UK Unemployment Decreases To 7.1%

It has been announced that the level of unemployment in the UK now stands at 7.1%. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that in the 3 months leading to November (2013) 170,000 people gained employment and the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (money unemployed people can get when searching for work) has decreased by 24,000.

In today’s Prime Minister Question time (http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2014/january/prime-ministers-questions-22-january-2014/) the Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, said he “welcomes the fall in unemployment” because “whenever an individual gets back into work, it’s good for them and good for their family.” However, he did argue that despite these seemingly good statistics the average annual wage had decreased since 2010 by £1,600.

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, also commented on the decrease of unemployment calling the last quarter “the biggest ever quarterly increase in the number of people in work in our country.” George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, also commented favourably on the increase employment at the World Economic Forum in Davos stating that the increase in employment shows his economic plan is working.

The decline of unemployment has been so rapid that experts had predicted these sorts of levels would be reached either later this year or even early 2015 (according to over half of the 28 economists polled) . Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit, believes this is set to continue and unemployment will “continue to collapse”

The Bank of England had previously declared that they may increase interest rates from 0.5% when UK unemployment reaches 7%. The benefits of increase interest rates would mean that people get more money coming into their bank accounts and prices of houses will go down. However, an increase of interest rates would result in the cost of borrowing money to increase meaning that small businesses could suffer.

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics

The Global Crises – An Update!

The world economy has been in a state of crises since 2008, but the World Bank has said that it is now at a ‘turning point’ and much stronger growth is expected in 2014.

Richer countries will feel the effects of economic growth, more than poorer countries, to begin with. However, there are warnings that the economy is still vulnerable “to the impact of the withdrawal of economic stimulus measures in the US”. The USA has already started to decrease the amount of bonds bought per month by $85bn/£52bn. (A bond is a form of debt. The government has been buying bonds in a sort of IOU loan).

The concern is that global interest rates would increase, which has the negative consequence of making the world economy more fragile and prevent money from entering poorer countries. The world bank warns of “crisis risks” in poor countries if global interest rates do rise. “Growth appears to be strengthening in both high-income and developing countries”, says the president of the World Bank (Jim Yong Kim), but the issues lies in the lack of growth in the developing world.

It has been forecasted that global GDP is expected to increase by 3.2% this year, an increase from 2.4% in 2013. Despite the risk of lack of growth in the developing world global GDP growth in these countries is expected to increase by 5.3% this year, up from 4.8% in 2013.

What are your global economy forecasts? What is the economy like in your country?

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics

 

India’s Battle Against Polio

It has been a phenomenal three year since India’s last reported polio case. This is seen as one of India’s greatest health successes as a result of its expansive inoculation programme, with India’s health minister calling it a “monumental milestone”.

Pakistan, Nigeria and Afghanistan are three countries where there is still cases of Polio, but India was removed from the list of polio-endemic countries in 2012. The graph below shows how cases of polio in India have declined since the 1980s:

The confidence of this success has led India with a new goal of eradicating measles in the coming years. Health in the country is improving at an astonishing rate with 741 cases of polio in India in 2009 declining down to just a single case in .

Previous health success in India includes the eradication of Smallpox in the 1980s after a similar inoculation process. Approximately 170m children under 5 years old had been given the vaccination and a similar process had been carried out for polio, and is expected in the fight against measles.

However, there are fears by some experts that where there is war and fighting polio may come back into existence. For example, in Syria and Somalia polio levels were the highest out of any other country. The interesting thing about this is, these two countries had been free from polio. Other experts fear that there is also a chance of polio spreading from Pakistan into India if there is a lack of care.

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics

Bangladesh Elections – Your Questions Answered

Tomorrow Bangladesh holds its 5th national election. The main two parties are the Awami League (Leader Sheikh Hasina) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP Leader Khaleda Zia). These elections have come under the media spotlight after the BNP and its allies have decided to boycott the election.

What is the risk?

– The Awami League is expected to win by a huge majority as a result of the opposition’s boycott. This will certainly undermine the credibility of the election. Violence is also expected to be an issue tomorrow as political workers from the parties clash.

Why has the Bangladesh Nationalist Party decided not to take part?

– The country has previously held elections with a neutral caretaker government to ensure that the election process is fair. But, in this election, the Awami League have refused to create a neutral caretaker government. This is believed to undermine the fairness of the election.

Impact of the boycott

– 154 out of the 300 seats are uncontested, which means the Awami League would win without trying. However, it is believed that continued protest and violent clashes will result from the election.

The main people

– The leader of both the Awami league and the BNP have been rivals for the past two decades as power shifted between the two parties. This election is likely to increase this tension dramatically. The third party’s (JP) leader H M Ershad has declared that the JP will also not be participating in the election furthering the complications.

What other issues are there?

– Violence, unemployment and poverty is high and afety and wage levels are low, which is not being helped by political instability. It is reported by The Asia Foundation that 75% of voters would like a neutral caretaker government during the election, so it will be interesting to see whether voter turnout will be on the same level as previous elections.

World Political implications

– Countries including the USA and the UK have refused to send observers to Bangladesh. This has weakened relations geopolitical and dented Bangladesh’s global image.

The election

– In the previous election there was a 70% voter turnout, but this is expected to be much less tomorrow. Although in 2008 the results were announced within 24 hours, the announcement of tomorrow’s results will depend on how peacefully the election is carried out.

What are your views on the elections? Should the Awami League set up a neutral caretaker government to maintain the peace?

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics

Prisoner Sentencing

How long a sentence should a murder get in prison?

In the UK life sentences rarely actually mean life, whilst in the USA this is fairly common. Currently in the UK only about 50 people are subject to a whole-life sentence, most recently Dale Cregan for murdering 4 people. In the USA, however, approximately 40,000 people are imprisoned without much hope of release. Furthermore, this figure does not include those American prisoners who have been given extremely long fixed term sentences. For example, one Alabama man was sentenced to 200 years for kidnapping and armed robbery.

America’s ‘sentencing inflation’ began in the 1980s when the Democrats and the Republicans wanted to show how tough they could be on crime. The increased sentences also saw a rise in states like Michigan where the death penalty does not exist, so the increased sentence was an alternative punishment.

However, there have been recent calls to have US-style, lengthy fixed life sentences in the UK. This is being considered after the European court ruled in 2013 that whole-life sentences were breaching the European Court of Human Rights. These proposals would allow the court to give sentences of hundreds of years. But, unlike whole-life sentences, these sentences can be reviewed and reduced (an aspect of sentencing less available in America).

Although many people say this move will “restore Human Rights” by enabling sentences to be reviewed along the way many others still argue that the sentence changes is dangerous and unnecessary, especially as the UK has seen increased sentences being given out year on year for the past decade.

How should a murderer be sentenced? How does it differ in your country? What sentencing proposals do you want to see?

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics

Latvia Joins Eurozone

Today, 1st January 2014, Latvia joins the Eurozone, becoming the 18th country which uses the Euro as its currency. The small country struggled financially during the economic crises, however it is now one of the fastest growing economies in Europe.

Being a former Soviet republic, Latvia has relied greatly on Russia, but the incorporation of the Euro is expected to reduce this dependency and gain greater financial independence – credit ratings (an estimate of the ability of a country to fulfil their financial commitments, based on previous dealings) should increase and more foreign investors are expected to be attracted. Olli Rehn, the EU Commissioner, said joining the eurozone marked “the completion of Latvia’s journey back to the political and economic heart of our continent, and that is something for all of us to celebrate”.

Despite this, opinion polls have suggested approximately 60% of Latvians do not want the Euro. One Latvian, Zaneta Smirnova, said she is “against the euro” and that they should have kept the Lat. But, the governor of the Latvian central bank, Ilmars Rimsevics, said the “euro brings stability and certainty, definitely attracting investment, so new jobs, new taxes and so on. So being in the second largest currency union I think will definitely mean more popularity.”

What do you think about Latvia joining the Euro?

Thanks for reading and please do share,

Digestible Politics

 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=hl

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

http://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics