February national unemployment hit 10.9%

[catsnknots]

We have been told time and time again that we are on a  good wicket and that people  are complaining for no reason... I know for a fact that people are on struggle street... I could not really understand how our interest rates are low because people are not spending, new housing numbers are incredibly low, businesses are sacking people and/or shutting up shop and the government is saying we have never had it better.. 

we hear that the unemployment rates are only about 5.4% and then people talk about even working 1 hour a week means they are classed as employed so the figures are skewed...... I could never really find proof of that statement.. 

well last night I managed to find this info... it sums it all up perfectly.. 

The ABS made changes in 2006 to include working 1 hour a week and did not include anyone that was unable to work... that is a very deceptive change... 

[polksaladallie]

you are right.. my bad.. it was just a typo.. 

having spent 3 hours in emergency with my mum I am feeling a bit drained... sorry.. 

Hope your mum is OK. 

It is quite incredible that that man was able to remove such a huge amount before he was detected.

[cherry*135]

The ABS follows agreed international standards for calculating unemployment rates.

I am sure if any citizen of Australia wanted to know how the ABS calculates their unemployment rates that info is available on their website. It is not hidden information, intended to deceive anyone. I was taught that in Economics subjects at Uni.

[cherry*135]

The Bureau of Statistics also provides a quarterly underemployment rate. This adds those who would like to work more hours than they currently are to those who are completely unemployed.

The underemployment rate is the bureau's answer to the criticism that one hour of work a week is enough to have someone classed as 'employed' in the headline unemployment figures.

As a side note, the one-hour-a-week figure is an international standard, so that Australia's headline unemployment rate can be directly compared with other countries. The ABS mounts a convincing argument for using this figure in its 'Understanding the Australian Labour Force Using ABS Statistics' document.

[cherry*135]

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6291.0.55.003Main%20Features999Feb%202013open...

[catsnknots]

Hope your mum is OK. 

It is quite incredible that that man was able to remove such a huge amount before he was detected.

Mum is ok... thanks for asking. :-x

she tripped over a speed hump and landed on her head and twisted her knee on Saturday. i didn't realise the extent of the injuries til I saw her yesterday.. ct scan today and some blood test and an ECT on her heart??(  I think that is what they call it) and she was given the all clear... the bruise on her eye is bad but her leg is bruised from her upper thigh down to her ankle. almost black looking... 

I read the article in The Weekend Australian magazine. 

omg.. how he got employed in the first place is amazing... how he stayed employed was just as amazing... 

even those around him didn't seem to believe his story.. but it was the the Emperor's new clothing story.. lol 

[lakeland27]

I don't think I mentioned Gillard or Labor in my post... 

and I also pointed out that the ABS started making changes in 2006... 

I think people are sick and tired of the spin on both sides when it comes to figures like this.. 

If we don't make a stand now and argue for true details then how are we to know when we are making the right decisions? 

considering the news sources quoted here so often that is just a little ironic.

anyway, i hope your Mum is OK.

[catsnknots]

We may argue who's news source is the better one but this is really nothing to do with that... 

This is about a true picture of our economy. 

And I will be just as cheesed off when Abbott leads us and we still have this type of twisting of figures. 

so many people would say I was overreacting when talking of the difficulties in the mines and the loss of jobs and the decline... The job losses where i live... even before the floods we had massive job losses.. the flooding has just magnified it. 

I think these numbers back up what I know is going on. 

[cherry*135]

It is nothing to do with whose news source is better than others.

The ABS made changes in 2006 to include working 1 hour a week and did not include anyone that was unable to work... that is a very deceptive change

The opening post suggests some hidden,deceptive, secret conspiracy about how the ABS compiles its unemployment statistics, which is not the case at all.

How the ABS compiles their statistics is clearly stated on their website for anyone who is interested to read. They compile their statistics to an agreed international standard.

No politician or ABS manager woke up one day and said lets fudge the unemployment statistics, the general public won't know any better.

What does it matter? The ABS  and Roy Morgan statistics on unemployment are both readily available for anyone to read and compare.

A lot of people already aware how the ABS compiles its statistics, it is nothing new, no new revalations there. 

No matter which party is in Govt the statistics will still be calculated in the same way. I can't see the ABS withdrawing from using agreed international standards.. why would they?

Storm in a tea cup.

[lakeland27]

We may argue who's news source is the better one but this is really nothing to do with that... 

This is about a true picture of our economy. 

And I will be just as cheesed off when Abbott leads us and we still have this type of twisting of figures.

Prepare to be cheesed off. he does it already, why not start now ?

No matter which party is in Govt the statistics will still be calculated in the same way. I can't see the ABS withdrawing from using agreed international standards.. why would they?

Storm in a tea cup.

i guess you'd be right about that, but seeing as its now a bipartisan thread (which i failed to recognise as such) i do find the method flawed as i did in 2006.

[*crikey*mate*]

1) Iza, why do you frequently bring someone's kids into a discussion to use at them as ammunition? I did it once - well an anonymous thread about 17 months ago - so I am guilty of this myself - but to do it consistently? mid thread? when it has no relevance to the thread? I am incredibly ashamed of the time that I did it, don't you ever feel ashamed? To continually sink that low? To not only use someone's kids against them but other personal info as well?

I thought it was an unspoken rule on these boards that kids were off limits?

As for the allusion to or blatant introduction of personal info for the purpose of attack - I acknowledge that you are not the only person who does this, but IMO it's just as low.

Even lower in this case - Cat has worked damn hard to get into the position she is now in - yeah, she had a bit of a hand up - but she never considered it to be a hand out - you started a thread about strong women? There's an example.

2) As for the OP and accompanying article - LOL - too long and badly formatted it making it difficult to read, so I skimmed and scrolled - but the general gist was that these current figures have been reached by using a different method to the past.

IMO - if a person wants to compare statistics, the two sets of statistics have to be gathered in the same manner using the same criteria - otherwise it's like comparing apples with oranges as far as I can see.