interesting article out today...report by the Australian Institute...about 11.7% unemployment.....the AI report shows there are a further 710,000 people who want to work,***** but are not actively looking for work...they claim to be carers, housekeepers etc...
the criteria for the ABS report is that to claim to be unemployed...****one must be actively looking for work....
oh and the ABS is a survey of 23,000 households....and the figures are then estimated for the total population.....
so how do you feel now...is it 5.7 or 11.7% unemployed.....
my question is why are 710,000 people wanting to work...but are not looking for work...maybe its how the question was presented to them....
eg; could you be bothered waking up on time,,,travelling to work, working 8 hours for a minimum 200,000 a year.....they probably would say yes....
but since their chances of earning even 50,000 are slim...they do not bother...and there is another one supporting them anyway.....
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,25314387-31037,00.html
The abs should at least present alternative measures of employment as the US Bureau of Labor Statistics does. For the US, U3 is the most commonly cited figure for unemployment, however they publish other broader measures.
Although U3 is the number that is repeated ad nauseam by media morons, it is just an artifact of the Clinton era when they decided to exclude marginally attached workers from the calculation. U6 includes marginally attached workers, as seen below, U6 is closing in on 16% in the US. When you hear comparisons saying that current unemployment of 8.5% is nowhere near the 25% of the Great Depression it is a false comparison. U6 is a better measure and it is on track to hit 20% in the next 12 - 18 months.
The abs should follow the lead of the BLS and print alternative unemployment measures to give us a better idea of the true nature of unemployment and underemployment.