>BTW: Charity was something you brought in later.

I really can't remember anymore, and really don't feel like going back 20 messages. We're obviously not on the same page here, probably not in the same book.

>>No wonder there's something called "charity industry". There's probably a charity market as well.
>
>I don't know what you mean here, but there are quite a few chariable orgranizations.

And like any other bureaucracy, their first and foremost task at hand is self-perpetuation. Ah, and some money to dedicate to their public reason to exist.

I didn't invent the term "charity industry" - it's really beyond me to invent such a thing. I heard it on the radio.

>We're at under 5% unemployment. This should make you at least a little happier. :)

Do you know how did Miloshevich raise the average salary? By not counting those who were sort of employed but were receiving no money.

The unemployment statistics here count only those who are receiving unemployment benefits - which last 6 months. This means anyone beyond that period, anyone who didn't have proper paperwork, and some below-the-radar categories are not counted at all.

I've seen somewhere (can't really find it now, and don't have a clue how to google it out) that when actual employment is compared with labor-capable population, the remaining percentage is about 16%, even when the standard non-workers (postgraduates, early retirees, housewives, solo artists and such) are excluded.

Don't trust sound bites, don't trust statistics.