It is generally appreciated that the unemployment figures are far from an accurate total . Here Conway has got them analysed and graphed.
Christina
TELEGRAPH 12.11.09
5.7m and climbing: the real unemployment toll
The labour market figures published this morning were pretty encouraging, showing that the the number of people out of work is, if not falling precipitously, then at least rising far more slowly than previously. Indeed, look beneath the headline figures which showed a 30,000 increase in the number of people out of work between July and September to 2.46m and you can see broad based signs of improvement.
But it is important not to lose sight of the scale of the problem. We�ve all heard plenty about the youth unemployment issue (rising to around 20pc of people under 25 now) but the problem is far broader than that. In my column a few weeks ago I mentioned that if you add up all the people who would like to work but for various reasons can�t get hold of a job (something Chris Dillow looked at last month), you actually get the rather more alarming unemployment figure of 5.6m.
The latest figures show that this is now closer to 5.7m, (over 15pc of the working age workforce) and is reaching the peaks it hit in the early 1990s. To clarify, this measure of unemployment includes: official unemployment, those classed as economically inactive who actually want a job and part time workers who would rather be working full time. Here is a chart showing you just how sharp the increase in this category has been over the past year or so.
Incidentally, it is worth pointing out that in the US, where politicians are frequently bemoaning the onset of a major employment crisis, their equivalent level of comprehensive unemployment is at 17.7pc.
Posts
