Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Point taken that Jérôme is making an argument about methodology.

Paving's point also taken that U.S. youth employment numbers probably include many "underemployed" people; it would be interesting to know just what proportion of the total those McJobs constitute.  (I regret, I could not understand very well your statement that, The figures for "unemployment" in the US are based on the percentage of people actually collecting these payments with zero effort to quantify the percentages of people who collect payment in full and leave the rolls, to US figures they are treated the same as one who has attained employment again.)

Also, I agree with Alex that it is quite possible that (2) is true because of (3): "studying late is harder in the US than in France, and finding a cheap job with no protection or benefits is easier in the US than in France".

Nevertheless, as much as I would like to believe otherwise, it seems that France's youth employment lags not only significantly behind that of the U.S., but also that of the U.K., as well as the average of the EU15, if I correctly interpreted the following graph (based on EuroStat, which I admit I don't know anything about):

Is this because EuroStat is in fact using a different denominator for its U.K. and other EU15 numbers (i.e. all, not just active, youth)?  Or is it because there are far more young people working McJobs in the U.K., and other EU15 countries, than in France, bringing up employment numbers by counting underemployement jobs?

If neither of the above is the case, then is there is any other reason why  the unemployment rate among active youth in the U.K. is nearly half of what it is in France?

Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire

by marco on Tue Mar 28th, 2006 at 06:41:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That graph above looks like the graph for the unemployment rate, i.e. unemployed to active youth population.

It says nothing about employment.

The number in your graph is the ratio of the number on the right column (unemployment to total population) to the sum of the numbers on the left and the right column (employment to total population + unemployment to total population = active population to total population)

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Mar 28th, 2006 at 07:37:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, they do indeed look roughly to be the same numbers, at least for France and the UK.  Thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not sure I understand your second point, though:  It says nothing about employment.

I am probably missing something very basic here, but does it not say that the active youth employment rate in U.K. is 88% while in France it is 78%?

Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire

by marco on Tue Mar 28th, 2006 at 08:00:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It says nothing about employment means that you're missing the information that 55% of UK youth v. 30% of Franch youth are actually employed.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Mar 28th, 2006 at 08:04:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Got it.  Thanks.

Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire
by marco on Tue Mar 28th, 2006 at 08:09:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series