Unemployment but we need work visas??

L

legend99

Registered User
Messages
842
Saw a story recently abotu Seamus Brennan saying that we had 100k work visas issued but yet we still have 300k claiming unemployment benefit....his point was...how can that be??
the story also said that he acknowledged that there was probably 20-25% of those 300k who would probably never be employable...but as he said that leaves over 200k people saying they can't get work, while we have 100k immigrants actively working.

So whats going on there?

This isn't a rant, i suppose I'm just picking up on what the Minister said...is there any excepted theory that explains this set-up?
 
Are you sure that it's 300,000 claiming Unemployment Benefit as opposed to 300,000 claiming some sort of social welfare payment? I find it hard to believe that 300,000 people are on UB to be honest.
 
alas mrs. legend threw out the paper so the details are a bit sketchy in my brina....but I suppose the principal of there being unemployment while having to issue work visas does lead to interesting questions....
 
According to the [broken link removed] there were c. 84,000 people unemployed during March-May 2004 which is a far cry from the 300,000 mentioned above and according to [broken link removed] the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 4.2% which, as far as I know, is as near to practical full employment as possible.
 
I 100% stand over the fact that brennan made a mention of a figure of 300k in relation to the story.

Second, "4.2% which, as far as I know, is as near to practical full employment as possible." why does full employment allow for 1 in 20 people to be unemployed?
 
According to recent comments by Seamus Brennan himself:
The facts were that there are just under 160,000 people signing on the Live Register at present. About 10% of these people are working part-time and receive welfare supports in respect of one, two or three days unemployment each week. The remaining 144,000 or so are required to be capable of work in order to sign on the Register.
Click to expand...

I 100% stand over the fact that brennan made a mention of a figure of 300k in relation to the story.
Click to expand...
Yes - but in relation to what precisely? I can't get any clarification online so perhaps if somebody saw the articles/comments in question they could clear this confusion up?
 
This quote from the CSO might help.

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 unemployment benefit. Unemployment is measured by the Quarterly National Household Survey, which currently stands at 82,100 (Q1 2005).
 
Exactly - my point was that if there are 160,000 on the Live Register then the chances of there being 300,000 people claiming Unemployment Benefit (and/or Assistance?), as mentioned earlier, are extremely slim especially since the number of people classified as unemployed would generally be less than the number on the Live Register.
 
ClubMan said:
Exactly - my point was that if there are 160,000 on the Live Register then the chances of there being 300,000 people claiming Unemployment Benefit (and/or Assistance?), as mentioned earlier, are extremely slim especially since the number of people classified as unemployed would generally be less than the number on the Live Register.
Click to expand...

i wish I could find the fecking paper....brennan defo. made reference to 300k people in some context of it saying 300k getting benefits while there are 100k work visas needed examintion.

By the way...GO ON CORK CITY FC
 
Are you thinking of the issue raised in the papers (in the last few days) saying that there are 250,000 - 300,000 too many on the electoral register?

There was an article with Joe "Iodine" Jacob, where he said that the number of eligible voters is around 2.6 million, whereas there are many more on the electoral register.

Imperator
 
Imperator said:
Are you thinking of the issue raised in the papers (in the last few days) saying that there are 250,000 - 300,000 too many on the electoral register?

There was an article with Joe "Iodine" Jacob, where he said that the number of eligible voters is around 2.6 million, whereas there are many more on the electoral register.

Imperator
Click to expand...

Nope. aware of that story as well...this was a interview with Brennan in the Examiner I think.
 
So nobody knows where this 300,000 figure came from or what it relates to? Oh well - don't let the facts get in the way of a good (populist) story...
 
The remaining 144,000 or so are required to be capable of work in order to sign on the Register.
Click to expand...

Isn't this the number of people who'll get into heaven according to the Jehova's Witnesses?

I would suggest that many unemployed people don't actually want to work, because they'll lose too much if they get a (maybe minimum wage) job. The Immigrants on the other hand, want to work.
 
umop3p!sdn said:
I would suggest that many unemployed people don't actually want to work, because they'll lose too much if they get a (maybe minimum wage) job. The Immigrants on the other hand, want to work.
Click to expand...
If you're going to suggest this then it might be an idea to back it up with factual evidence. Otherwise some people might just assume that it's simply based on your own prejudices.
 
tada... it was the [broken link removed] and it was 30k not 300k :p
I 100% stand over the fact that brennan made a mention of a figure of 300k in relation to the story.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top