Unemployment is much higher among young people

Mr Bump

Mr Bump

From under the bridge
Messages
10,944
Name
Sophia aka Paul
Edit My Images
Yes

Unemployment is much higher among young people​

Worrying Trend ...

1771332180161.png
 
Yes, the current government’s growth plans are going well :(
 
For some time it has been reported that GenZ or whatever they are called are swelling the ranks of those not in work nor looking for it. I think a lot of them are making a living from a combination of influencing on social media, buying and selling on auction and second hand sites, and avoiding attracting attention by not claiming benefits. Some may also be legitimately running cottage industry type businesses. These stats are too broad-brush to tell us much, as the nature of employment has changed in the last 20 or so years.
 
Well, this is an interesting and worrying statistic.

  • Total estimated vacancies were down by 69,000 (8.6%) in October to December 2025 from the level of a year ago, decreasing in 13 of the 18 industry sectors.
  • There were 2.5 unemployed people per vacancy in September to November 2025; this is up from 2.4 in the previous quarter (June to August 2025) and up from 1.9 in September to November 2024.

Vacancies and jobs in the UK - Office for National Statistics

Estimates of the number of vacancies and jobs for the UK.
www.ons.gov.uk
 
lindsay said:
For some time it has been reported that GenZ or whatever they are called are swelling the ranks of those not in work nor looking for it. I think a lot of them are making a living from a combination of influencing on social media, buying and selling on auction and second hand sites, and avoiding attracting attention by not claiming benefits. Some may also be legitimately running cottage industry type businesses. These stats are too broad-brush to tell us much, as the nature of employment has changed in the last 20 or so years.
Click to expand...

a good amount of it also is the over 55s simply refusing to work any more.
deciding to give it up, i am not sure how many claim any benefits for being unemployed,
i fit into that category technically as well, i quite at 55 because i didn't see many benefits of paying into the system anymore once i have filled my state pension to max and also had enough in my private pension.
Tax and NI rated being so high in this country even though i feel they should be higher oddly...

  • Number of Unemployed (50-64): While the unemployment rate for this group is 3.1%, separate data indicates that around 876,000 individuals aged 50 to 64 are either actively seeking work (unemployed) or are inactive but willing to work.
 
andya700 said:
Well, this is an interesting and worrying statistic.

  • Total estimated vacancies were down by 69,000 (8.6%) in October to December 2025 from the level of a year ago, decreasing in 13 of the 18 industry sectors.
  • There were 2.5 unemployed people per vacancy in September to November 2025; this is up from 2.4 in the previous quarter (June to August 2025) and up from 1.9 in September to November 2024.

Vacancies and jobs in the UK - Office for National Statistics

Estimates of the number of vacancies and jobs for the UK.
www.ons.gov.uk
Click to expand...

it is when you think our young people are our future workforce.
i think we as a country are failing them
 
We are average for the Euro area but look at Germany?

CountryLastPreviousReferenceUnit
Japan2.43Dec/25%
Kazakhstan3.13Dec/25%
Switzerland3.23.1Jan/26%
Thailand4.85.9Sep/25%
Nigeria6.58.4Jun/24%
Germany6.86.8Dec/25%
Moldova6.88.3Sep/25%
South Korea6.86.2Jan/26%
Hong Kong7.17.6Dec/25%
United States910.4Jan/26%
Vietnam9.048.98Dec/25%
Netherlands9.29.1Dec/25%
Australia9.59.1Jan/26%
Czech Republic10.110Dec/25%
Austria10.511.2Dec/25%
Jamaica10.610.2Dec/25%
Iceland10.813.5Dec/25%
Denmark11.412.4Dec/25%
Latvia11.711.8Dec/25%
Taiwan11.7511.7Dec/25%
El Salvador11.814Dec/22%
Ireland11.811.4Jan/26%
Malta11.911.5Dec/25%
Bulgaria1212.6Dec/25%
Saudi Arabia12.410.7Sep/25%
Poland12.712.6Dec/25%
Canada12.813.3Jan/26%
Norway12.815.2Dec/25%
Cyprus12.912.9Dec/25%
Greece1315.9Dec/25%
New Zealand13.213.7Dec/25%
United Kingdom1413.7Dec/25%
Rwanda14.115.5Nov/25%
Turkey14.115.2Dec/25%
Euro Area14.314.4Dec/25%
Hungary14.413.1Dec/25%
European Union14.714.9Dec/25%
Lithuania14.713.6Dec/25%
Albania1515.1Sep/25%
Slovakia16.416.3Dec/25%
China16.516.9Dec/25%
Croatia17.217.2Dec/25%
Estonia17.317.3Dec/25%
Georgia17.521Dec/24%
France18.118.5Dec/25%
Slovenia18.218.2Dec/25%
Portugal18.418.9Dec/25%
Luxembourg18.618.8Dec/25%
Sri Lanka19.220.8Sep/25%
Finland19.520.5Dec/25%
Kosovo19.517.3Dec/24%
Belgium19.619.6Dec/25%
Iran20.219.4Dec/24%
Cape Verde20.323.9Dec/24%
Italy20.519.1Dec/25%
Sweden22.123.4Jan/26%
Serbia23.422.8Sep/25%
Spain23.423.6Dec/25%
New Caledonia25.926.2Dec/23%
Romania26.926.9Sep/25%
Morocco38.435.8Sep/25%
Palestine39.437.6Sep/25%
Angola48.752.7Sep/25%
South Africa5758.5Dec/25%
 
Last edited:
I'm married to a Thai and I nearly married a Kazakh... I think in these countries the reason for at least some of the youth unemployment is nothing to do with job vacancies and more to do with lifestyle choices particularly with young men. A look at the immigration figures and the number of foreign workers in some countries would support this. I suppose some would say the same about the UK too.
 
woof woof said:
I'm married to a Thai and I nearly married a Kazakh... I think in these countries the reason for at least some of the youth unemployment is nothing to do with job vacancies and more to do with lifestyle choices particularly with young men. A look at the immigration figures and the number of foreign workers in some countries would support this. I suppose some would say the same about the UK too.
Click to expand...

there are some odd stick out numbers in the above tho.
like sweden 22% that seems odd for such a progressive country
Italy i can understand at 20%
but japan has almost zero
 
Mr Bump said:
Tax and NI rated being so high in this country even though i feel they should be higher oddly...
Click to expand...
I don't agree that tax and NI are too high, however I do think they are too unsophsticatedly coarse. Essentially 3 bands of tax that are not very progressive. In germany there are more bands and they step up more evenly, imho, but there are more sensible allowances; in France the social security is much higher but you get more for the money (I believe). One of the standout features in my mind is that in France for example, it is the total household income that is divided by the number of people then taxed, which is fairer. In germany, there is (or was_) a more generous married person allowance, reflecting the fact of two-person households.
I think we should have a slightly higher starting point for income tax, that and NI should be merged into one income tax, but we should have more tax bands roughly 20k apart, with small increments in tax rate eg 15-20-25-30-40-45.
Also there does appear to be a problem caused by the combination of minimum wage and employers NI. Employers NI is exactly a tax on jobs, with no cap. It should be capped and should be lower.
None of the above will happen though.
 
Mr Bump said:
there are some odd stick out numbers in the above tho.
like sweden 22% that seems odd for such a progressive country
Italy i can understand at 20%
but japan has almost zero
Click to expand...

I don't like the use of "progressive" these days. Progressives politics and policies very often aren't progressive at all. A real world example of 1984 doublespeak I suppose.
 
Last edited:
lindsay said:
... but we should have more tax bands roughly 20k apart, with small increments in tax rate eg 15-20-25-30-40-45.
Click to expand...
I agree but I would like to see that progression of tax rates continue up to 90.
lindsay said:
Also there does appear to be a problem caused by the combination of minimum wage and employers NI. Employers NI is exactly a tax on jobs, with no cap. It should be capped and should be lower.
Click to expand...
On this I disagree.

Given that successive governments have refused point black to directly apportion taxes to specific purposes, they leave themselves no choice but to take money from wherever they can get it. If road tax went entirely to roads and national insurance went directly to health care and social services, I think they would find it a lot easier to justify any particular taxation.
 
The old SuperTax days of (I think) 88% tax was egregious, and drove a lot of people away rather than having to pay that. Think the Rolling Stones etc. A tax rate of upto 50% is morally tolerable; over that is an appalling idea, wealth at extreme levels should have a separate type of wealth tax where assets and income are combined for tax purposes.
Employers NI is a tax on the jobs or more precisely the ability of companies to employ people. If I have to pay 12% (or whatever it is now) to employ someone, on top of what I actually pay them before tax, it's a cost of employment. It matters not what the Govt do with that money, it's the simple fact that it is levied at all that is bad. OTOH if it were as you say, a subscription to a private health scheme, everyone would be happy.
 
Mr Bump said:
a good amount of it also is the over 55s simply refusing to work any more.
deciding to give it up, i am not sure how many claim any benefits for being unemployed,
i fit into that category technically as well, i quite at 55 because i didn't see many benefits of paying into the system anymore once i have filled my state pension to max and also had enough in my private pension.
Tax and NI rated being so high in this country even though i feel they should be higher oddly...

  • Number of Unemployed (50-64): While the unemployment rate for this group is 3.1%, separate data indicates that around 876,000 individuals aged 50 to 64 are either actively seeking work (unemployed) or are inactive but willing to work.
Click to expand...

So do you count as unemployed in the figs?
 
lindsay said:
The old SuperTax days of (I think) 88% tax was egregious, and drove a lot of people away rather than having to pay that.
Click to expand...
We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
lindsay said:
OTOH if it were as you say, a subscription to a private health scheme, everyone would be happy.
Click to expand...
It is a sad truth that the greedy will always be unhappy, when they are forced to pay their wealth towards the benefit of other people.
 
lindsay said:
The old SuperTax days of (I think) 88% tax was egregious, and drove a lot of people away rather than having to pay that. Think the Rolling Stones etc. A tax rate of upto 50% is morally tolerable; over that is an appalling idea, wealth at extreme levels should have a separate type of wealth tax where assets and income are combined for tax purposes.
Employers NI is a tax on the jobs or more precisely the ability of companies to employ people. If I have to pay 12% (or whatever it is now) to employ someone, on top of what I actually pay them before tax, it's a cost of employment. It matters not what the Govt do with that money, it's the simple fact that it is levied at all that is bad. OTOH if it were as you say, a subscription to a private health scheme, everyone would be happy.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall a certain Mr Michael Jagger saying he worked for the government and took a 12% commision. (y)
 
lindsay said:
The old SuperTax days of (I think) 88% tax was egregious, and drove a lot of people away rather than having to pay that. Think the Rolling Stones etc. A tax rate of upto 50% is morally tolerable; over that is an appalling idea, wealth at extreme levels should have a separate type of wealth tax where assets and income are combined for tax purposes.
Click to expand...

This is the crux which I feel many overlook. High income tax will most likely be circumvented by the elite through clever and complicated tax affairs and also tax avoidance schemes, hence why people like Rishi Sunak could have such a low effective tax rate despite high earnings. There's a lot of reform needed in our tax system, but it would be a herculean task.


lindsay said:
Employers NI is a tax on the jobs or more precisely the ability of companies to employ people. If I have to pay 12% (or whatever it is now) to employ someone, on top of what I actually pay them before tax, it's a cost of employment. It matters not what the Govt do with that money, it's the simple fact that it is levied at all that is bad. OTOH if it were as you say, a subscription to a private health scheme, everyone would be happy.
Click to expand...

I have always certainy found it strange that when a company employs someone and therefore potentially keeps them off welfare and saves the state money, the Government says thanks by slapping an extra tax on them. In general the standard rate is 15% on earnings above £5k. There are some exceptions and allowances, but for most it really is quite a lot to have to pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top