2 ms·

>highest employment in more than 15 years Sorry, but knowing the way many countries count unemployment, that doesn't mean shit. In my country, you're only part

>highest employment in more than 15 years Sorry, but knowing the way many countries count unemployment, that doesn't mean shit. In my country, you're only part of the unemployment statistics if you receive unemployment benefits and only that. If you're taking a paid course by the unemployment office, like learning the local language so you can get a job later, or just not working without receiving unemployment benefits because you're not entitled to them, or if you're a refugee who can't work, or homeless, or some of the other dozens of cases where you still get money from the government but not working, you're not counted as part of the official unemployment statistics even though you don't have a job and you're not contributing to the local economy in any way. Knowing this, low unemployment numbers mean little to me, especially when housing and living costs are at an all time high while wages are stagnating. > In the meantime inflation is actually very good for public finances and is healthily impacting the inflated asset prices which is nice Excuse me but how is this high inflation good for public finances and inflated assets? Where I live, I and most of the population, saw a massive increase in cost of living (that's why the people with shopping carts protesting in the article), with 30% to 100% increase in everyday prices like groceries and bills, while my salary increase by less than 4% (and I work in tech, others got even less), while rent and asset prices like real estate have proven to be inflation-proof, even beating inflation and rising above what inflation could erode from them. So what personal advantage did I miss from this, as my bank account is not seeing it, and a lot of Europeans around me are having too much month left at the end of their salaries.

_djo_ 4y ago
> Sorry, but knowing the way many countries count unemployment, that doesn't mean shit. In my country, you're only part of the unemployment statistics if you receive unemployment benefits and only that. There are standardised ways to measure unemployment and all major countries provide the necessary data to measure them in a comparable way, even if they might choose to highlight different measurement types. So when the OECD reports on unemployment rates they do so in a harmonised way that uses the same definition for all. e.g. https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rate.htm https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rate.htm Another example is that Eurostat defines actively working as having at least one hour of work a week, just in order to create a useful basis for comparison. The Netherlands defines it as at least 12 hours a week, so the commonly published Dutch number will be different than the Eurostat one. It doesn't matter though because the underlying data is still available for a direct comparison.

_djo_ 4y ago

> Sorry, but knowing the way many countries count unemployment, that doesn't mean shit. In my country, you're only part of the unemployment statistics if you receive unemployment benefits and only that. There are standardised ways to measure unemployment and all major countries provide the necessary data to measure them in a comparable way, even if they might choose to highlight different measurement types. So when the OECD reports on unemployment rates they do so in a harmonised way that uses the same definition for all. e.g. https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rate.htm https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rate.htm Another example is that Eurostat defines actively working as having at least one hour of work a week, just in order to create a useful basis for comparison. The Netherlands defines it as at least 12 hours a week, so the commonly published Dutch number will be different than the Eurostat one. It doesn't matter though because the underlying data is still available for a direct comparison.