Live Register figure hits record high.

von Neumann

Pretty scary stuff

Gone from 8.3% to 9.2% in one month and when you add this to outward migrations (assumed).
What would our working population be now?

I hope this is as bad as it gets....but it worries me that even if unemployment stops rising that the working population will continue to fall due to migration.

I read some where that unofficial unemployment in the states is at 13%. (sorry don't have a source for this.)

Time Magazine

I think the thread title is wrong. I know it's the headline on rte.ie but I think they're wrong too.

It's the highest increase ever, but that's different to the highest level ever.

How many were signed on in 1987?

The Economist

The Economist wrote: »

I think the thread title is wrong. I know it's the headline on rte.ie but I think they're wrong too.

It's the highest increase ever, but that's different to the highest level ever.

How many were signed on in 1987?

quite possibly the total is the highest not the % IF the population was smaller in 87

mike65

Its the highest number, peaked in early 90s was about 275,000 (15.3%). As a % of working population its a long way from old peak of course, currently at 9%

The massive leap for January is a bit artificial as it contains many who would have got thier p45 in December but for employers hanging on till Christmas was done.

Time Magazine

mike65 wrote: »

Its the highest number, peaked in late 80s was about 275,000

I stand corrected.

mike65

I tweaked that cos I googled and found that unemployment peaked in 1993!

MG

Figures on the abolute number can be found here and the % on one of the links. Unfortunately it shows the male/female breakdown but not the total for the numbers graph.


http://www.statusireland.com/statistics/finacial-statistics-for-ireland/28/Irish-Live-Register-Figures.html

When Bertie took power in June 97 the unemploymet rate was 10.4% so in about two months we'll be back to where we started.

anyone want to estimate end year %
with reasons to back up their estimate

utick

Deleted User wrote: »

anyone want to estimate end year %
with reasons to back up their estimate

20% by end of year, less people will emigrate than previously because unemployment is high accross the world right now

foundation10

We will easily hit 20% by year end and welfare budget will also be blown. The Government are hoping that there will be a mass exodus from the country

gurramok

I had already predicted 13% on the Accommodation forum which came across as too pessimistic but i too was shocked by the January figure. I'd revise upwards to 15%.

I'd hate to see it going higher into late teen's, i just fear for the young people churning out of school/college with no prospects of a job. ( i was in that position before and know what its like)

conlonbmw

Please do not forget that unemployment figures are seasonally adjusted by Gov, also they are not including a large selection of people on disability or sickness, or unmarried lone parents,as well as others.

"The Live Register is not designed to measure unemployment."

Unemployment is measured by the Quarterly National Household Survey.

Also the Gov does not have an exact figure for our population. We could have up to 200,000 undocumented people here as well.

lifeboats

Don't forget the students graduating this year,there's 140,000 students in third level now, how many are graduating this year? + all those who leave school after the leaving cert.

Peanut

Deleted User wrote: »

anyone want to estimate end year %
with reasons to back up their estimate

I would guess 17%, no particular reason for that though.

I would also speculate that the government will have to intervene with some sort of massive FÁS type scheme in order to consolidate problems with both employment and social welfare.

The country has to become more competitive - the actual, tangible value in work being done has to increase, relative to other regions. It's not all bad though, I think difficult conditions can bring determination and innovation to industry.

trentf

you know they can print money out of thin air. You are aware they can do that and figures they enter in financial systems are just figures. That money you think is in the bank is just a figure on the system representing the money they can print at will. The whole financial system is a joke. You swap figures for food. The elites have us fooled really good.

When you start to figure out whats really going you can sit back and laugh at people worrying about unemployment and sw figures etc. Borrow borrow borrow.....

4arc

irish labour force = c2,200,000

live reister = c330,000

unemployment rate = c15%???

Explain!

tedstriker

Just so people are clear, here are the actual stats in 2 graphs. They are the official CSO stats.

1st is the unemployment rate i.e. the % unemployed:
http://www.statusireland.com/statistics/finacial-statistics-for-ireland/31/Seasonally-Adjusted-Standarised-Unemployment-Rates-SUR.html

2nd is the actual amount of people unemployed:
http://www.statusireland.com/statistics/finacial-statistics-for-ireland/28/Irish-Live-Register-Figures.html

Neither of them are good reading.

142857

4arc wrote: »

irish labour force = c2,200,000

live reister = c330,000

unemployment rate = c15%???

Explain!

"The Live Register is not designed to measure unemployment. It includes part-time workers (those who work up to three days a week), seasonal and casual workers entitled to Jobseekers Benefit or Allowance. "

Our full unemployment level is 9.2%, or about 200,000 people. The extra 130k are part-time, etc. The average Irish newspaper seems not to have figured this out, so a lot of people are going to be confused!

gurramok

Thats not true.

See http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/current/lreg.pdf

Nearly 23,000 males and 22,600 females were classified as casual and part-time, alot less than 130k. That leaves about 281,000 fully unemployed give or take a few hundred.

Whats your source for the 130k?

142857

gurramok wrote: »

Thats not true.

See http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/current/lreg.pdf

Nearly 23,000 males and 22,600 females were classified as casual and part-time, alot less than 130k. That leaves about 281,000 fully unemployed give or take a few hundred.

Whats your source for the 130k?

It is true. You are forgetting there are more people on the live register who are more than just unemployed, casual and part time workers.. Hence use of the word etc

My source for the 130k was the difference between the amount unemployed and the amount on the live register.

If 281k are fully unemployed someone needs to tell the central statistics office because our current unemployment rate is given in what you posted as 9.2%, not 13%. Workforce is 2.2 million approx. 9.2% unemployment is about 200k unemployed.

I'm not saying they aren't cooking the numbers, but that's the way it is.

gurramok

I'm intrigued. For your 130k, are you quoting the Quarterly National Household Survey?

If so, that is always out of date by a good few months.

Last one was June-August in 2008 at 6.3%?
http://www.cso.ie/statistics/sasunemprates.htm, Davy says that snapshot is for July 2008 http://www.davy.ie/content/pubarticles/QNHSQ32008.pdf

Sea Sharp

I wonder, what would unemployment have been like in the 80s had nobody emigrated.

There's nowhere to emigrate to this time

The **** will hit the fan in 2009. 2010 - 2011 will be like the 80s.

Unemployment around 20% doesn't seem too farfetched.

142857

gurramok wrote: »

I'm intrigued. For your 130k, are you quoting the Quarterly National Household Survey?

If so, that is always out of date by a good few months.

Last one was June-August in 2008 at 6.3%?
http://www.cso.ie/statistics/sasunemprates.htm, Davy says that snapshot is for July 2008 http://www.davy.ie/content/pubarticles/QNHSQ32008.pdf

Nope, I'm referencing the link you posted that puts unemployment for January at 9.2%. I don't know where they got the numbers but that's what they give.

tedstriker

I think the most important thing here is the trend rather than the breakdown of the figures.

von Neumann

Just out of curiosity is there any maximum unemployment.

What I mean to say is there any factors which limit unemployment growth.



As an aside....

Nearly all job losses will be in the private sector,

So should we not be looking at these figure as

2.2(Total) - 0.4(Public) = 1.8 (Private)

Real world that would give 11.25%