Are there more people working than not working in the UK?
Discussion
There are about 62 million people in the UK, 12 million are under 16, 14 million are retired leaving 36 million of 'working age' 3 million of them are unemployed and actively seeking work leaving you with 33 million - so not far off 50% or so.
I'd bet if you factor in housewives/husbands (I know they work, but for the purpose of this they don't count as they don't have a contracted job as such) people who are disabled, people of independent means and the homeless the balance would dip just below 50%
As for how many people you see about between 9-5 you have to consider of course not everyone works 'office hours' and how many people work part-time these days (through choice or not) and that most people in the UK get 6 weeks ish leave to take every year - that's over 10% of your year you can be off-work if you want.
I'd bet if you factor in housewives/husbands (I know they work, but for the purpose of this they don't count as they don't have a contracted job as such) people who are disabled, people of independent means and the homeless the balance would dip just below 50%
As for how many people you see about between 9-5 you have to consider of course not everyone works 'office hours' and how many people work part-time these days (through choice or not) and that most people in the UK get 6 weeks ish leave to take every year - that's over 10% of your year you can be off-work if you want.
Edited by P-Jay on Friday 12th September 16:59
From the 33M, you need to remove the 6 or 7M public sector workers, the minimum wage who get topped up with benefits etc and pretty soon you see the problem.
Less than 25% of the country are paying their own way, and less than 10% of it are paying for everyone else. The number in private sector employment needs to be increased while reducing the cost of the others, or the books will never balance.
Less than 25% of the country are paying their own way, and less than 10% of it are paying for everyone else. The number in private sector employment needs to be increased while reducing the cost of the others, or the books will never balance.
i heard a shocking soundbite discussed as part of scottish independence that 60% of Scots are on benefits. Completely misleading as precisely the same proportion of the rest of the UK is too, but still it's a fking ridiculous number. Doesn't quite relate to the unemployment rates, and clearly 'benefits' covers a number of different aspects.
Many, many people "on benefits" are also receiving a wage - legally. "On benefits" does not mean a person is not actually working and receiving earned income.
Also, does the "60%" figure include people receiving state pension? Are you implying that those who have worked hard all their lives are NOT entitled to state support in old age? After all, they most probably will only receive a fraction of what they contributed in their working lives.
Also, does the "60%" figure include people receiving state pension? Are you implying that those who have worked hard all their lives are NOT entitled to state support in old age? After all, they most probably will only receive a fraction of what they contributed in their working lives.
P-Jay said:
As for how many people you see about between 9-5 you have to consider of course not everyone works 'office hours' and how many people work part-time these days (through choice or not) and that most people in the UK get 6 weeks ish leave to take every year - that's over 10% of your year you can be off-work if you want.
Good points there.Like the OP, when I have a rare day off and walk around a city centre during 'office hours' I am always amazed at the hoards of people and I always wonder why they aren't all at work!
Blown2CV said:
i heard a shocking soundbite discussed as part of scottish independence that 60% of Scots are on benefits. Completely misleading as precisely the same proportion of the rest of the UK is too, but still it's a fking ridiculous number. Doesn't quite relate to the unemployment rates, and clearly 'benefits' covers a number of different aspects.
Is it a ridiculous number? Presumably everyone with a child under 16 counts, to start with. Eric Mc said:
Many, many people "on benefits" are also receiving a wage - legally. "On benefits" does not mean a person is not actually working and receiving earned income.
Also, does the "60%" figure include people receiving state pension? Are you implying that those who have worked hard all their lives are NOT entitled to state support in old age? After all, they most probably will only receive a fraction of what they contributed in their working lives.
does the 'on benefits' figure include people who recieve Child benefit ( so basically anyone witha child under school leaving age apart from the top few percent), working families tax credits - especially those with several offspring , plus of course the state pensions and people who get DLA/PIP regardless of their work status (as DLA/PIP is none means tested - if you are ill / disabled enough you get it - i don;t know if the likes of Frank Williams and Stephen Hawking do claim but they'd be eligible to get it ). Also, does the "60%" figure include people receiving state pension? Are you implying that those who have worked hard all their lives are NOT entitled to state support in old age? After all, they most probably will only receive a fraction of what they contributed in their working lives.
I see other posters have perpetuated the fallacy that public sector workers are taking from the economy - i know it;s immature and pathetic but i wonder if these people would have oteh same veiw of the public sectyor fater being involved in an RTC which caused them serious , life changing , injuries and their survivial depended on at least 3 of the emergency services, their recovery was result of the world class trauam and specialist rehab services the NHS has - far far better than the services the average US American has access to ...
bingybongy said:
So 6 or 7 million public employees don't count as being at work?
I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
I'm pretty sure, they were not devaluing the work your wife does. Just that from a purely income making prospect for the UK income, it does not generate wealth. I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
bingybongy said:
So 6 or 7 million public employees don't count as being at work?
I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
Of the 30 million who work, only about half of those are full time. Of the 15 million in full time employment, half of those are public sector (like your wife). The problem with public sector jobs is that they are paid from the tax pot, then they themselves pay tax and the money gets churned around. Full time private sector jobs make up about 10% of the UK population, which is why we are in so much debt.I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
Cemesis said:
bingybongy said:
So 6 or 7 million public employees don't count as being at work?
I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
Of the 30 million who work, only about half of those are full time. Of the 15 million in full time employment, half of those are public sector (like your wife). The problem with public sector jobs is that they are paid from the tax pot, then they themselves pay tax and the money gets churned around. Full time private sector jobs make up about 10% of the UK population, which is why we are in so much debt.I'll let my wife know the 10 hours a day she spends in the hospital aren't work.
Eric Mc said:
Studio117 said:
The problem with most public sector jobs is the lack of consequences and culpability for major cockups. Missed a deadline? Oh well...
Tell that to the squaddie in Afghanistan who misses a target.Not that I'd admit such a thing to my brother, obviously.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff