So this is saying we’ve been growing the employable workforce faster than we’ve been creating jobs. Or is it saying that we’ve net lost jobs? It’s hard to tell from the way it was phrased.
It also seems to be implying that existing jobs were lost while new jobs were created for immigrants. It’s being very careful to imply that without directly saying it, which makes me question whether that’s actually going on.
So this is saying we’ve been growing the employable workforce faster than we’ve been creating jobs. Or is it saying that we’ve net lost jobs? It’s hard to tell from the way it was phrased.
It also seems to be implying that existing jobs were lost while new jobs were created for immigrants. It’s being very careful to imply that without directly saying it, which makes me question whether that’s actually going on.
The article says:
I read it as
So we’ve net lost jobs, while we’ve grown the workforce. At least by my reading.
So a total of ~60k less job vacancies?
I’d phrase it as 60k people without jobs. But basically, yeah.
Yup, I read that backwards.