Unemployment at current rate will reach 620,400 by end of year...

Darragh29

Right, according to the figures here:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0304/liveregister.html

Unemployment at the end of February stood at 354,400.

For the month of February, 26,600 people joined the live register.

So if we take the February figure and assume that the same rate of unemployment will continue throughout the next 10 months of the year, that suggests that 266,000 (26,600 x 10 months), people joining the dole queues between 1st March and 31st December 2009.

If we add 266,000 to 354,400 we get: 620,400...

So by the end of the year, going by the current trend, there will be 620,400 unemployed people in Ireland next Christmas...

yoshytoshy

Relax the cax ,businesses always suffer at end of year ,things always pick up in march/april.

FrankGrimes

Darragh29 wrote: »

Right, according to the figures here:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0304/liveregister.html

Unemployment at the end of February stood at 354,400.

For the month of February, 26,600 people joined the live register.

So if we take the February figure and assume that the same rate of unemployment will continue throughout the next 10 months of the year, that suggests that 266,000 (26,600 x 10 months), people joining the dole queues between 1st March and 31st December 2009.

If we add 266,000 to 354,400 we get: 620,400...

So by the end of the year, going by the current trend, there will be 620,400 unemployed people in Ireland next Christmas...

Gulp! :eek:

Yes, we all knew it was bad but it's still comes as a shock to see such harsh figures when they are announced.

One thing though, why does the RTE article say "Speaking in the Dáil, Brian Cowen said the unemployment rate at the end of last month was 10.4%.

He added that if the present rate of job loss continues, the unemployment figures could reach 450,000 by the end of the year."?

Is Cowen grossly underestimating the likley end of year total?

FrankGrimes

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Relax the cax ,businesses always suffer at end of year ,things always pick up in march/april.

Delusionville is that way

---

>

Darragh29

This government can't add or subtract...

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0304/liveregister.html

"Speaking in the Dáil, Brian Cowen said the unemployment rate at the end of last month was 10.4%.

He added that if the present rate of job loss continues, the unemployment figures could reach 450,000 by the end of the year."

If the current rate of job losses continue, the end of year figure will not be 450,000 as suggested by Cowen but will be 620,400.

Darragh29

:mad::mad::mad:

These guys are paying themselves over 300K a year and they can't even add two numbers together!

:mad::mad::mad:

yoshytoshy

FrankGrimes wrote: »

Delusionville is that way

---

>

What are you on about ,it's common knowledge that money dries up after christmas ,hence theres less money for the government to pick up.

Them figures will not continue at the rate that is mentioned ,are you seriously inviting that on the country ?

vinylbomb

FrankGrimes wrote: »

Gulp! :eek:

"Speaking in the Dáil, Brian Cowen said the unemployment rate at the end of last month was 10.4%"

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

Then numbers can be skewed any way you wish them to be. Taking the jobs loss total in February and extending that out for the year is a little disingenuous, as Feb is probably one of the worst months recently.
For example in December there were 16.300 job losses, so to push this out for the year will give a figure 33% lower than the one stated by the OP.

I'm not saying things are all good, but the numbers dont always tell the whole truth, good or bad.

Robbo

Nothing wrong with extrapolating in a straight line, seems like a sensible way of going about things...

GunScope

No wonder the country is being affected so badly with people like this in charge ..... :rolleyes: ..... a bit of planning and forecasting and realising that nothing lasts forever could have prepared the government.

shqipshume

Anyone think the re-election will happen before time? I think needs to badly

Darragh29

yoshytoshy wrote: »

What are you on about ,it's common knowledge that money dries up after christmas ,hence theres less money for the government to pick up.

Them figures will not continue at the rate that is mentioned ,are you seriously inviting that on the country ?

Let's just look at the facts and we'll see if your argument can be reconciled with the facts. See the attached screen capture from the CSO.

Last January 2008, the rate of unemployment was 4.8%.

Every single month, exception none, that rate rose, until the rate of employment at the end of the December was 8.6%.

That trend over 2008, is continuing into January and February 2009. If anything, the rate of change is increasing and not decreasing.

What also should be taken into account is that there are probably thousands and thousands of people in Ireland who have recently lost their jobs but because of the huge backlog, they are not on the system and on this basis are not included in the above figures...

Mizu_Ger

Darragh29 wrote: »

Right, according to the figures here:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0304/liveregister.html

Unemployment at the end of February stood at 354,400.

For the month of February, 26,600 people joined the live register.

So if we take the February figure and assume that the same rate of unemployment will continue throughout the next 10 months of the year, that suggests that 266,000 (26,600 x 10 months), people joining the dole queues between 1st March and 31st December 2009.

If we add 266,000 to 354,400 we get: 620,400...

So by the end of the year, going by the current trend, there will be 620,400 unemployed people in Ireland next Christmas...

You're taking one of the worst months for increase in jobless numbers and expecting every month until the end of the year to be the same. There's no reasoning or method behind that. I would assume that trends through the year would need to be taken into account (as much as they still apply) before arriving at an estimate for the number out of warok at the end of the year. Or maybe take the monthly average incerase over the last 6 months to get a better estimate.

vinylbomb

Robbo wrote: »

Nothing wrong with extrapolating in a straight line, seems like a sensible way of going about things...

You're bang on, but you need to use more than one point of information, otherwise its not linear from past to present, and then future.

mike65

Robbo wrote: »

Nothing wrong with extrapolating in a straight line, seems like a sensible way of going about things...

Nonsense tbh, at best the peaks and troughs might even themselves out but thats not a good way of making projections!

Unemployment will jump in June/July/August for example - students leaving collage etc signing on, various staff who work in the school system, the summer shutdown in business (as opposed to the general closures).

Whether we are in an apocolypse (or if things are merely really bad) will be known for sure in September.

yoshytoshy

Darragh29 wrote: »

Let's just look at the facts and we'll see if your argument can be reconciled with the facts. See the attached screen capture from the CSO.

Last January 2008, the rate of unemployment was 4.8%.

Every single month, exception none, that rate rose, until the rate of employment at the end of the December was 8.6%.

That trend over 2008, is continuing into January and February 2009. If anything, the rate of change is increasing and not decreasing.

What also should be taken into account is that there are probably thousands and thousands of people in Ireland who have recently lost their jobs but because of the huge backlog, they are not on the system and on this basis are not included in the above figures...

But this is something I've seen every year for the last fiftheen years ,honestly.
People in general don't start spending until mid march/april ,thats consistantly through the years.
What has happened this year ,is the economy is shutting shop for a while ,probably due to the fact that money is scarce.
Theres still loads of people with money and they are too scared to spend ,we need people to start spending again and putting money back into the economy.

No one has any confidence in the current government and I doubt outside investors do either.

eoinbn

Oh come on.

The rate of job loses has peaked it's going to slow. If we were having this discussion last month we would be saying that a further 401500(36500*11) would lose there jobs by the end of the year.

Darragh29

My view of this is that whatever the end of year figure turns out to be, the people who are trying to resolve this on our behalf, should provide for a worst case scenario. We can argue all day about whether the February figure for job losses of 26,600, can reasonably be applied to the next ten months of the year.

I think the more jobs that are lost, the more the fear factor operates upon the economy, the more people don't spend, and then inevitably, the more jobs are lost again as a result. I think this is called a "negative feedback loop" in economics or in the real world, a runaway train effect.

Either way, we have yet to see a credible plan to stop or even slow down this rate of job losses on a monthly basis...

Darragh29

yoshytoshy wrote: »

But this is something I've seen every year for the last fiftheen years ,honestly.
People in general don't start spending until mid march/april ,thats consistantly through the years.
What has happened this year ,is the economy is shutting shop for a while ,probably due to the fact that money is scarce.
Theres still loads of people with money and they are too scared to spend ,we need people to start spending again and putting money back into the economy.

No one has any confidence in the current government and I doubt outside investors do either.

I agree, but the logic behind your argument is that people are scared sh*tless and will remain so for as long as there is a crisis of confidence in the government. So you could argue that for as long as we have this government, we are stuck with this monthly rate of job losses...

Mizu_Ger

Darragh29 wrote: »

I think the more jobs that are lost, the more the fear factor operates upon the economy, the more people don't spend, and then inevitably, the more jobs are lost again as a result. I think this is called a "negative feedback loop" in economics or in the real world, a runaway train effect.

I think that you are part of the "fear factor" and "negative feedback loop" with threads like this. Things are obviusly bad, but you can't just throw out numbers without any real basis behind them.

Robbo

mike65 wrote: »

Nonsense tbh, at best the peaks and troughs might even themselves out but thats not a good way of making projections!

I didn't sprinkle the sarcasm heavily enough over my original post.

OP, the methodology you've used to predict unemployment rates is quite wrong. I suggest you read Huff's seminal work on statistics.

yoshytoshy

Darragh29 wrote: »

I agree, but the logic behind your argument is that people are scared sh*tless and will remain so for as long as there is a crisis of confidence in the government. So you could argue that for as long as we have this government, we are stuck with this monthly rate of job losses...

Joblosses at the rate mentioned are not realistic ,you will find what we are left with are long standing Irish business and companies with good ties with ireland.

You'll always have companies running at the first sign of trouble ,I'd like to see the percentage figures for the remaining businesses and their interest in ireland.

vinylbomb

Mizu_Ger wrote: »

I think that you are part of the "fear factor" and "negative feedback loop" with threads like this. Things are obviusly bad, but you can't just throw out numbers without any real basis behind them.

The numbers have been shocking over the last few months, but I think that the "backlog" that was spoken of is what has just piled through the system, and badly skewed the stats.

In all honesty, every dog and their owner should have known this was coming.

One stat tells the whole story.

In normal developed Western economies, the percentage of the workforce employ in the construction industry is about 8%

At the end of 2007, in Ireland it was 21%



To me that says it all.

Darragh29

Mizu_Ger wrote: »

I think that you are part of the "fear factor" and "negative feedback loop" with threads like this. Things are obviusly bad, but you can't just throw out numbers without any real basis behind them.

I'm just making the point that the man who is running the country is simply INCORRECT When he states that IF the current rate of job losses for February were to continue throughout the year, that this would mean that only 450,000 people would be out of work by the end of the year. This is simple 4th class maths, if you can't understand it, grand, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation.

Every single forecast this government has issued over the last 18 months has been very wide off the mark. Last week we had the Taniste saying that the public finances were "now under control". Not seven days have passed and it emerges that in fact the public finances are even deeper and further down the toilet than we had previously been led to believe last week by the Tanaiste, (that the public finances were now under control).

You have to stand back and ask yourself what in the name of Jasus is going on here...

mike65

Robbo wrote: »

I didn't sprinkle the sarcasm heavily enough over my original post.

I'll be honest, I did wonder as it was you but then thought nah, Robbo is a thicko this morning! :pac:

vinylbomb

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'm just making the point that the man who is running the country is simply INCORRECT When he states that IF the current rate of job losses for February were to continue throughout the year,

He didnt say that. He said if the current rate of job losses continue.......

As far as I can tell you put the February in there, and derived the figures from that.

Caoimhín

mike65 wrote: »

Whether we are in an apocolypse (or if things are merely really bad) will be known for sure in September.

Im willing to bet on the former right now Mike.

Darragh29

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Joblosses at the rate mentioned are not realistic ,you will find what we are left with are long standing Irish business and companies with good ties with ireland.

You'll always have companies running at the first sign of trouble ,I'd like to see the percentage figures for the remaining businesses and their interest in ireland.

I'm talking to lads I know running businesses who have survived the 70's and the 80's, and are now either closing their businesses down or else letting people go.

yoshytoshy

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'm talking to lads I know running businesses who have survived the 70's and the 80's, and are now either closing their businesses down or else letting people go.

Theres no denying the mess thats left with us ,because of the way things were run.
The economy always follows the easiest route ,we've had our chunk of it and now its passed on to eastern europe.

Fianna fail have a lot to answer for ,hopefully they'll have plenty of time to do it ,soon enough.:)

Darragh29

vinylbomb wrote: »

He didnt say that. He said if the current rate of job losses continue.......

As far as I can tell you put the February in there, and derived the figures from that.

He said this in the context of discussing the February unemployment figures ffs.

vinylbomb

Darragh29 wrote: »

He said this in the context of discussing the February unemployment figures ffs.

Ah come on.
You cant just pick one set of figures and leave it at that!!
Sure if he compared them against the stats in January there would have been a 30% drop in the unemployment figures!!

Darragh29

vinylbomb wrote: »

Ah come on.
You cant just pick one set of figures and leave it at that!!
Sure if he compared them against the figures in January there would have been a 30% drop in the figures!!

The reason the January figures were so high is obvious. A load of people were let go in January as their employers didn't want to let them go just before Christmas last year. To say that the picture is much rosier now because the February figures are down on the January figures is to miss the point completely.

AlekSmart

MInd you it`s not all bleak.....Opportunities for Statisticians and Analysts are increasing exponentially as more people need the figgers figgered out for them....:)

Mizu_Ger

I think the problem is that we all know things are bad. I don't know much about economics, but taking 1 or 2 months data and using that as a basis for determining the rate of unemployment for the whole year just isn't right. If economics was that simple we'd all be experts and simplifying to this extent doesn't help when trying to fix things either.

vinylbomb

Mizu_Ger wrote: »

taking 1 or 2 months data and using that as a basis for determining the rate of unemployment for the whole year just isn't right.

+1

My point exactly

Darragh29

Mizu_Ger wrote: »

I think the problem is that we all know things are bad. I don't know much about economics, but taking 1 or 2 months data and using that as a basis for determining the rate of unemployment for the whole year just isn't right. If economics was that simple we'd all be experts and simplifying to this extent doesn't help when trying to fix things either.

Well whatever convoluted way they are using at the moment isn't working because every single forecast they have issued in the last 2 years has been subsequently thrown out the window in its entirety.

vinylbomb

vinylbomb wrote: »

In normal developed Western economies, the percentage of the workforce employ in the construction industry is about 8%

At the end of 2007, in Ireland it was 21%

Darragh29 wrote: »

The reason the January figures were so high is obvious.

Righto. But then by that logic, if you read the quote here, all the other job losses were expected at some stage too once the building boom ended....................

vinylbomb

Darragh29 wrote: »

Well whatever convoluted way they are using at the moment isn't working because every single forecast they have issued in the last 2 years has been subsequently thrown out the window in its entirety.

So has every single forecast ever made. As will be yours!

Its an indicator of the future based on past figures, unless you're the Doc and Marty Mc Fly you wont know precisely what will happen ..............

nhughes100

I think the phrase you are looking for is seasonally adjusted. I would accept that 400-450 thousand could be on the dole by the end of the year which is a bad enough situation but people are going to emmigrate, immigrants are going to leave, the hospitality industry always lets a lot of casual workers go after Christmas but will take on again during the Summer. Don't forget this could be skewed again by people signing on for 2 days a week who are on 3 day weeks, shortened hours etc.

Darragh29

vinylbomb wrote: »

So has every single forecast ever made. As will be yours!

Its an indicator of the future based on past figures, unless you're the Doc and Marty Mc Fly you wont know precisely what will happen ..............

Forecasting isn't about knowing "exactly what will happen". It is about coming up with a somewhat reasonable picture of what could be expected to occur in the future, based on looking at what has historically happened in the past.

vinylbomb

vinylbomb wrote: »

Its an indicator of the future based on past figures

Darragh29 wrote: »

It is about coming up with a somewhat reasonable picture of what could be expected to occur in the future, based on looking at what has historically happened in the past.

I believe thats almost exactly what I've said previously.

You appear to be trashing Cowen for doing exactly what you have asked for.

You said you wanted a worst-case scenario presented, thats not a reasonable picture by any standards.

He's presenting the figures as they are. Not a doomsday scenario, but an adjusted figure, to account for other factors as were mentioned by a previous poster.

Darragh29

vinylbomb wrote: »

I believe thats almost exactly what I've said previously.

You appear to be trashing Cowen for doing exactly what you have asked for.

You said you wanted a worst-case scenario presented, thats not a reasonable picture by any standards.

He's presenting the figures as they are. Not a doomsday scenario, but an adjusted figure, to account for other factors as were mentioned by a previous poster.

Well here's what I'm saying. We'll revisit this thead at the end of the year and we'll see what figure was more representative of the situation, the 450,000 figure or the 620,000 figure.

Only 6 months ago, the notion that unemployment would go through 10% was laughed at. According to everyone, it just couldn't happen.

vinylbomb

Grand, lets do that.

If only to prove that some stats are better than other stats, but not all stats

Daithinski

nhughes100 wrote: »

... but people are going to emmigrate, ...

It would appear that alot of the ones who left for Australia are now on their way back here (to the dole). As the Australian economy contracts the first ones to be let go are recent foreign immigrants. ie a whole bunch of Irish.

Its hard to know what impact this will have on the dole figures but it certainly won't help.

The immigrants who are here, who will be leaving will NOT help the irish jobless situation as they are leaving because they have no job.

Although it might mean less dole payments for the government to give out but it won't create any jobs.

When a jobless immigrant leaves, it will not create a job for anybody else.
Probably the opposite. Presumably they are buying stuff / renting etc when they are here, (keeping people in work).

The true jobless figure will more likely be between Cowens 450k (the government has underestimated everything so far, so you can bet this is too) and the 620k the OP said. Around 550k maybe?

Do the government figures include all the "self employed" unemployed (self un-employed?) that are getting a payment from the HSE rather than directly through social welfare?

If not, then the actual unemployed might already be at the 450k mark. If this is the case the figure of 620k might not be too far off the mark. Who knows?

vinylbomb

Daithinski wrote: »

Who knows?

Well, you've hedged your bets fairly effectively there, in a fantastic display of fence-sitting!;)

I'm joking dude.

IMHO worst case scenario you're looking at about 515-520k on the dole.
If it goes beyond that the country would be ruined financially.

Probable scenario is between 450-480k

Highsider

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Relax the cax ,businesses always suffer at end of year ,things always pick up in march/april.

Mr. Cowen what you doing on boards?

vinylbomb

Daithinski wrote: »

When a jobless immigrant leaves, it will not create a job for anybody else.
Probably the opposite. Presumably they are buying stuff / renting etc when they are here, (keeping people in work).

But when a jobless immigrant (that is on the dole, the point of the stats we are arguing) leaves it is one person less on the dole, hence the figures will come down as the Polish etc bolt off home. I read a report that there is something like 2000 a week forecast to leave across the year.

Daithinski wrote: »

Do the government figures include all the "self employed" unemployed (self un-employed?) that are getting a payment from the HSE rather than directly through social welfare?

I don't know, but I would have thought that if they currently don't, why would they int he future?

yoshytoshy

Highsider wrote: »

Mr. Cowen what you doing on boards?

If only I had his money ,I could buy a tank and get them out of the dail;)

Highsider

For what it's worth driving around this morning listening to the radio several economists on newstalk said they all expect the jobles total by years end to reach well over 550,000. They said the only thing that will stop this is mass emigration which is likely to only kick in September onwards. Imo i'd tend to agree and can see 600,000+ on the live register by January 2010 .

vinylbomb

Highsider wrote: »

They said the only thing that will stop this is mass emigration

This will have to happen anyway IMO, due to the numbers that were working in construction that will have to either re-skill or leave, I'd imagine most will leave.

Darragh29

Daithinski wrote: »

The true jobless figure will more likely be between Cowens 450k (the government has underestimated everything so far, so you can bet this is too) and the 620k the OP said. Around 550k maybe?

I think we will be extremely lucky if at the end of the year, the number of people out of work starts with a 6.

What people here don't seem to get is that these jobs that are being lost, there is no chance of them being replaced in the short term. Also, the outlook on several fronts is just not good at all.

I get the impression that some people here think that we are on the way out of this now and the worst is behind us and give it another 6 months and we'll be grand. The truth is that we are not even into this yet, the most optimistic folks I know who are running their own businesses are looking around saying, "I don't know what is going on here but I don't like the look of it one bit".

The government simply don't have a handle on this. They have no strategy to stop jobs being lost and even less of a strategy to create new jobs. Whatever chances they had of developing one, they are being overtaken now by exchequer returns and are now dealing with a budget as a priority which is a reactive instrument to a worsening financial problem.