Four people hunting every Blackburn and Pendle job vacancy (From Lancashire Telegraph)

That's only an average of the unemployed people applying. Throw in applications from those who are already in work and it becomes a bit more desperate, especially if we're to believe the line that "it's easier to get a job when you're in a job".

From the three interviews I've recently had the average is about 60 applicants per job.

Where did they get that figure from? 100 people applying for every job is more realistic.

I have to laugh when they say the private sector has created 1 Million jobs. I think not, How many people have gone self employed with no realistic prospects of actually earning a living? How many have simply gone on the black market, cash in hand? The sad reality is there are not enough jobs for people. The Tories have always preferred high unemployment to control the masses.

Actually an example of non use of statistics to come to an erroneous conclusion.
I quote
FOUR people are chasing every job in Blackburn with Darwen and Pendle, with another 4.9 chasing every vacancy in Hyndburn.

Does this mean 8.9 people chasing each job in Hyndburn if not the "another" is redundant and misleading

If you are going to quote statistics show the base line,

Is it no of unemployed divided by the no of vacancies, or is it the total no of applications received by job advertisers divided by the total no of jobs applied for. 2 different sets of data which would give different results,

As I said, massaged statistics to give the result wanted

I think someones telling porkies.
How is then that I have got every job I have ever applied for.

mavrick wrote:
I have to laugh when they say the private sector has created 1 Million jobs. I think not, How many people have gone self employed with no realistic prospects of actually earning a living? How many have simply gone on the black market, cash in hand? The sad reality is there are not enough jobs for people. The Tories have always preferred high unemployment to control the masses.

Are you seriously suggesting that the Tories deliberately want mass unemployment?

Whatever you say about the Tories, you can't say they are the most financially reckless. That's Labour surely. Labour are like a drunken gambling addict let loose with the UK's national finances. Why would the Tories possibly want less money coming into the UK tax coffers that mass unemployment would bring therefore? Your theory makes no sense.

Is this Labour propaganda perchance? Who thinks this junk up?

What's the alternative? More debt on our already struggling children's shoulders?

I agree with government spending on *worthwhile* projects which would improve our country as a whole. It would be better, however, if that came from savings from silly, bloated, or unnecessary spending that the public sector is unfortunately still quite awash with. Compare council spending here, amongst other public sector outlays, with abroad.

If the public sector lived in the same real world which the private sector had to financially, then there would be huge amounts to spend on housing or other worthwhile infrastructure projects. Which would see an increase employment, but each job with a visible positive impact on Britain. No disrespect but you can't say that about all public sector jobs.

The problem I have is that the world is still in a shaky state. Who knows what's going on with the EU, completely aside from Britain's decisions? Forget Greece or Portugal or Ireland. Spain would be a biggie, but it's Italy that could bring it down. Politically it's a joke there now. Literally with a comedian almost gaining power.

None of that matters if the German public decide at the polls that they are sick of bailing out lazy or corrupt EU partners.

It all means any extra debt now is risky. In a year, two years, maybe, but not now, because who knows what's still going to happen.

In the danger countries in Europe, governments are still spending too much - way more than they have coming in in tax - and so they lending more of their tax payers' future, to lend to their own banks, to borrow more off them to keep spending. It's a cycle which only has one ending currently. Crash.

It's a major problem which still hasn't been addressed. Some countries have no other option but to continue though. Otherwise they have to face the crash.

Labour want us to be one of those countries.

People were still struggling for jobs under Labour, even with the good times. And many jobs which were created were a sick joke anyway in many cases, because they were totally unsustainable. So people were given jobs, when there was no way to keep them on when financial reality bit.

Labour don't know how to spend sensibly. Unless they steal the idea off the Lib Dems of course!

Christ, that were a rant!

Jack Herer, just a reminder that public sector workers are bin men, dinner ladies, teachers, NHS nurses/healthcare workers for example who do live and look after people in the real world. The biggest winners at the moment in the public sector are the politicians who are highly paid and are allowed to claim expenses which amount to more than a years salary for me. They are cutting back for everyone else but not themselves. They do not live in the real world and i would love them to try to do my job when they are 68 years old!

This is a global recession so cant just blame labour. Australia are having the same problems as we are, no jobs, kids living at home in their 30s and 40s, shops shutting down etc,

I remember when the Tories were last in power, recession, mortgage rates were 15% and lots of people lost their homes, lessons were learned from that thankfully.

Hopefully the boom will come again post next general election and history will repeat itself.