As for the column, a few additional points are in order: First, sectoral details of the trend in employment reveal interesting facts. While the increase in employment in industry looks impressive, most of it is due to weak base effects- that is the sectoral equivalent of one of the major points in the column. The same is also true for construction, but services is the one that really puzzled me, as it has managed to suck in workers even through the crisis. When I dug deeper (but not as deep as Bilica), I was even more surprised: Most of the increases come from a single item, administrative and support services. Unless the demand for secretaries skyrocketed last year, I have no idea on how to explain this fact. So if you have a valid explanation, please go ahead and enlighten me.
As for my point on the NAIRU, I used a simple multivariate model, similar to the one used in an 2004 IMF working paper, although I had not seen the paper when I did it hastily Saturday night after heading straight home from a Besiktas loss @ Inonu. Since I was too lazy to write out my methodology in full, I searched for a paper that had done a similar thing, and this was the first one I came across.
Anyway, on to the column: