Lies, Statistics and Unemployment Figures

[rainbow]

Our Overlord Masters are lying to us.
How can there be a labour participation rate of 60%, but only 5% unemployment?

[Svartalf]

well, and how can there be so much unemployment when many companies are looking for employees to hire and can't find any suitable applicants.

[Brian Peacock]

The remaining 35% are either considered to be economically inactive, and thus don't qualify to be counted; in the black economy, and thus don't want to be counted; or of private means, and thus sit at home all day counting their change and complaining about the poor and the tax rate.

[Svartalf]

for instance, I'm part of the non working uncounted, because my status is neither that of a full retiree (I'm merely pensioned off as an invalid), nor that of an unemployed (since I can't work and am not registered as a job seeker)

[Brian Peacock]

In the UK the headline unemployment figures are derived from the number of people of working age and claiming unemployment benefits. After 10 years of benefit 'reform' unemployment is at it's lowest since the Boer war.

[Scot Dutchy]

Once again:

What is unemployment?

Q. How is unemployment measured in the UK?

A. Unemployment is measured by a survey of 100,000 adults aged 16 and over in 40,000 households in the UK. The survey uses a random sample of addresses.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) then uses the survey results to estimate the total number of people who are unemployed across the UK.

This is separate to the claimant count which measures the number of people claiming benefits because they are out of work. It includes people who are on Jobseeker's Allowance and people who are claiming Universal Credit and required to look for work.

Talk about massaging the figures.

[Brian Peacock]

As a methodology it seems pretty sound.

[Svartalf]

depending how random the addresses choice is, and how wide the address pool is...

[Brian Peacock]

The devil is in the detail of course, but I don't see how random sampling exemplifies massaging the figures.

[Rum]

It is as well to be skeptical about any stats a government (which wasn’t to get voted back in after all) publishes, but you can’t fault the level of transparency involved. The definitions, methodology and process of measuring (un)employment are all very clear if a tad complicated. The link below takes you to a flow chart if you can be arsed.

My biggest gripes are about two categories of employment - the self employed, which now make up a large part of the working population, and those who are technically employed but only do a few hours a week. Both these categories, I suspect, contain large numbers of ‘working poor’ who hardly scrape by. That, to me, is what counts - the quality of life you can obtain. And certainly by walking through some of the poorer areas of my little city, thankfuly not blighted by crime and such, there is plenty of evidence of people just looking down right poor.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemplo ... gories.png

Talking of credibility, inflation is supposed to be at 1.9%. If you look at your food bill, your energy costs and basically have your wits about you, it is obviously quite a bit higher than that. The government of course gets to choose what items go in the inflation ‘basket’

[pErvinalia]

Once again:

What is unemployment?

Q. How is unemployment measured in the UK?

A. Unemployment is measured by a survey of 100,000 adults aged 16 and over in 40,000 households in the UK. The survey uses a random sample of addresses.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) then uses the survey results to estimate the total number of people who are unemployed across the UK.

This is separate to the claimant count which measures the number of people claiming benefits because they are out of work. It includes people who are on Jobseeker's Allowance and people who are claiming Universal Credit and required to look for work.

Talk about massaging the figures.

A random sample isn't "massaging the figures". What the fuck are you on about?

[Scot Dutchy]

Once again:

What is unemployment?

Q. How is unemployment measured in the UK?

A. Unemployment is measured by a survey of 100,000 adults aged 16 and over in 40,000 households in the UK. The survey uses a random sample of addresses.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) then uses the survey results to estimate the total number of people who are unemployed across the UK.

This is separate to the claimant count which measures the number of people claiming benefits because they are out of work. It includes people who are on Jobseeker's Allowance and people who are claiming Universal Credit and required to look for work.

Talk about massaging the figures.

A random sample isn't "massaging the figures". What the fuck are you on about?

Something you dont understand. Just go and lie down in your trailer there's a good something or other.

[Scot Dutchy]

A very UK diagram as not all the exceptions are included. They cant use the EU's standard definition can they?
No they are SPECIAL. I wish you lot would leave. Even that you are unable to do.

[pErvinalia]

Once again:

What is unemployment?

Q. How is unemployment measured in the UK?

A. Unemployment is measured by a survey of 100,000 adults aged 16 and over in 40,000 households in the UK. The survey uses a random sample of addresses.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) then uses the survey results to estimate the total number of people who are unemployed across the UK.

This is separate to the claimant count which measures the number of people claiming benefits because they are out of work. It includes people who are on Jobseeker's Allowance and people who are claiming Universal Credit and required to look for work.

Talk about massaging the figures.

A random sample isn't "massaging the figures". What the fuck are you on about?

Something you dont understand. Just go and lie down in your trailer there's a good something or other.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. A cop vs a scientist, who do you think has a better grasp on stats? Hint: it's not the geriatric cop.

edit: I also note that you continue to go personal. Shines a light on your hypocrisy over having a tantrum because I mentioned your wife.

[rainbow]

The remaining 35% are either considered to be economically inactive, and thus don't qualify to be counted; in the black economy, and thus don't want to be counted; or of private means, and thus sit at home all day counting their change and complaining about the poor and the tax rate.

That 35% is a huge part of the population.
I know that in Germany they would encourage people to enter the jobs market later, by remaining students well into their 20s, doing pointless postgrad degrees. Then on the other hand encouraging people to take early retirement, sometimes as low as 55. This means that a person may be employed for only 30 years, out of a lifespan of about 80.
Then people are given extended maternity and special leave sabbaticals, which are also not counted as unemployment.