Live Register For March

[Thac0man]

Has anyone posted this yet? Apologies if they have:
RTÉ News: Live Register climbs by another 20,000

20,000. I suspose the most worrying thing is we have not hit a real decline in the amount signing on each month. Cowans dire predictions about the end unemployment rate seem to be spot on, about the only figure the government has given that seems to actually be accurate. Worryingly though he made the predictions before the revised tax take estimates and the subsequent downward correction.

[Seos]

As an example

say the figure for feb is 50,000 and the fig for march is 55,000, so the difference is 5,000.

Then the natural log (ln on calculator, excel can do it too) is 10.81977828 and 10.91508846. So the log difference is .0953, which is almost 10% (the log difference is not "ln 5000 = 8.517", thats the log of the difference). Using the log difference rather than calculating actual percentage changes is a little inaccurate, but more than good enough for your fancy graphs

right here you go:

[Dios]

The corner is being turned.

No, its not. This is the first wave, myself and a few others predicted that the redundancies would be front loaded, since you let people go while you still have some money, not when you are stony broke. These are the "demand will probably drop" unemployment rates. When demand actually does drop and hit home, we'll see a second wave. Until then we're in the long tail, which is just as damaging, but not as headline worthy.

[Eorna]

The accepted definition of a recession is two quartely contractions. Nobody contests that. I'll start to get annoyed when people say we are in a depression however.

However saying crash rather than slump sells more papers. Maybe 40% over two months is too strict. However part of the problem has been the focus on house prices. The real crash was in the number of people employed in construction and the number of house starts.

Whether this is called the great crash, the longest recession, or a new depression, is only semantics. We'll meet two of the widely accepted definitions of depressions 1). if you define it as a drop of more that 10% from peak to trough, in all likelihood we'll have a drop of between 15-20% from peak to trough. 2). A stark de-leveraging across all sectors of the economy. Who can dispute that.

We will have many years before we return to any meaningful growth (above 1%). Do you honestly believe that this recession will be over next year, and if so why.

[Seos]

right here you go:

Crap, the column that says log differences is actually log differences multiplied by 100 to get percentages, this is also what are in the graph.

No, its not. This is the first wave, myself and a few others predicted that the redundancies would be front loaded, since you let people go while you still have some money, not when you are stony broke. These are the "demand will probably drop" unemployment rates. When demand actually does drop and hit home, we'll see a second wave. Until then we're in the long tail, which is just as damaging, but not as headline worthy.

As the first Premier of the people's republic of China said when asked about the French revolution being good or bad: "It's too soon to say".

[BodyofEvidence]

For the second graph I think showing log differences would be better (so as to get percentage changes).

see the property pin for this very discussuin....

[Factorem]

see the property pin for this very discussuin....

Pack of cynical, bitter ********************ers.

They're not interested if you're not in their little make-fun-of-specuvestors clique.

[Digout]

Pack of cynical, bitter ********************ers.

They're not interested if you're not in their little make-fun-of-specuvestors clique.

what did you do over there to get banned?