Vybik Jon wrote:
Vote for you? Not until you bother to put some effort into your arguments, pooley.
I was too busy working to look at it properly, Still it's an awful lot less than the figure mentioned in this thread earlier. Shows there is hope for jobless/ work shy (;-)). Also too busy to put much effort into responses on this thread, just giving you an opinion. they are allowed aint they? Up-to-date figures:
Claimant Count (Jobseeker's Allowance) 864,700
Vacancies 634,900
A difference of 229,800. Just a little more than you were suggesting. I do hope that your job doesn't involve a lot of figures.
Also, the groups you suggested taking out of the figures don't form part of the unemployment figures. If what you are thinking of is those deemed economically inactive, then talk about that. There's a major difference. (Mind you, even that is a bizarre notion dreamed up years ago by some civil servant).
