It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

World Economy May Lose 51 Million Jobs: U.N. Agency

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   

World Economy May Lose 51 Million Jobs: U.N. Agency


abcnews.go.com

GENEVA (Reuters) - Up to 51 million jobs worldwide could disappear by the end of this year as a result of the economic slowdown that has turned into a global employment crisis, a United Nations agency said on Wednesday.

The International Labor Organization (ILO) said that under its most optimistic scenario, this year would finish with 18 million more unemployed people than at the end of 2007, with a global unemployment rate of 6.1.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Well there is just no hiding this anymore.
I hope everybody is ready. I have to say that when it rains it pours.
Is this yet another example of a NWO?

Get everybody ready for a one world government? Related topics in a recent post I made with regard to what the powers that be are discussing and will attempt to do here.

Annan: World faces 'crisis of governance'

abcnews.go.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 28-1-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Tell it like it is Ron! Give em hell





posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   



Sep. 18, 2008.
Ron Paul explains how misguided policies and actions by the Federal Reserve and the government led to the current financial crisis.

Many who agree with me on a lot of other issues, do not understand my enthusiasm for gold and sound money or why I spend so much time studying and talking about monetary policy. Its true that I talk about money differently than most, but the fact is sound money offers many benefits. For example peace.

Can sound money really bring about peace? Actually, it plays a big part in peaceful international relationships. Money based on commodities, rather than paper, is not subject to government manipulation, and is a key component to free and honest trade.

History shows that if countries engage in trade with each other, their governments tend to find ways to get along for the same reason you do not kill your customers at your place of business, even if they occasionally annoy you.

If someone outright cheats you, however, you may engage in war by taking them to court, for example, and the relationship will sour. Governments and central banks with unfettered power to manipulate currency also have the ability to cheat their creditors. One way they do this is to simply create enough currency to pay off debts. This devalues the currency and cheats the recipient out of what they are owed. It would not be fair if you watered down your product the way our government waters down its currency, so it is not hard to understand, in these simplified terms, why loose monetary policy contributes so much to ill will and war around the world.

Sound money, on the other hand, simply is what it is. Removing governmental power to manipulate money, removes the temptation for government to spend, print and cheat. Sound money ensures that our governments spending priorities would be brought into sharp focus and reduced to only what we can afford.

Sound money also limits the ability to wage wars of aggression. Imagine how much more careful Washington would have to be about starting a war if they did not have this financial sleight of hand at their disposal! Fiat currency allows government do expensive things they should not be doing while paying the bills with cheap money. The Federal Reserve has lately been auctioning off large amounts of treasury bills as a way to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our crushing entitlement burden. The resulting devaluation of the dollar is quickly eroding our image as a good trading partner in the world. As a consequence, there is therefore more talk of economic isolation and war.

This vicious cycle of spending, fighting and inflating is not what Americans want. It is what the government wants, and it has had to deceive the citizens into allowing and supporting it. Sound money curbs the governments ability to engage in these shenanigans and reduces the wars we fight to only truly defensive ones, for which Americans are more than willing to stand and fight. So in these ways, sound money is very conducive to peace.





posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
well the good news is that there are 6.5 billion people in the world. 51 million in a year doesn't seem soo bad considering this is supposed to be a huge depression.

That's probably a padded number though. It'll probably be much higher. And I doubt 2009 will be the worst year of this depression to top it all off.

We are in for a very rocky future.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Well I'll still have my job safe and secure. So I could care less about the employment of 51 million people.

My job is fighting the NWO, and if I have to fight alone, then so be it.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   

well the good news is that there are 6.5 billion people in the world. 51 million in a year doesn't seem soo bad considering this is supposed to be a huge depression.


Yes, I thought that way also. However, you have to exclude children from that figure and people who are unable to work.

I also wonder if the unemployed will be evenly distributed or will it impact one area more than others.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321

well the good news is that there are 6.5 billion people in the world. 51 million in a year doesn't seem soo bad considering this is supposed to be a huge depression.


Yes, I thought that way also. However, you have to exclude children from that figure and people who are unable to work.

I also wonder if the unemployed will be evenly distributed or will it impact one area more than others.


Of course. So where does that leave us? 3.5- 4billion labour force world wide? Still a huge number. But you're right 51 million will effect enough people.

And the unemployment rate will also be heavily deflated even after all these layoffs. Here's why:

Sooo many people will be discouraged to even look for work that they don't count in the unemployment rate. So the UE may say 8.9 by year's end but in reality it will be like 13% because that many people will just quit looking for work and be discounted from the labour force.

That global unemployment rate of 6.1% in the OP article doesn't count in those who don't have the will to work any more even if they have the means (health and ability).

Therefore a lot more people will be without work than the article leads you to believe.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Portugoal
 


While 51 million might seem a small number to you in terms of the world population of 6.5 billion, remember that that is 51 million more desperate, hungry and potentially homeless people simmering waiting to explode. An army of 51 million people is nothing to scoff at.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
This might not seem like a large number compared to the 6.5+ billion people on the planet, but what you have to understand is that there is only a handful of nations that enjoy an unemployment rate that is lower than 20%. The job loss will not be equally distributed. Companies that deal in the global economy will be hurt the most, the countries/staes that have the most of these type of companies will lose more jobs than say places that focus on local business. Some nations/states, in particular African nations have a more local economy in terms of farming and markets. They will not suffer as much as say California which depends heavily on trade with foreign nations.

The next few years will be a truely intriguing time to be alive.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by A NeWorlDisorder]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Portugoal
 


While 51 million might seem a small number to you in terms of the world population of 6.5 billion, remember that that is 51 million more desperate, hungry and potentially homeless people simmering waiting to explode. An army of 51 million people is nothing to scoff at.


Of course not. My point is that this number will seem almost insignificant to other citizens (hate to say it this way but non-informed/disinterested citizens) because they'll say, well 51 million is nothing in a world of 6.5 billion people.

The UN knows they'll get this kind of reaction so it won't be deemed a horrific outlook. I honestly think that 51 million is a generous number. Obviously they'll cover how bad it can get in a year.

You must understand that the average citizen won't think, "WOW 51 million is huge in a world of 6 billion so we'll just create an army and take matters into our own hands." Instead they'll think, "there are another 4 billion people working so the world isn't going to [insert expletitive]."



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Another related thread I've posted if you're still not convinced.
The Great Depression of the 21st Century



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by A NeWorlDisorder
This might not seem like a large number compared to the 6.5+ billion people on the planet, but what you have to understand is that there is only a handful of nations that enjoy an unemployment rate that is lower than 20%. The job loss will not be equally distributed. Companies that deal in the global economy will be hurt the most, the countries/staes that have the most of these type of companies will lose more jobs than say places that focus on local business. Some nations/states, in particular African nations have a more local economy in terms of farming and markets. They will not suffer as much as say California which depends heavily on trade with foreign nations.

The next few years will be a truely intriguing time to be alive.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by A NeWorlDisorder]


That's the thing. If 50 million jobs are lost from the big countries, (Russia, US, Europe, Canada, Japan, China, India, Brazil) it'll pass on to the small counties and spiral out of control. Then no one will be looking for work



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   
It's funny how nobody seems yo care about how this NWO will come about and nobody is paying any attention

My father once told me that there are three types of people in the world.

1. Those people who make things happen. 5%

2. Those people who watch things happen. 10%

3. Those sheople who say What happened? 85%



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Portugoal


That's the thing. If 50 million jobs are lost from the big countries, (Russia, US, Europe, Canada, Japan, China, India, Brazil) it'll pass on to the small counties and spiral out of control. Then no one will be looking for work


Exactly it's like a snow ball rolling downhill first you have few million loosing their jobs then 50 million and before you know we are at 10% global workforce laid off.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Portugoal
 


I agree, but this does make you wonder that if you drew a parallel between the global economy and a corporate entity, what the global breakeven is is 51 million will make a difference.

If it's that little margin of safety in the global economy, then how would a pandemic then affect it.


Not sure if it's a material number or not without more information.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by annefran
 


Here is a recent headline and story good example


France braces for mass walk-out


A mass one-day strike by public and private sector workers in France is set to severely disrupt transport, hospital and education services. Hundreds of thousands of workers are expected to take to the streets to demand more government action to protect their jobs and wages.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Portugoal

The UN knows they'll get this kind of reaction so it won't be deemed a horrific outlook. I honestly think that 51 million is a generous number. Obviously they'll cover how bad it can get in a year.

You must understand that the average citizen won't think, "WOW 51 million is huge in a world of 6 billion so we'll just create an army and take matters into our own hands." Instead they'll think, "there are another 4 billion people working so the world isn't going to [insert expletitive]."



The question becomes is this a real figure or just something they threw out there to get people thinking also from where will most of these numbers come from? the EU Russia or China? The US? or more from the third world countries?

In other words who will tke the biggest hit?




top topics



 
12

log in

join