The ABS will be releasing the July unemploment figures at 11:30 am today (News Limited). They’re expected to show a rise of about 0.6% in the unemployment rate – according to Joe Hockey, this is not a problem:
Mr Hockey acknowledged the unemployment rate might rise.
“We’re taking nearly a quarter of a million people off welfare and creating a work obligation for them,” Mr Hockey said on Sky News.
“That has the potential to spike the unemployment rate, of course, this month, maybe over the next few months more obviously, but it’s about managing the economy, managing capacity.”
Well, that’s alright then, isn’t it?
Update: the ABS figures are out and they show that Hockey needn’t have bothered making an ass of himself.
That’s beautiful. This government really has the midas touch!
Good is good and bad is pretty good too.
Now come on Rod – remember the LP mantra – The Fed Gov is not repsonsible for any good economic news, but fully responsible for all bad news. House prices are high because State and Local Governments aren’t allowing enough new land releases – but the Federal government are responsible. There isn’t enough State Funded Housing, and the Federal government are responsible for that. Disability services are woefully neglected and despite this being a State responsibility, the Federal government is responsible. And once KevvyOOOOOH7 wins government, the Federal Government will no longer be responsoible for the State responsibilities that they are currently repsonsible for. And if the Uneployment rate starts to rise under a new ALP Government, that won’t be their fault.
No change to the unemployment rate as it turns out. Which is good news.
But it would be a terrible thing if this good news caused the Reserve bank announced another interest rate rise on Wednesday 7 November, just three days before an election on Saturday 10 November.
As I recall it Razor, in the late 80′s & early 90′s, all the economic bad news was blamed on the Liberal Party of the 1950′s.
This would more or less make rising unemployment under a Rudd govt the fault of McMahon.
This is great news for all of those folks working at least one hour per week.
But it’s terrible news for the electoral prospects of Mr Howard.
How much better do labour conditions have to get before the voters stop threatening to punish Mr Howard severely for his alleged faults of lying, conniving, being old and out of touch, and being too tricky?
This must be very frustrating for supporters of Mr Howard in the Liberal Party. When does their loyalty to Mr Howard begin to be perceived as counter-productive?
So this is what Howard’s YouTube video was in aid of: getting the media all tuckered out covering that (lots of cheery pictures of younguns in uniform for the telly) instead of covering this (sad people without work are not rivetting imagery).
How on earth can ANYBODY be out of work in Australia today?
As I’m sure you’ve read many times, SATP, the true unemployment figure, if based on a 38 hour week rather than the 1 hour week the ABS uses, is estimated to be between 12 and 15% .
Yep, it must be very frustrating for Mr Howard’s supporters. Almost eleven years in office, boom conditions, and yet a large part of the population impervious to the opportunities and threats of the Howard government.
I guess a lot of folks have marked this one as a failure of government.
Look, they just have to change the definition of employment from working one hour per week to having a heartbeat. That should fix the problem.
yep report UNDEREMPLOYMENT too..
When are you going to get it through your heads that the ABS uses an internationally recognised definition unemployment – they don’t just make one up for themselves that suits the social preferences of the LP brigades.
“Look, they just have to change the definition of employment from working one hour per week to having a heartbeat.”
And the abilty to make some sound on a landline phone. ABS does phone interviews to determine employment figures. That cuts out all who just rely on a mobile or are uncontactable.
Try finding staff Sans Blog, and you will find out just how few people are in the Australian labour market.
Or perhaps there is a pile of unemployed, all sitting in Sydney waiting for jobs to come to them?
Katz, I don’t understand your point, or even if there was one?
“When are you going to get it through your heads that the ABS uses an internationally recognised definition unemployment.”
Yep, Razor …World Best Bullshit
Blacklight (was asking about underemployment)…
1. Of about 107K graduates each year, 13K don’t have a job that uses a degree (link)
2. On DeadRoo there was a lively discussion on different ways of spinning the 2007-05-14 Research Note on Underemployment and other measures of labour underutilitization from the Parliamentary Library. The report included the following
Quite a large number of the underemployed wanted a good half-working week or more, and these probably fell into the "working a couple of hours a week on call" In the DeadRoo article you’ll find links to a couple of Peter Martin articles on our flat productivity that provide related figures.
They are the latest I can find… and I doubt if well get another report on labor market underutilization before the next election.
Gee, after 27 years in the industry, I still don’t have a job that uses my degree.
Whether or not you add underemployment to the numbers, there’s no doubt that unemployment has gone down a lot. And it is a lot harder to find skilled workers these days than it used to be. Note, Razor and SATP, the word skilled. There are a lot of people with no education and no skills and they are still unemployed.
Anyways, all the excellent economic news over the past two days seems to have made Howard’s election prospects worse.
Labor has firmed in the betting (at Centrebrt) from $1.60 to $1.56.
Go figure.
Sans Blog,
Re: the true unemployment or ‘underemployment’ stats. Here’s what I said in another thread yesterday or the day before:
The source for this statement was ABS/RBA data here.
Now the underlying problem with your comment is this: you’ve mentioned a 38-hour week. How on earth is that relevant to anything? Many people do not want to work that many hours per week. Why should we care whether they are? Shouldn’t we be measuring the actual unmet demand for hours, which is precisely what the ABS and RBA do?
Cheers
BBB
There has always been a “work obligation” of some kind or other for the unemployed in every society since forever.
Hockey is a blithering dilettante who sold his soul for a brief taste of minor political power.
Sorry Dave Bath, we crossed comments. Your link seems to be based on the same data. It confirms a total of 10% ‘underutilisation’, not 12% or 15% as claimed.
Interestingly, the Research Note also has an ‘extended labour force underutilisation rate’ which takes into account persons ‘marginally attached’ to the labour market. This group includes ‘discouraged jobseekers’. The note has this measure at about 10.6% during September 2006.
Cheers
BBB
I suppose a few people may be surprised by this admission.
Three Bs
We could throw stats at each other all week . Here are a couple of articles that I found interesting.
Rubbery figures hide the real jobless tragedy
Hidden jobless figure may reach 17%
It’s just that some people happily ignore the obligation.
Hockey’s remark about taking people off welfare and imposing a work requirement isan’t particularly accurate – the Welfare to
WorkCheaper Welfare reforms take people off welfare programs without a work requirement – DSP and Supporting Parents Benefit for example – and put them on lower allowances with Centrelink “Mutual Obligation” thrown in for good measure.Shorter Joe Hockey – if the unemployment figures do go up in the next few months, it’s because we’re a pack of sanctimonious bastards.
If anyone out there can dumb this down for me any further, I’d really appreciate it. When was the definition of unemployment altered to include anyone who works at least an hour per week? Prior to that, what was the threshold? (I have a figure of 15 hours floating around in my head for some reason, but I’d love to have the correct figure)
I guess the difficulty with all of this is the progressive casualisation of the workforce. Way back when, you either had a job (of the 38-40 hour per week variety) or you didn’t – in the main, that is. So comparisons of this era to that are mostly pointless.
Is there any way to adjust the figures simply to include all those receiving any form of unemployment assistance? Wouldn’t that give a more accurate picture?
Yeah, SB. Who needs actual ABS data when you can quote the Fairfax press, who in turn quote Quiggin (!).
To be fair, they get it half-right. We need more investment in education and training. However, the BoSL guy gets it precisely wrong when he implies lowering or dispensing with the minimum wage is not part of the answer. Not only does it get the low-skilled back into the workforce, it can actually give them the opportunity to obtain skills through on-the-job training.
Now what system have we got in Australia? First we price the very low-skilled out of the job market through the minimum wage. These people are often the most vulnerable. Brilliant. Then we say: “Oh, look at all these low-skilled unemployed people! We need to set up a Government system to give these people skills so they can join the workforce!”. It’s braindead policy. And all so that the educated middle-classes can sleep at night knowing that poor people aren’t being ‘expolited’.
We ought to be pumping mountains of cash into our primary and secondary school systems to improve equality of opportunity, and then getting rid of these insane, economically indefensible and life-destroying labour market restrictions.
Cheers
BBB
IIRC, that was a decision during the Hawke/Keating era (but might even be earlier). Usually decisions like this happen during recessions, for obvious reasons.
Errr, ‘exploited’?
Hi Ville, Dave Bath’s link above has a great Parliamentary Library research note which shows when and how the unemployment definitions changed. From memory standard ABS practice is to re-calculate past data on the basis of the new definition, to allow ‘apple with apples’ comparisons, but I’m not sure whether that has been possible for the labour market series we have been talking about.
Cheers
BBB
“We ought to be pumping mountains of cash into our primary and secondary school systems to improve equality of opportunity, and then getting rid of these insane, economically indefensible and life-destroying labour market restrictions.”
To bloody right bingo bongo,we should bring back pit pony’s kids working in mines,shit why stop there! lets have some press gangs and scoop up those lazy fucking surfies on our beaches and put them in the military. But the real savings could be made by getting rid of the safety officers on building sites,Yea instead of having approx 1 death a week on building sites we could possibly get ten killed, think about that for a minute that’s ten less potential Labor Party supporters.All those LIFE DESTROYING LABOR MARKET RESTRICTIONS WELL YOU GOT THAT BIT RIGHT! And on it goes.etc fucking etc.And my wife wants to know why I drink.
“Sorry dear, I have to hold back the tide of heartless capitalism with a few more beers first.”
Ha ha. It’s difficult to know whether you’re a psycho or a comic genius, Gaz. Either way, you’re even more hysterical than me. A big ask I would previously have thought. Anyway, keep it up!
Now I should add what ought to be obvious: workplace safety laws are undoubtedly a good thing, notwithstanding that they are a cost to business (I should have been clearer about what I meant, though).
Finally Gaz, these days pretty much everyone is a potential ALP voter. They’re not just on building sites. Howard is finding this out the hard way.
Cheers
BBB
“Now I should add what ought to be obvious: workplace safety laws are undoubtedly a good thing, notwithstanding that they are a cost to business ”
Hmm ought to be obvious,out of the mouths of babes,what do think the union movement started from benevolent employers? hear’s a hot flash for you,the cost to business is minuscule compared to the cost to society.It is after all the shrill and rhetoric has gone,going to be industrial relations that are going to sink these bastards,hence them spending a fucking kings ransom of my money trying to justify and prop up what is clearly a huge fucking mistake on their part.They have painted themselves into a corner with this shit and they know it.But you know what’s more funny,Shrek is gonna take the fall for it, what a squeezer.
Most stats are crap under this government.
What?
Oh, ok, let me build on that sweeping statement.
eg inflation excludes petrol
eg work bans are excluded from stats on industrial dispute levels. Which is funny, since they are about the only non-illegal form of industrial action these days.
eg you’re employed if you work one hour.
Gaz,
The Union Movement? I thought that was Mosley’s outfit.
Anyway, you’re the one who was banging on about workplace safety, not me. Normal people understand that workplace safety is about protecting workers and their families from harm, and so business costs should not be relevant. This only needed saying because there are other kinds of labour market regulation that impose costs on business and which ultimately hurt the low-skilled most. Just trying to clear up the confusion old chum. I don’t disagree with you but perhaps you’ve been drinking and have missed that.
Good night Australia
BBB
“The Union Movement? I thought that was Mosley’s outfit.” Well that shows you what you know! Mosely was a rampant right wing Nazi sympathizer, I didn’t have to go to Wiki for that in the fifty’s it was taught in school.
Yea I’ll get in first I should have payed more attention in grade 3.
“Normal people understand that workplace safety is about protecting workers and their families from harm, and so business costs should not be relevant. ”
Hmm normal people, if that was the case than a union movement would not have been necessary, but that’s common dog aint it.
Costs incurred on business only effects their profit margin,helping low skilled workers is not a high priority until they are needed. If you believe that, I suggest you try some other books to get your info out of,the Three Little Pigs is good,Little Red Riding Hood,and one of my favorites Gullivers Travels.
Because Howard and his band of Troglodytes have been in power for eleven long years don’t think for a minute we(the left )are going to let you re-write history.
Your little barb about drinking I will let go through to the keeper,suffice to say,there are no prizes for seconds.
Ok, ok Gaz. You win. Now here’s some material on the Union Movement for you, old chum: [link]
BBB
Old chum,your play on words and your little joke was and is not your intention,to prove any point,I stand by what I said.Old Chum !.
Thanks BBB – that clears a few things up for me. Cheers.
(1) The one-hour-a-week is in line with ILO standards for "completely unemployed"
(2) The underuse of skills won’t be stopped by pumping out more and better graduates, but by some way of making Australian business (or government) make smarter use of our best and brightest. Doing this might even help our shocking current account and longest-running-ever trade deficits.
(3) Craig Mc. I’m pretty sure that the “not using a degree” refers to not being in a role that normally requires a degree. I’m a biologist, but have been working in roles “normally requiring a degree” in IT for more than 20 years, so I wouldn’t be counted in this class of underutilization. But then, we aren’t pumping out people likely to be inventive and create exportable products (tangible or intangible).
(4) Theres a detailed ABS paper giving the breakdown of number of hours per week people want compared to what they have. Can’t find it at the moment (it was in a comment somewhere not a post), but it was a doozy. Does anyone know the ref?
Ratty is sprouting bullshit again.
“Faced no longer with threat of old unfair dismissal laws, many small businesses in this country have taken on more staff, they’ve taken a risk,” he said.
“I think it would be a tragedy for long-term unemployment in this country if we bring back those old unfair dismissal laws and the only party that’s promising to do that is the Australian Labor Party.”
Hmm, looks like Howard may call a 3rd November Poll.
With the Liberal Party reportedly booking about $7 million of television advertising airtime for October and November, the first Saturday in November would give the Coalition a chance to go to the polls before another rate rise
Somehow I doubt it because the media will be so wrapped up in Melbourne Cup Fever, that any political message will get ignored, plus there is still CHOGM, which Howard would want to attend.
I still reckon 1st Week of December.
The penny is dropping and I am coming to realise that unemployment statistics have nowt to do with people having an income generating job. Nor is it a measure of society being in any kind of decent financial shape in indicative of its members having money to spend. It is not as I would have once naively thought, a measure of a healthy society.
Faux, employment statistics are useful only as a ‘prop’ for our rather silly and fairly irrational ‘economy’. Low unemployment cannot be responsible for high inflation. High inflation is far more likely attributable to lack of supply, (we’s running out of stuff) and ever sky rocketing corporate greed. All those CEO salaries going up and up. Such exacerbated expenditure must be met somewhere. Ipso facto, flow down to the price being paid by consumers.
Oh and I just read this:
No, no, no! Normal people understand that workplace safety is about the worker not suing the crap out of the employer for negligence. Its about insurance and avoiding litigation nothing more.
“When was the definition of unemployment altered to include anyone who works at least an hour per week?”
1978, when John Howard was Treasurer.
Frankj Calabrese, on the contrary, John Howard is actually dead right in that statement.
I can promise you, the unfair dismissal laws caused me to sharply reduce hiring.
Reintroduction of them would cause me to rethink all permenant jobs.
“How on earth can ANYBODY be out of work in Australia today?”
While there are employers like SATP it is inevitable.
And here’s me thinking SATP was a model employer,a man who would bend over backwards for his staff or was that frontwards how soon I forget.
You know, I was surprised Howard introduced the unfair dismissal laws,I mean outside of his career in the public service, any employer hiring him would wanna give him the sack! When! Oh I don’t know by smoko the first day probably.
SATP this is progress for you mate. Objectively a very good thing (for the greater good) and subjectively the beginning of personal SATP wisdom. Rethinking grandiosity was precisely what the laws were designed to encourage old bean: to help prevent idiotic, hapless fools with no concern for their fellow human beings who think they can make a buck to go back to where they metaphysically belong – a twinkle in their father’s eye mate and a reciprocal come hither boy flounce by their mother. At best, potential.
No point in being a happening without either a future or justifiable present.
You demonstrate Jinmaro, that you have no idea how those ideas work in practice.
Ever wondered why the workforce has become casualised or on short term contracts?
Joe2, to avoid looking like a troll, explain why it is inevitable with employers like me that people will be out of work. Old bean, you made a wrong call here, time you put yourself into the stewpot old chap.
Because it is cheaper for the employers of labour and the sellers of labour have less power?
Given that it should be easy for Centrelink to provide stats on a weekly by weekly basis, I reckon they could provide a proxy for the unemployed and those underemployed and hurting by publishing
(1) Normal unemployment data
(2) Counting those who are "employed" but who are given "top-ups" by Centrelink – say, more than $75 dollars a week or more.
Would anybody know if these figures are available? Are they published regularly (e.g. quarterly/monthly).
SATP from what I have heard from you, over a long period, introspection is not one of your strong points. You are continually complaining about the lack of ‘good starff these days’ as if you run a Toorak manor. Have you ever considered that people might not want to work for you because you are the creep?
No I am not a troll and comment here often.
Then stop talking like one Joe2. You have no idea what you are talking about on this matter. Besides, it is way off the topic!
I’d just like to add that everyone doing WFTD (work for the dole) is considered employed by the Howard government. If you’re unemployed you have to do WFTD after six months of being on payments, that right there would probably be the majority of unemployed people. Also as we all know WFTD is not employment and you’re basically not paid a cent, I’d love to see someone one day challenge the government on this for being paid below the legal minimum wage but alas they know the unemployed don’t have the means to challenge such a thing so will never happen.
Also the Welfare to Work “reforms” by Howard sees them kicking people off of the disability pension and single parent payments on to the dole which would then technically inflate the real unemployment figure further.
This is probably not the right thread for this but has anyone else heard the rumour doing the rounds that IF the Liberal Party are re-elected, Howard plans to change all the welfare payments (the ones for the poor people anyway) to a HECS style system. Anyone on the dole, disability pension, single parent payments will have to repay every cent they receive from the government once they get/find a job.
Dave Bath,
The last I was made aware of the statistic you seek it was in the form of a total of all those on Newstart. It included those receiving top ups to their (typical) 15 hour/week jobs and those who did not do paid work i.e. “volunteers” and WFT dole .The figure used by Marcus L’Estrange in a May Crikey was 1.7 million.He estimated that the total of those without a real job was 2 million.He used material obtained from the ABS site to come up with these numbers.
If you work for the dole you are essentially working for your board and keep.Centuries ago it was called slavery and was ultimately abolished.
Fantastic! I would be much better off with such a system. I hope they bring it in.
Dave Bath you are spot on with your enquiry. Sad to say I have no information either, but maybe Gummo or Mark B would know.
I would ask why we are reliant on, over the phone ABS interview figures, for those important unemployment/underemployment figures when someone senior at Centrelink would surely be able to hit a button or two on his/her computer and tell us the whole story, in detail?
Joe2,
The whole story would not look pretty and no doubt this is the reason the buttons are not hit.
The same thing applies to the up to date s457 visa story.
The 457 visa story is not pretty? Anyone who has had contact with 457′s knows that.
However to imply there is some sort of large scale unemployment is stretching it. People who don’t really wish to work, or who wish to work very much on their own terms, & are spoiled and uncompetitive by the Australian floor price system for labour, well it is possible they could be out of a job.
Dany le roux I guess you are correct that the actual numbers in both cases would be an embarrassment for all parties. Now I just wonder if the figures are not freely available, as we suppose, whether they might be released through freedom of information by an interested group with the resources to put up the initial dollars.
Katz
What is it with people sneering about “one hour per week?” I never hear anybody actually explain what they are trying to argue when they trot this out. Of the 21,800 NEW jobs created, 99.5% of them were full-time.
Given the changes in welfare obligations this is a phenomenally good achievement.
The one hour per week definition of employment comes from the International Labor Organisation and is used worldwide. Since its inception in the 1950s, the definition has only been modified once and very marginally in 1982. It has absolutely nothing, zip, nada to do with John Howard. God knows where these people get their ideas about economics and government from!
Not entirely the whole story, Mr G. Up until the late seventies/early eighties, there were tow routinely published counts of unemployment – the ABS stats and a monthly count of jobseekers registered for unemployment benefit, compiled by the now defunct CES.
There were inaccuracies in both series – the ABS definition of “unemployed” was, and is, routinely derided for undercounting the number of unemployed people, thanks to the “worked one hour in the last week” definition of employment. The CES figures were derided for overcounting the number of unemployed, by counting people who’d got jobs and notified Social Security (but not the CES), people in casual employment who weren’t actually receiving benefits – were in fact working, but only on a short term basis and so on and so forth. Generally the true figure was accepted as being somewhere between the two.
The publication of CES register counts stopped under the Fraser government and no government since has seen fit to resume it, or an equivalent data series drawn from Centrelink records. No surprises in that.
Joe2,
Perhaps a better idea would be to ask the presumptive Labor minister what his/her approach would be.It would be great if Labor were returned and they declared that the real unemployment rate under Ratty was in excess of 2 million and that from now on since the real rate of Newstart membership because of good communications/computing could be obtained at the push of a button actual daily figures free of survey results would become the norm.It could be used by the incoming government in the same politically embarassing way that Costello used the Keating billions of government “debt”.They could wipe the slate clean and declare a large scale education and retraining program for the 2 million and continually remind the plebs (us)that the Liberal party cannot be trusted with the truth.
“Since its inception in the 1950s, the definition has only been modified once and very marginally in 1982.”
That once in 1982 would not have been to define it as one hour per week would it JG? Ratty does not have to use the one hour per week standard because other countries e.g. Germany use a 15 hour minimum per week to count for full employment.Less than 15 hours per week in the Fatherland and you are unemployed even though they too abide by ILO standards.
And SATP what the fcuk is “the floor price system for labour”? I think the beer is talking for you there,Bwana.
And Joe2 perhaps you already know that Morgan Polls use the same definition of “employed” as do the ABS but get consistently higher unemployment rates (usually almost double the ABS rate). It is worth a look at the Morgan website for a critical discussion of his survey techniques.
On today’s Science show on Radio National they reported that August 2007 is 2 hundred years since slave trading in Britain was halted.Abolition however did not stop till 1834 .
They should have reported that it was reintroduced into Oz in 1997 by the Mad Monk and was given the name of Working For the Dole.
Danny Le Roux, the the fark the floor price system for labour is, in case you have never noticed, is a far king thing called “minium wages”. Every award I have read stipulates a floor price, which is the lowest people can be paid.
It has the same impact upon quality and productivity as does any other floor price scheme.
You have never far king noticed that there is a minium amount of wages, which it is illegal to pay below?
Where the fcuk have you been?
“Floor price” is a term normally used for something traded and whilst it is true that workers “sell” their labour they are in civilised societies regarded as being better in the scheme of things than cattle,Bwana.
When people in democracies discuss minimum wages they usually use the term “minimum wages” and thus do not gratuitiously take away from workers their basic dignity.
You seem to be getting stroppier as time goes on and the election approaches SATP.
Bwana STAP is a captain of industry dont cha know,I mean shit if he had his way he would pay just enough for luxuries like food and clothes.Of course anyone not running a pub wouldn’t know,I mean the fact that I was employing people in Baghdad ,while STAP was in his Dady’s bag is neither here nor there.
I personally know of businesses that pay the” Minimum Wage ” which is a pittance.These employers that pay the pittance exploit mostly the young 18 yr olds who left school for whatever reason to early,and a lot of them from my experience are not even in a position,because their parents are drink or drugged fucked,to get them to negotiate for them.These same businesses that work on the “Slave Labour” mentality always have appalling safety records,with some employees lucky if they get home to their family’s after work.
I have personally investigated a young man who was working about twenty hours a week o/t for some unscrupulous bastard for nothing, and he wasn’t no orphan there are hundreds doing it. As soon as Rudd is elected I hope there will be a full investigation into this bastardly attitude via “Work Choices” this has gone beyond nastiness, there has been brown paper bags involved here.
Given that 250,000 people were supposedly thrown off welfare and must have somehow, miraculously walked straight into employment, I would think that Howard has performed another one of his miracles.
Should cut down the wine bill at Kiribilly though. He should just be able to turn on the tap and water will miraculously turn into wine.
Gummo said:
"The publication of CES register counts stopped under the Fraser government and no government since has seen fit to resume it, or an equivalent data series drawn from Centrelink records. No surprises in that."
The real "no surprise" (although I think Gummo is correctly implying that the figures would make for red-faces) is that Centrelink would find making such calculations reliable would be near impossible given how poorly they manage information. Google for centrelink with the “site:anao.gov.au” qualifier and you’ll see they couldn’t organize a pissup in a pub.
BTW: Most people don’t know the “site” operator and it’s really handy when the search tool inside a site is crap. Here’s the full URL I spoke about before:
http://google.com/search?q=centrelink+site:anao.gov.au
It’s really handy for doing a whole-of-government search with “site:gov.au”
stap:
“people who don’t want to work or…on their own terms or…are spoiled and uncompetitive”.
Steve, sounds to me like you must have a REAL grudge against Trujillo and the rest of these ceo’s who get $ten mill plus a year for doing little better with their time than trying to ruin the lives of thousands of people, by dreaming up new ways to sack or cheat them…
Oh, I get it; Those WEREN’T the people you meant!
SATP worked out what Hayek was really proposing and now also advocates the Hayek “Road to Serfdom”?
They weren’t the people I meant Paul Walter, but you know that.
I don’t have a grudge against the ceo’s you list, that is saved for really bad people, such as a (say) a certain bank with a scots name. I do agree with your feelings on Mr. Trudgellow & co.
Neither do I have any grudge against people who choose to not work. Why would I? They have done nothing to me. Nor are they likely to.
Dany: Clearly you have got your wires crossed, whoever is getting stroppy in here, it ain’t me. Projection can be tricky can’t it? If you are referring to the language I used, try asking a question without a profanity in it, & see if my answer is correspondingly without profanity.
Could someone please explain how this can happen and not have the figures looking shonky. ie The unemployment figures / monthly employment figures.
The Unemployment figures for the month supposedly didn’t change as Costello said yesterday, with the usual great big smirk on his face.
You’re a shrinking violet as well as a Social Darwinist SATP?