Monthly Archives: July 2018

Australian Politics 2018-07-31 15:44:00



In his latest offering, conservative Australian cartoonist ZEG is outraged by the way NSW police treated Lauren Southern.  A good interview with the lady below:

'Men matter too': Anti-feminist launches a 'March for Men'

An anti-feminism campaigner is asking for donations to support a 'March for Men' claiming that males have been unfairly treated in the aftermath of the rape and murder of comedian Eurydice Dixon.

Sydney Watson, has setup a GoFundMe page for the event she is organising in response to what she calls 'an assault on men collectively.'

Ms Watson, who is half American and a vocal Trump supporter, has previously released YouTube videos questioning gun control arguments and white privilege.

The former University of Melbourne journalism student says she is hoping hundreds of men and women will attend the event at Melbourne's Federation Square on August 25 to 'rally together for masculinity.'

The goal of the march is 'not to diminish women's rights or make any negative statements about women,' says Ms Watson.

In June, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews posted to Facebook his thoughts regarding the rape and murder of Ms Dixon. 'Women don't need to change their behaviour. Men do,' he wrote.

'My safety is my responsibility. I don't want to put any accountability on anyone else. Sure, we can teach men not to rape or, alternatively, maybe we can give women the right to self-defence' Ms Watson said in response.

'This post is sanctimonious and patronising. I, for one, am absolutely sick and tired of men collectively being demonised at every turn and at every opportunity.'

The event GoFundMe page has so far raised over $1500 towards its goal of $5000.

'For a long time, we have focused on women's liberation and women's rights,' the description for the event states.

'But now, it is time to give male issues the love and attention they deserve in the interest of creating a better Australia.'



Turnbull moves to soothe schools tension

Labor is claiming victory from Malcolm Turnbull's "humiliating admission" on school funding, as the prime minister moves to douse damaging tensions with Catholic schools.

The Catholic school sector campaigned against the government's funding policy in the Queensland seat of Longman, where the coalition suffered a bruising by-election defeat.

A deal to restore $1.7 billion in funding to Catholic schools over the next decade is expected to be reached within weeks after the prime minister seized control of the issue, The Australian reports.

Catholic Education bosses met with Education Minister Simon Birmingham on Tuesday but it's understood nothing concrete has been offered.

Labor leader Bill Shorten said Mr Turnbull had spent the last 12 months calling Mr Shorten a liar and saying there was no problem for Catholic schools.

"Now he's received an electoral smack on the bottom over his cuts to school funding, he's now going to sing a different song," Mr Shorten told reporters on Tuesday.

The opposition say cuts in the wider education sector amount to $17 billion and must be reversed. "Malcolm Turnbull has been forced into a humiliating admission that his school funding policy is in crisis," the party's education spokeswoman Tanya Plibersek said.

Liberal Senator Jim Molan was matter of fact on the situation. "We've got to be prepared to be taken to task by the Catholics; we shouldn't get ourselves into the situation where we're taken to task by the Catholics," he told 2GB.

But cabinet minister Steve Ciobo maintained the government line that they're putting record funding into schools as part of a shift to a needs-based funding model.

The Australian Education Union maintains a special funding deal for Catholic schools will be categorical proof of the failure of the latest education funding model.

Federal president Correna Haythorpe has called for $1.9 billion to be restored for public education over the next two years before any deal is done with Catholic schools.

"The commonwealth should strike a deal with states and territories to ensure that all public schools receive 100 per cent of their schooling resource standard by 2023," she said, saying just 13 per cent of schools were expected to.

Meanwhile modelling commissioned by the Catholic sector found 350 schools would be forced to close across Australia if the current funding model was continued.

"You don't have to be Nostradamus to work out that is going to lead to electoral difficulty, indeed pain, were that allowed to continue along that route," Liberal MP Tony Pasin said.


Swelling cities need a breather from mass migration

Judith Sloan

There were important population figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics last week. The most important was “the number of overseas arrivals was the highest on record”. That’s right, the highest on record.

Note that only people who are resident in Australia for at least 12 out of 16 months are included in the figures. In 2016-17, 540,000 people arrived in Australia, with 315,000 arriving on temporary visas. Of those who arrived on temporary visas, there were more than 150,000 international students, just more than 50,000 working holiday-makers and 32,000 temporary workers.

Where did these migrants go? Overwhelmingly, Sydney and Melbourne. In 2016-17, almost 40 per cent went to NSW and 34 per cent to Victoria.

Queensland also attracted a relatively large share — more than 13 per cent.

The numbers are substantial. Net overseas migration (arrivals over departures) added 104,000 people to NSW in 2016-17, although quite a few NSW citizens got fed up and headed to other states, principally Victoria. Victoria had a net gain of 18,200 people from interstate on top of the 90,000 it gained from net overseas migration.

I should apologise for the blitz of figures. But there really is no alternative to highlight the sheer scale of migration and the destination of the migrants, thus under­pinning the conclusion that our migrant intake is out of control.

For a long time, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton had the lame excuse the Coalition government had a better record than Labor in controlling immigration. This was based on the sole NOM figure of 300,000 that occurred in 2008-09, at the height of the mining boom.

But at that time migrants were heading to Western Australia in record numbers. The NOM figure for Western Australia was 44,000 in 2008-09.

The NOM figures for that state have fallen to 15,000. It was a completely different ball game then. Migrants now overwhelmingly head to Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane (or southeast Queensland). It’s time for Dutton to put the “we’re better than Labor” excuse in the bin.

His real problem is that NOM for the country as a whole is on the rise. There have been two consecutive increases and the latest figure of 262,000 is approaching the figure of 300,000 so derided by Dutton.

The ABS figures also put the numbers in some context.

Labor is promising to clamp down on the number of temporary workers, but the number of net temporary workers in 2016-17 was less than 17,000, which is only 6.5 per cent of the total NOM. Halving their number would make little difference.

The largest single group is higher education students, with 101,000 arrivals in 2016-17. The numbers are higher again in 2017-18. These students need accommodation, services and use public transport. Given their work rights — 20 hours a week during semester time, unlimited at other times — their numbers also have a noticeable impact on the labour market.

If we consider the face of the population across a longer time­frame, we can begin to see what impact the migration settings have had. In 1996, there were 119,000 China-born residents living in Australia — 20 years later, it was 526,000, an increase of 342 per cent. In 1996, those born in China made up 0.7 per cent of the population; in 2016, it was 2.2 per cent.

In 1996, there were 80,000 India-born people living in Australia. In 2016, the number was 469,000. This is an increase of 486 per cent. Their share of the population has risen from 0.4 per cent to 1.9 per cent.

By contrast, the number of people born in Britain and Ireland has remained relatively steady, rising from 1.218 million to 1.284 million. Their share of the population has fallen from 6.7 per cent to 5.3 per cent.

Australia has a much higher proportion of its population born overseas (28 per cent) than most other developed countries. In the US, the figure is only 13 per cent; in Britain, it is 12 per cent, as in France.

Australia’s population has changed dramatically in numbers and ethnic composition. It’s not clear whether there has ever been an explicit debate about these changes. But political enthusiasm for unrestrained growth of migrant numbers has, if anything, intensified in recent years, including on the part of the Turnbull government.

Lured by the false prognostications of Treasury and egged on by the Department of Immigration (now Home Affairs), politicians have embraced the Big Australia message as an economic saviour. Take the recent advice from Treasury that a drop of 20,000 in the migrant intake would lead to the loss of tax revenue of $500 million a year. It’s just nonsense. If this were true, every single one of those 20,000 migrants would immediately be earning more than $80,000.

The secondary applicants have much poorer labour market outcomes than the skilled migrants they accompany. We also know that family migrants are not net tax contributors. Family entrants would make up about 7000 of this hypothetical reduced intake.

What’s even more unforgivable, Treasury will not have estimated the additional costs associ­ated with higher migrant intakes which, admittedly, are largely borne by the states and territories: school places, healthcare facilities, additional infrastructure.

Let’s hope there are sufficient numbers of cabinet ministers who realise that estimates such as a loss of $500m in tax revenue by ­reducing the migrant intake are plain wrong.

They are meant to get politicians to support excessive migrant intakes — they make the economy look bigger.

The fact that per-capita income falls in the short term is known by all sensible economists.

If the government has any hope of winning the next election, it must do something radical about the migrant intake numbers.

There is a strong case to institute immediately an inquiry into international students, both at the university and vocational college levels, to get to the bottom of the rorts and the misuse of the student visa categories as pathways to permanent residence as well as other issues.

In the meantime, educational providers should be called on to freeze international student enrolments at today’s levels — or preferably lower.

Our cities need a breather and the Turnbull government cannot afford to keep its head in the sand.


Revealed: The university degrees most likely to land you a high salary - and the ones that will leave you struggling

Most Australian students are heading into their second semester for the year and likely thinking about job prospects once graduation season begins.

And while many pursue degrees because they have a passion for that chosen field, when it comes to how much they'll be paid on a graduate salary, that varies depending on what they studied and what gender they are.

The median salary of all undergraduates employed full-time in 2017 according to the Department of Education and Training was $60,000 which is an increase of $2,100 from 2016 - and men were paid higher wages across the board.

For those who chose to study dentistry (which on average costs $53,770 for five years) they will be paid the highest gross salary of $80,000 in their first year out of university.

Medicine ($64,524 for six years) and engineering ($36,740 for four years) follow close behind with $65,000 and $62,000 respectively.

If you've undertaken the recommended four year course to become a lawyer or paralegal, which costs students $43,016 in total, you'll be looking at a $60,000 wage in your first year.

And rounding out the list in fifth place are teachers who, after four years and $25,776 of HECS debts, will secure $60,000 at their very first school.

On the other side of the spectrum are five fields of study that will hardly cover the costs of doing the degree during your first year out of university.

Interestingly pharmacy is at number one, which takes four years and costs $36,740, because you're only looking to get $41,600 as a graduate.

Creative arts (three years) and communications (three years) follow because they both cost $19,332 to do but give you $45,000 and $46,000 respectively after you receive your diploma.

Tourism (three years) comes in at number four on the list with the degree costing $32,262 and earning the student $48,000.

And six long hard years of studying veterinary science (which costs $64,524) will wind up having you lose money by earning $49,600 in your first year.

In between these sectors there are prospects for those endeavouring to study mathematics ($57,500 first year salary), computing and information systems ($59,900), architecture ($56,400), nursing ($60,000), psychology ($57,600) and social work ($62,600).

Career Development Association of Australia's (CDAA) president Wanda Hayes said there were clear benefits enjoyed by university graduates that those who aren't tertiary-educated get.

'But we know that once you're in [some organisations], there is a ceiling that you can pass through if you have a degree, which you can't pass through if you don't have a degree,' she told the ABC.

Ms Hayes said those with degrees generally had lower rates of unemployment and lower rates of underemployment across their working lives - meaning more money.


Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here

GANA’s Bukele with a sizable lead in El Salvador

As of right now, former San Salvador Mayor Nayib Bukele remains the front-runner for next year's presidential election in El Salvador. According to a recent CID Gallup poll, Bukele has the support of 38% of all Salvadorans. He is followed by Carlos Calleja of ARENA with 24%. Hugo Martinez of the incumbent FMLN is in a distant third with an embarrassing 5%. Martinez' polling gives you a sense of how dissatisfied Salvadorans are of the FMLN after nearly three two terms of controlling the presidency.

The election is six months away, the margin of error +/- 3.5, and one-third of the respondents to the late July poll don't have a preference. It's not too late for the FMLN or ARENA to make some head way against Bukele. However, their strategy these last few weeks seems to have been to prevent Bukele from competing in the election. Lawsuits, the hindering of his political party from forming, the cancellation of the CD.

Bukele is now the candidate of Tony Saca's GANA. Running with GANA is worse than running with the CD but better than not running at all. Unfortunately, there are a lot of shadowy elements associated with GANA. To be honest, though, you can say the same about each of El Salvador's political parties.

Ranking the Worst-Ever One-Day Stock Market Cap Crashes

On Thursday, 26 July 2018, the shareholders of Facebook (NASDAQ: FB) experienced the worst ever rout of an individual stock in stock market history, as they collectively lost over $119 billion in just one day.

Facebook on Thursday posted the largest one-day loss in market value by any company in U.S. stock market history after releasing a disastrous quarterly report.

The social media giant's market capitalization plummeted by $119 billion to $510 billion as its stock price plummeted by 19 percent. At Wednesday's close, Facebook's market cap had totaled nearly $630 billion, according to FactSet.

No company in the history of the U.S. stock market has ever lost $100 billion in market value in just one day, but two came close.

The two that came close were Intel (NYSE: INTC) and Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), both of which got monkey-hammered in separate one-day crash events back in 2000. CNBC put together the chart below showing the Top 12 market cap crashes for individuals stocks. It's a well-designed, highly informative chart, but if you look closely, you'll see that all of the recorded Top 12 market cap crash events have taken place during a period spanning just the last 18 years.

CNBC: Market cap losses in big cap stocks

You don't have to be either stockholder or a consumer of Campbell's Soup (NYSE: CPB) to know both that the U.S. stock market has been around a lot longer than that and also that there's been a bit of inflation over that period of time. What would happen if we adjusted the largest one-day market cap losses for these individual stocks to account for that factor?

And then we realized that would be a pretty worthless exercise. If we were to do so, we would have to choose which inflation measure to do the adjustment (Consumer Price Index? Personal Consumption Expenditures? GDP Deflator? Tomato Soup Standard?) and also for what period of time to set the value of a dollar (should we use constant July 2018 U.S. dollars? January 2000? How about an average over the year 2000? Why not split the difference and choose some other point of time somewhere in the middle?).

Now, what some other company's stock experiences another record-setting one-day crash event several years from now, and we have to make all those choices and do all that math all over again?

The nice thing about the kind of nominal data shown in CNBC's chart is that it doesn't pose these kinds of problems. Those are the values that have direct meaning at the time at which the events occurred. What we really want is a better way to describe the magnitude of these high dollar one-day market cap crash events that directly captures how much of a bite they took out of the stock market on the days they occurred.

It occurred to us that the best way to capture that kind of information with nominal data is to directly calculate the impact of the individual stock's market cap crash on the whole stock market, which for our purposes, would mean dividing the individual stock's market cap loss by the value of the market capitalization for a major stock market index that includes the individual stock as a component to find its relative magnitude as a simple percentage of the total valuation of the index.

Since CNBC's Top 12 list is made up of large cap stocks, it would make sense to use the market cap of the S&P 500, since each listed company is a component of this market-cap weighted index and the index represents about 80% of the capitalization of the entire U.S. stock market. If you understand the 80-20 rule, you know why that matters....

What this does is give us an objective measure that doesn't require needlessly repetitive and not terribly worthwhile calculations to tell how big of a market rout such a one-day crash event may have been. In fact, we can immediately compare the relative magnitude of a given event with others to tell which would have a larger impact in the terms of the stock market of its day.

We've done that math for CNBC's Top 12 market cap crash events for individual stocks in the following dynamic table, which you can sort from either high-to-low or from low-to-high by clicking the various column headings. What's more, if you insist on putting a particular day's dollar value on the magnitude of a market cap crash event, you can by simply multiplying the percentage we've calculated by the applicable market cap for the S&P 500 index (we've estimated those values with respect to the S&P 500's recorded market cap at the beginning of July 2018).

If you're accessing this article on a site that republishes our RSS news feed, please click through to access a working version of the dynamic table. If not, we've added an extra column with the "Adjusted Rank" to make it easy to tell how each company stock's market-cap crash ranked in terms of how big a bite it took out of the S&P 500 total market cap.

Largest One-Day Market Cap Losses for Individual Stocks Since January 2000
Nominal RankCompany (Ticker)Date of LossLargest One Day Market Cap LossAs Percent of S&P 500 Market CapAdjusted Loss (for July 2018 S&P 500 Market Cap)Adjusted Rank
1Facebook (NASDAQ: FB)26 Jul 2018$119,419,310,0000.48%$119,419,310,0004
2Intel (NYSE: INTC)22 Sep 2000$90,736,960,0000.76%$189,950,184,8251
3Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT)3 Apr 2000$80,024,600,0000.64%$159,693,090,4702
4Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL)24 Jan 2013$59,633,680,0000.47%$117,297,800,7385
5Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM)15 Oct 2008$52,511,380,0000.58%$146,531,232,7943
6General Electric (NYSE: GE)11 Apr 2008$46,914,750,0000.38%$96,029,919,4037
7Alphabet (Google) (NASDAQ: GOOGL)2 Feb 2018$41,074,840,0000.17%$42,719,042,60310
8Bank of America (NYSE: BAC)7 Oct 2008$38,486,790,0000.40%$101,412,985,0206
9Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN)2 Apr 2018$36,477,450,0000.16%$40,641,561,53611
10Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC)5 Feb 2018$28,905,810,0000.12%$30,062,893,21812
11Citigroup (NYSE: C)23 Jul 2002$25,941,230,0000.29%$71,520,350,6268
12JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM)29 Sep 2008$24,884,180,0000.23%$57,118,598,0939

After adjusting for the relative impact on the S&P 500 in terms of the index' total market capitalization, we find that Facebook's nominal single-day record decline actually ranks fourth at 0.48% when considering the impact of the stock price drop upon the U.S. stock market as represented by the S&P 500 index. We find that Intel's 22 September 2000 crash claims the top spot with an adjusted market loss of 0.78% (or nearly $190 billion in terms of July 2018's S&P 500 market cap), followed by Microsoft's 3 April 2000 decline of 0.64% (nearly $160 billion) in second place, and Exxon Mobil's 15 October 2008 drop of 0.58% (over $146 billion) coming in third, all of which representing a bigger relative bite out of the stock market of their day than what Facebook's nominal record-setting $119 billion loss of the company's market valuation did on 26 July 2018.

And that's covering the biggest one-day market cap crashes for individual stocks since January 2000! If we went further back in time, who knows what the real all-time one-day market cap crash champion would turn out to be! If you have the individual stocks market cap loss and the total market cap for the S&P 500 index on the day(s) before the individual stock's crash event, the math is easy, the results are clear, and any time that you have a new event, you would simply insert the results of the math into the appropriate row of the ranking table.


Imbert, Fred and Francolla, Gina. Facebook's $100 billion-plus rout is the biggest loss in stock market history. CNBC. [Online Article]. 26 July 2018.

Standard & Poor. S&P Market Attributes Web File. [Excel Spreadsheet]. 29 June 2018. Accessed 29 July 2018.

McMillan, Alex Frew. Year of the big stock drop. CNNMoney. [Online Article]. 12 October 2000.

30/7/18: Broader Unemployment vs Official Unemployment: Ireland

In the first post (see above) looking at the broader measures of unemployment and dependency ratios, recall that CSO publishes several extended series for broader unemployment rates. 

The official unemployment rate at 1Q 2018 stood at 6.4 percent (well within the pre-crisis historical range of the average of 5.31 percent and the 99% confidence interval of (3.70%, 6.92%). In more simple terms, statistically, the current official unemployment rate is indistinguishable from the average rate prevailing in 1Q 1998 - 4Q 2007. Which is the good thing, implying that in official terms, Irelands economy has recovered from the crisis at last. In fact, the recovery in official terms has been attained in 4Q 2017.

However, the CSO also reports the PLS2 measure of broader unemployment. The Above analysis was based on reported PLS1 data, covering unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percentage of the labour force. Adding to the PLS1 those in potential additional labour force (basically able bodied adults who are neither employed nor unemployed, nor discouraged, and are not in studies or formal training), the CSO gets PLS2 measure of broader unemployment. In 1Q 208 this number read 10.2% of the Labour Force, plus Potential Additional Labour Force, which was statistically higher than the pre-Crisis average of 6.1% (falling into the 99% confidence interval range of (4.39%, 7.81%). In other words, the economy has not yet recovered from the Crisis based on PLS2 broader unemployment measure.

Extending PLS2 to cover all unemployed, plus those who want a job and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training, in 1Q 2018 the broader PLS3 unemployment measure stood at 14.2 percent, unchanged on 4Q 2017. As with PLS2, the 1Q 2018 reading for PLS3 falls well beyond the range of the pre-crisis historical average of 8.36% (with 99% confidence interval of (6.52%, 10.20%).

As noted above, by two broader unemployment measures: PS2 and PLS3, Irish economy has not recovered from the crisis, even if we take a relatively benign recovery measure of the economy reaching the pre-crisis 1Q 1998 - 4Q 2007 average rate of unemployment. 

Worse, taking 4 year moving average and a 4 year rolling standard deviation in PS3 rates, 1Q 2018 PLS3 rate of 14.2% is closer to the upper margin of the 99% confidence interval for 1Q 2018 based on prior 4 years of data (the CI is given by (9.81%, 15.63%) range). Which means that 1Q 2018 data shows no statistically significant break-out from the PLS3 broader unemployment dynamics of the past 4 years. The same holds for the 5 years MA and rolling STDEV. 

So while the official unemployment readings are showing a very robust recovery, broader measures of unemployment continue to trend in line with the economy still carrying the hefty legacy of the recent crises. 

30/7/18: Ireland’s employment data: Official Stats vs Full Time equivalents

Based on the most current data for Irish employment and working hours, I have calculated the difference between the two key time series, the Full Time Equivalent employment (FTE employment) and the officially reported employment.

Let’s take some definitions on board first:
  • Defining those in official employment: I used CSO data for “Persons aged 15 years and over in Employment (Thousand) by Quarter, Sex, and Usual Hours Worked”
  • Defining FTE employment, is used data on hours per week worked, using 40-44 hours category as the defining point for FTE. 
  • A note of caution, FTE is an estimated figures, based on mid-points of working time intervals reported by the CSO.

Based on these definitions, in 1Q 2018, there were 2.2205 million people in official employment in Ireland. However, 51,800 of these worked on average between 1 and 9 hours per week, and another 147,300 worked between 10 and 19 hours per week. And so on. Adjusting for working hours differences, my estimated Full Time Equivalent number of employees in Ireland in 1Q 2018 stood at 1.94223 million, or 278,271 FTE employees less than the official employment statistics suggested. The gap between the FTE employment and officially reported number of employees was 12.53%.

I defined the above gap as “Employment Hours Gap” (EHG): a percentage difference between those in FTE and those in official employment. A negative gap close to zero implies FTE employment is close to the official employment, which indicates that only a small proportion of those in employment are working less then full-time hours.

All the data is plotted in the chart below

Per chart above, the following facts are worth noting:
  1. In terms of official employment numbers, Ireland’s economy has not fully recovered from the crisis. The pre-Crisis peak official employment stands at 2.2522 million in 3Q 2007. The bad news is: as of 1Q 2018, the same measure stands at 2.2205 million.
  2. In terms of FTE employment, the peak pre-Crisis levels of employment stood at 1.9261 million in 3Q 2017. This was regained in 3Q 2017 at 1.9444 million. So the good news is that the current recovery is at least complete now, after a full decade of misery, when it comes to estimated FTE employment.

The improved quality of employment as reflected in better mix of FT and  >FT employees in the total numbers employed, generated in the recent recovery, is highlighted in the chart as well, as the gap has been drawing closer to zero.

One more thing worth noting here. The above data is based on inclusion of the category of employees with “Variable Hours”, which per CSO include “persons for whom no usual hours of work are available”. In other words, zero-hours contract workers who effective do not work at all are included with those workers who might work one week 45 hours and another week 25 hours. So I adjust my FTE estimated employment to exclude from both official and FTE employment figures workers on Variable Hours. The resulting change in the EHG gap is striking:

Per above, while the recovery has been associated with a modestly improving working hours conditions, it is now clear that excluding workers on Variable Hours’ put the current level of EHG still below the conditions prevailing in the early 2000s. More interestingly, we can see a persistent trend in terms of rising / worsening gap from the end of the 1990s through to the end of the pre-Crisis boom at the end of 2007, and into the collapse of the Irish economy through 2012. The post-Crisis improvement in Employment Hours Gap has been driven by the outflows of workers from the Variable Hours’ to other categories, but when one controls for this category of workers (a category that is effectively ‘catch-all-others’ for CSO) the improvements become less dramatic.

Overall, FTE estimates indicate some problems remaining in the Irish economy when it comes to the dependency ratios. Many analysts gauge dependency ratios as a function of total population ratio to those in official employment. The problem, of course, is that the economic capacity of someone working close to 40 hours per week or above is not the same as that of someone working less than 20 hours per week.

Note: More on dependency ratios next.