Fact checking the claims of Ben Bradley and Ann Widdecombe on #PoliticsLive.
1/ Most of the unemployed have been unemployed for less than 6 months. Longer-term unemployment is much lower. ons.gov.uk/employmentandl… Image
The data underlying the chart above show that in Jan-Mar 2023 about 300,000 people had been unemployed for longer than 12 months, and just under 170,000 people had been unemployed for 6-12 months.
That's less than 500,000 people who are potentially available to fill agricultural jobs. And that's before we look at the reasons why they are unemployed, whether they are capable of doing those jobs and whether training would make any difference to their ability.
I'm excluding the shorter-term unemployed because with overall unemployment as low as it currently is (only 3.9%), the vast majority of these will find jobs. They don't need retraining or directing into shortage industries.
A healthy labour market always has some short-term unemployment (remember that unemployment is defined as "looking for work", not claiming unemployment benefits). It's normal "churn".
It's the long-term unemployed we need to be concerned about. And solving their problems really isn't as simple as retraining them as fruit pickers. If only it were.
As for Bradley's claim that 2 million economically active could be brought into the workforce to do shortage jobs such as fruit picking, I'm afraid this is pie in the sky. This is economic activity broken down by age, from the ONS publication above: Economic activity by age gr...
The chart shows that young people (16-24) have largely moved out of economic activity into employment. The ONS says these are mostly students getting jobs. There are few economically inactive young people now.
And here are the reasons why people of working age are economically inactive. By far the largest proportion are long-term sick. How on earth is retraining them going to enable them to take physically demanding jobs like fruit picking? They need healthcare, not training. Image
Bradley and Widdecombe haven't done even basic research into unemployment and economic activity. They don't know the statistics and they are proposing dangerously simplistic solutions to an extremely complex problem. They need retraining!
unroll please @threadreaderapp

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Frances 'Cassandra' Coppola

Frances 'Cassandra' Coppola Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Frances_Coppola

May 16
Danny Kruger on solving the housing crisis: "Housing owned in trust for local people, so every town and village can build the housing it needs and get the benefit of it themselves."
No-one is ever to move away from their town or village of origin.
"An economy built around the household means jobs that are well paid – enough for a full time or two part time salaries to support a family. Where jobs are close to home."
All jobs must be local. Employers must organise themselves round the location of households.
Really surprised to hear this from a supposed free-market Conservative. This could be a radical left-wing agenda.
Read 6 tweets
May 15
I read a piece yesterday saying that Braverman's views on immigration were very influenced by Rhodes Boyson. I remember Rhodes Boyson - my parents were impressed by him, though I can't say I was. He was fiercely anti-immigration.
But that was in the late 1970s/early 1980s, when UK unemployment was far higher than it is now. There is a reasonable argument that when unemployment is high, restricting immigration can be a sensible measure. But we now have the lowest unemployment since the early 1970s.
We have a structural shortage of labour because of an ageing population and falling birth rate. We need immigration because there simply aren't enough people to do all the jobs the economy creates.
Read 5 tweets
May 3
Borrowing short and lending long is the business of banking. Too many talking heads don't know what banking is.
The guy I blocked earlier for being insufferably rude didn't know what banking is. He talked about "layer 2" and "layer 3", and mentioned e-money licenses. These terms pertain to payments, not banking. They are relevant for payment processing companies, but not for banks.
I often see ppl conflating payment processing with banking and asset management with banking. Banks do both of these, but neither is "the business of banking". The business of banking is borrowing at a low interest rate, lending at a higher rate, and profiting from the spread.
Read 5 tweets
May 2
The question is not whether "Operation Chokepoint 2.0" is real, but whether it is justified. In this piece (which starts by looking at the seizure of Signature Bank NY), I argue that it is. coppolacomment.com/2023/03/what-r…
In the past year, every one of the risks and abuses that the Fed, FDIC and OCC list in their January statement has been evident in the crypto world. And as a result, many people have lost money they could ill afford. List of crypto risks and ab...
It is hard to see that regulatory action intended to protect people from such behaviour is unreasonable. And it is therefore also hard to see why such action should be seen as an unfair and illegal conspiracy against legitimate businesses.
Read 10 tweets
May 1
"Driven by advances in digital banking and the rapid spread of information and rumors through social media, Signature experienced a runoff of $18.6 billion in deposits in a matter of hours, reducing the Bank’s deposit base by 20 percent in one day." dfs.ny.gov/system/files/d…
I wonder if the Operation Chokepoint 2.0 geniuses are going to claim this run never happened and the DFS is making up a story to justify its seizure of SBNY?
"The Bank needed an emergency loan from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (“FRBNY”) late that night to close a cash deficit of nearly $4 billion..."
Emergency liquidity assistance is expensive. Especially if it replaces deposits on which you were paying no interest.
Read 17 tweets
May 1
"While the Bank grew steadily from its founding, growth accelerated significantly between 2019 and 2021. Over that time, Signature’s total assets more than doubled, growing from $51 billion at the end of 2019 to $74 billion in 2020 and $118 billion at the end of 2021..."
SVB and Silvergate similarly grew very fast at this time. I suspect we will find FRC did too.
Imho extremely rapid growth should be a red flag for regulators.
And I'm afraid it also calls into question the Fed's competence. Exponential growth of uninsured deposits, along with all manner of stupid investments, was an inevitable consequence of massive QE during the pandemic. The risks should have been foreseen and managed. They weren't.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(