobs available nowadays, yet 40% of the children who leave school do not have the minimum qualifications deemed necessary to get a decent job.

 

Not only do we have the unemployed, we have the unemployable. Why?

 

Yes, there are millions of people out of work and many companies/industries have to import workers because the locally-grown product is either incapable of or unwilling to do the job.

 

The NHS can't get sufficient qualified and skilled staff locally to staff the Health Service.

 

According to Nagel, the Oil companies can't get sufficient qualified staff to fill jobs they have to offer.

 

There was a Pakistani restaurant owner interviewed on Look North about a year ago who said that he couldn't get sufficient skilled staff locally to allow him to run his business.

 

There are jobs (perhaps not 2 million jobs) but it seems that there are insufficient qualified people willing to do them.

 

Unemployment is a major problem but unemployability is the one which will really bite hard.