Lies, Statistics and Unemployment Figures

[laklak]

Teh gummint should make sure every person wins a lotto jackpot, that would solve all our problems.

[rainbow]

Teh gummint should make sure every person wins a lotto jackpot, that would solve all our problems.

Recycling unproductive people is the best solution.

[Svartalf]

recycling, you mean, as per soylent green?

[rainbow]

recycling, you mean, as per soylent green?

[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.

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.

It is a big number but I don't think it means there's 40% of the population out of work.

[laklak]

Soylent, biodiesel, cattle feed, the possibilities are endless.

[Cunt]

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.

His wife is a lovely woman, who likely always takes it up the ass when asked, and swallows EVERY drop while maintaining eye-contact.

I mean, she does for everyone else...so welcoming, friendly and enthusiastic. He must REALLY get a good treatment!

So you stop fucking insulting his wife you mostrously ignorant scientist!

As to the OP, they ask at addresses, and I can tell you that if their social services are similar to ours in Canada, that alone excludes a lot of the targeted demographic. It's like trying to count the homeless. No-one wants to tell you that (usually) so they have endless trouble doing a 'Point In Time' count (for instance)

See, people who are on social assistance can't rent their spare room to a nephew without reporting it, so he stays (he's FAMILY) but can't let anyone know - certainly not a surveyor from the government.

It's tough to find out who is suffering, because like drowning, it is quiet and unremarkable (until the body floats up)

[Rum]

We used to do a physical count, city by city, of homeless ‘rough sleepers’. The Blair/Brown government virtually eliminated it over six or seven years. ‘Austerity’ and Conservative values have seen the numbers rise again to unacceptable levels. I’m not sure anyone is required to do a count any more either but it is estimated at a little over 4500. The figure has risen by 165% since 2010. Fucking Conservatives.

[Cunt]

Fucking Conservatives.

Blaming fucking conservatives isn't all that helpful. If we could find a way to blame YOU, we might get somewhere.

Counting the homeless is an easy thing to do, if you REALLY want to know how many they are. No-one wants to admit how big the problem really is though. An example of a 'hidden homeless' is a young under-employed chick sleeping on someone's couch in exchange for minor sexual favours.

Not optimal for her, but she wouldn't show in many studies...

So my proposal, harsh and Cuntish, is to count those who have a home, then count the turds in the sewer, and calculate how many people were not able (or willing) to identify a home.

This might yield a number slightly higher than the genuinely homeless, but I don't give as much of a fuck about that end of errors.

There might be better ways than counting turds, but the idea is that it is easier to count the 'homed', with all their infrastructure and support, than to count the homeless, with their varying situations and cautious nature.

[Rum]

What? An active and effective left leaning policy more or less eliminated rough sleeping. A change of government to a Conservative one that has not had a policy on the issue until late in the day sees the numbers increasing very significantly.

What’s not to get?

[Forty Two]

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

Labor participation is the percentage of the working age population which is working. You are in the labor force if you are working, looking for work, or self-employed. The percentage is the number of people working divided by the number of people eligible to be in the labor force.

Unemployment is calculated by polling people to see if they are ready, willing and able to work, and if they have looked for work in the four weeks prior to the survey. Failing to look for work makes you not unemployed. Not being ready, willing or able to work makes you not unemployed (even though you are eligible to be in the labor force).

[Cunt]

What? An active and effective left leaning policy more or less eliminated rough sleeping.

Good. A left-leaning policy in the US and Canada (housing first) has claimed to have eliminated homelessness in a few cities. I didn't have too hard a time finding some people who disagreed that it had been eliminated.

I'm all for reducing 'rough sleepers', but it's not at all the whole problem. I think some of the most tragically affected are those couch-serfing, as they are most likely to USE help to improve their life. (a lot of what would be 'rough sleepers' here are people with multiple diagnosis of mental health and other problems - VERY challenging to help)

A change of government to a Conservative one that has not had a policy on the issue until late in the day sees the numbers increasing very significantly.

What’s not to get?

Conservatives might be fuckers, but if they are, calling them fuckers won't help at all.

If, alternately, we found a way to blame YOU, your make-up wouldn't allow you to leave it that way. You would fix what you thought you did wrong.

Or at least I hope so.

Do you get about counting the homeless being a waste of time? I could compare it to searching for hiders...you will only ever find those who are not good at hiding.

[Rum]

What?

[Cunt]

You're right (or I believe you) about lefty policies improving the count of rough sleepers.

I was asking if you would look at yourself, instead of conservatives. Their errors are a lot easier to see, what with them being the enemy and everything.

But the lefties don't bother getting a good count of who is 'homed' (which would be simple) instead trying to count the homeless (who are variously motivated to hide from such counts)

[pErvinalia]

What?