Here we go again, our leaders would have us believe that we are experiencing one of the best times for employment and that our job numbers are just dandy.

Well what a load I say.

Just how many of these workers are experiencing 'under employment'?

How many jobs have been created (at our expense) fixing the 'stuff ups' labor has created?

Finally, if things are so 'dandy', why are so many stressed and living on the edge?

More importantly, how on earth are we going to cope if the tide does turn?

I think it's high time we redefine the way jobs are counted so there is at least some 'real truth' in the numbers.

Rechtub in all probability you are not a bad bloke.
You how ever run of in wrong directions armed with the wrong information more than not.
5% is considered nearly as close to full employment as we get.
I do not agree but it is excepted, conservatives, financial experts, both sides say any less is likely to bring wage hike pressures.
Now fixing Labors mess, fun stuff not unexpected but this is true.
We have a two speed economy, mining is dragging on the ability of trades employers to find staff.
This will now see,with out doubt more 457 imported workers to rebuild areas hit by fire storm and flood.
I know of no massive unemployment in areas other than those hit by this crisis do you?

Belly, my point is that in the way that employment numbers are calculated.

In any normal situation, where there are less than 5% unemployed, one would expect those 95% would have cash spilling from their wallets, but they don't!

It is yet another useful tool governments (from both sides) use to talk the talk.

Now as for high unemployment numbers, Cains, Whitsundays, in fact, pretty much any tourist destination is experiencing crippling unemployment, even before the floods/cyclone etc.

In fact, North qld tourism is on its knees, it's just that that info has not really surfaced yet. Of cause, as usual, the natural disasters will be blamed. How very convenient!

Rechtub I understood on first reading your point,actually agree with the part about hours needed to work.
It was introduced to hide unemployment numbers, in far worse times than now.
We can not use Islands[no pun intended] of high unemployment as a rule of nation wide situation.
Work exists if you are prepared to move to find it.
Many jump in about here and say why should I move.
I did often, and at times it hurt, lost Friends and lifestyle.
I think, no red neck here, it is past time for reform in welfare,unemployment payments.
Not army like regimentation but we can do far better job refugees exist.
Some can benefit by training others by relocating.
If someone knows how to contribute the long term unemployment numbers here it would be good.
But a measure of our failure not a jobs crisis.

One way to approach things would be to stop punishing people for working. What I mean is, many choose not to work, or, work less in order to get the welfare payments.

So, what about if they received the welfare for their family on top of their wages. The additional taxes generated should go towards off setting the welfare, BUT, this must also only come in if welfare becomes strictly for essentials only, NO CASH!

If you want the nice things in life, get a job!

It's the same method of calculating employment figures that was use during the Howard era but in those days it was seen as an indication of a strong economy and good government.

Now it's Labor in power and with the numbers looking even better, it's suddenly become a problem?

Actually, I think we should be aiming for about 50% unemployment.
Back in the Menzies era, 4% to 5% unemployment was considered to be fairly ideal; small enough to be affordable, large enough to keep the employed from getting too cocky.
But remember this was almost entirely MALE employment.
The one bread winner economy meant families had a safety net; if the main breadwinner got sick/disabled/died, there was at least a chance of the partner picking up the reins. It also meant singles could still afford to buy a home.
Working couples have now bid up the price of houses to the point where it is a very rare single indeed who can afford to buy a home, and average couples can't afford to get sick.
Technological progress, computers, ATM's, self service... by rights we should be working less, not more.
Instead of requiring 40-45 hours work a week to raise a family, now it requires 80-100 hours a week.
We are going backwards.

To me, the statement from the *Business Council* today, as published by ABC OnLine:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3137847.htm

is indicative of the fact that they are not being sufficiently driven to perform at the level of best international practice. The reason I say this is that in some instances, the "Disability Support Pension" is clearly wholly inadequate.

Case in Point:

Australian Citizen AND *Veteran* of the Iraq War, young guy in his 20's, mentally crashed and burned under load, possible schizoid disorder, dumped in the Fremantle Alma Street Public Mental Health facility wherein his parent(s) were recently requested to authorise the use of *Clozapine.*

.. he "may" be in their now, locked up inside himSelf, surrounded by the worst aspects of his own nature considerably amplified, presenting constantly in his own conscious waking state as if it is a hostile foreign force, courtesy of the auditory and visual hallucinations in conjunction with the "errors of reference" and paranoia that have now beset him.

Indeed, a veritable distinct *Plane of the Abyss* wherein the Hellishness of the Battle Fields of Iraq have yet to relinquish him.

This one has yet to truly come home.

...

No private solution for this *Veteran* though it seems. As after all, by granting the relevant medics the right to make up their own fees, they have thereby effectively priced themselves out of the reach of the very people who most need them!

I.M.O. only by attempting a sustained broad spectrum therapy and treatment regime will anyone know whether this lad can be brought back to a high level of functionality.

It is a testimony to "gutlessness" that we don't hear from the so called "top brass" of the Australian military via the press about the inadequate nature of the medical support for service personal, both on and off the battle field I suspect.

..

CentreLink is largely no more than an excuse not to employ everyone (within reason) and pay them with at least a minimum independent financial security solution, which people on benefits argueably do not receive.

the butcher sez "many choose to work less to qualify for welfare payments"....

Or words to that effect.

Welfare of preferred in-groups is greater than the butcher suggests.

I am aware of one case of a qualified "professional" earning "just under" 80K, who occupies a housing commision house.

*and* the parents have substantial if not liquid assets.

People on the bones of their ass, homeless regardless of flood are still in emergency housing partly because commission housing is full and rents are at "market" rates.

anybody on "just under" 80K can afford normal rent or mortgage and the HC should start winnowing.

Rusty