Search results

already gave the stats above that show most jobs a part time and majority of new jobs are in construction and professional. the stats are out there, so feel free to show how jobs arent good enough by your arbitary measure, which probably didnt exist for alot of people in the 60's either (when...

hardly selective, its basic data behind the headline stats. the objection i have is with the notion that all the new jobs are low pay, part-time jobs. which some people seem to think dont count as jobs.

when politicans talk about the employment and unemployment numbers, they are talking about the of the whole nation, not any demographical group. thats really point of my objection, those complaining are implying its only representive of a subset of data, without anything to back up or define...

income tax reciepts are going up, but so is cost of the outgoings. i though we all understood this, and many want the spending to be more?

so you're saying this representitive of all jobs available? you can provide the figures to support this, or using an example of a single visible group without any further research to back up the assertion?

i dont know why you suppose that this would benefit an employer either. there might be some small saving in NI at very low hours, but for this sort of level it would be an extra administrative cost to employ two people at half the hours each. anyone have actual numbers to back up the premise...