2 reader comments

  1. Philip Edwards says:

    Gary,

    Considering the definition of “unemployed” has been altered over thirty times in the last thirty-four years, and each change has resulted in lower figures………what do YOU think Georgy Boy is up to?

    He’s lying. As usual.

    Significant he makes this latest hypocritical pitch at Tilbury docks and not at Liverpool docks, don’t you think? Of course that might be because he would be eaten alive by men who aren’t easily fooled.

    It will be of marginal interest to see what latest load of two-faced claptrap neocon economists come up with to define “full employment.” My bet is it will apply to anyone who gets out of bed after 8.00 am. Or something.
    :-)

  2. Philip says:

    What counts as “employment”? If thousands of part time, temporary, minimum wage, zero hours count, full employment is virtually meaningless. And would represent a massive decline in productivity. It is almost certainly predicated on this employment pattern continuing. What we need – from the education system into employment – is better training, developing people for more skilled jobs. Reasons why UK employers are grabbing EU migrant workers is (a) because they already have the skills so they don’t have to invest in much, if any, training; (b) they’re prepared to work for less because they’ll put up with worse hosing conditions to get the jobs; and (c) because somewhere along the line too many British workers seem to have developed an attitude that work should fit them, rather than the other way round.
    Another area of our democracy which we need to look at is true independence of the National Statistical Office – giving it the freedom from politicians to use its own definitions of what “employment” means.
    As it is, like everything else Osborne does, this is politics first, politics second & the good of the country 99th…..or am I being over-generous there?

Comments are closed.