|
Federal Election 2008 Thread (pg. 23)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
There are also 27 people earning approximately half what they were before, with no benefits.
Ultimately, the economy is growing so jobs are created; however, those numbers are misleading as the economy is not growing at such a pace as to account for that many "new" jobs. |
What's important is what you said earlier....that most of these new jobs are replacement jobs for people going to university. Many students have either found new jobs in new cities or have had to cut hours and the employer has to hire new employees to fill those hours. Its not uncommon for a spike in part time employment in September. |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
I agree, those 54 part-time positions most likely 'create' 27 new jobs.
But you have to think of it in terms of individuals. There are 27 'new' individuals who now have jobs. Though, some of those 27 individuals might already have a part-time job.
I'm curious how many new individuals have entered the labour force vs. new jobs 'created'.
It is still a positive as it seems that there are quite a few unemployed individuals who are now working, even if it is just part-time.
|
do part time jobs even count?
also if someone has two jobs at two different places, does that count as two jobs? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by StereoPrincess
do part time jobs even count?
also if someone has two jobs at two different places, does that count as two jobs? |
any job for which a Record Of Employment (ROE) has been filed with Human Resources Canada counts.... which is to say, if someone is working on the books for any employer regardless of the number of hours they put in.
Yes, someone working two jobs at two different employers would count as two jobs as there are two different ROEs. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
While it sounds like good news I always wonder how many of those new part time jobs are actually just two part time jobs replacing a full time job that has been lost. I have 27 employees... if I replaced those 27 full time people with 54 part-time people I would have "created" 27 new jobs. So how many of these "new" jobs are actually employers replacing students who were working full time in the summer with a number of students now working part time? |
all of this is right here: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subje.../LFS/lfs-en.htm
So in September, 113k persons entered the job market. From within that number 107k found jobs, 10k were full time, 97k were part time.
Maybe they're seasonal jobs? The ratio seems really weird.
The %of part time jobs overall is 18.8% |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
all of this is right here: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subje.../LFS/lfs-en.htm
So in September, 113k persons entered the job market. From within that number 107k found jobs, 10k were full time, 97k were part time.
Maybe they're seasonal jobs? The ratio seems really weird.
The %of part time jobs overall is 18.8% |
I think Chemy probably got it right... many of those 97K PT jobs are two or three people filling the hours left vacant by a student who was working full time over the summer and can now only work part time. If 30,000 students were to terminate their full time summer jobs in September then employers would need anywhere from 60-90,000 part timers (depending on hours per week worked) to fill that void. |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Master Kush
LOL can't beleive you're defending Dion on this. If he can't understand a simple question that any 10 year old could, then he shouldn't be representing our country.
It's embarassing that this guy is the leader of the Liberal's. |
If you can't understand the relevance of Dion's unanwered request for context, and how that directly contributed to the confusion, then I'd argue it's *you* who has the problem ;)
As for PT work being created...big deal. Most PT jobs have low pay, provide little to no benefits, little job security and hardly allow someone to support themselves, nevermind a family. PT jobs are typically filled by students, seniors, 2nd income earners in a household...or someone hold 2-3 of them to make ends meet.
That's *exactly* the point being put forth by those poking holes in the CPC "job creation" numbers. HIGH QUALITY, HIGH PAYING jobs are being lost...and the jobs "created" in their place are garbage in comparison. |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry but this whole thing tells us that Steve Harvey can't ask a question rather then Dion can't answer one.
Harvey starts with a big preamble in the present tense then asks "if you were prime minister today" (present tense) "what would you have done" (past tense) |
It's not the most ideal way to ask the question, but in order to be addressing the financial crisis today, the PM would have had to HAVE DONE various things before the present time. Interviewer was asking what those things were.
I understand asking for clarification, but he asks THREE times. And after each time, continues to answer the question despite clearly not understanding what he was being asked. Why not spend a little more time understanding the question before you start providing an answer?
The liberal aide understood the question, didn't she?
Dion is absolutely painful to watch. Moreso than Palin. If these two get elected I'm throwing myself in front of a train. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
It's not the most ideal way to ask the question, but in order to be addressing the financial crisis today, the PM would have had to HAVE DONE various things before the present time. Interviewer was asking what those things were.
I understand asking for clarification, but he asks THREE times. And after each time, continues to answer the question despite clearly not understanding what he was being asked. Why not spend a little more time understanding the question before you start providing an answer?
The liberal aide understood the question, didn't she?
Dion is absolutely painful to watch. Moreso than Palin. If these two get elected I'm throwing myself in front of a train. |
My understanding was that it was an ATV staffer that clarified the question. It would seem that that person was the only one who understood it, as Harvey explicitly said "no" when Dion asked if he meant what would Dion have done if he had been PM for the last 2.5 years; however, it turns out that is what the question was intended to ask.
Painful to watch... sure, that's a good criteria upon which to base a vote. Strange that someone who presents herself as highly intelligent (and I don't doubt that you are) would be so influenced by something so superficial. I would never presume to tell someone how to vote; however, I really do hope you have better reasons for your decision. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
Dion is absolutely painful to watch. Moreso than Palin. If these two get elected I'm throwing myself in front of a train. |
lol. you feel that strongly about those two eh.
the latest poll numbers are kinda scary. possible Lib win w/ coalition with NDP or Green....:nervous: |
|
|
| malek |
For a french speaker, this question doesn't make sense because it has past and present tences in the same sentence.
I'm wondering why no one is making any fuss about M. Baird or most CPC ministers ability to answer in French. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
the latest poll numbers are kinda scary. possible Lib win w/ coalition with NDP or Green....:nervous: |
is it still a 4-5 point spread?
I think I'd rather have a Cons. minority then a Lib-NDP coalition. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
the latest poll numbers are kinda scary. possible Lib win w/ coalition with NDP or Green....:nervous: |
aka end of the world.
btw, those libs votes are spread out across the country which will give them less seats than the CPC. |
|
|
|
|
