According to the World Bank in Australia government contribution as a % of GDP is 18.9% while in Bangladesh is 5.9%. If you want to look for the reasons behind such big disparity then I suggest you should start by looking at the health sector for both countries, which in Australia to a very large extent is in government hands. And, of course, with that in mind maybe you should spend some time in Bangladesh in order to study their health care system in situ.
Now, in 2017 the number of employed people in Australia was 12,419,800. Supposing that both public and private sectors do have the same organic composition of capital then of those 12,419,800 workers 2,347,342 would be working for government. However, since the organic composition of capital is not the same that number was only 1,956,900 ( 239,800 employees in Commonwealth government, 1,527,600 in state government and 189,500 in local government ).
At the same time the participation rate was 65.5% and the unemployment rate 5.4%.
Had the labor market been more attractive to the working age population then the participation rate could have been 67%. In that case the number of employed people would have reached 12,704,222 implying an increase of 284,422.
The unemployment rate has several components including one call frictional unemployment defined as the unemployment that results from time spent between jobs when a worker is searching for, or transitioning from one job to another. We had a boom in mining with people, specially in certain states, trying to get jobs elsewhere meaning that such component must have been in recent times higher than in the previous years.
How many unemployed are looking for jobs "
The answer is all. In order to be counted as being unemployed the unemployed must be actively looking for a job. That is by definition. Before coming here to parrot the anti-government rant #1 people should at least try to understand the definitions of the objects they want to talk about.
"how many jobs are there available in total? "
This question just shows ignorance about how markets are suppose to work. The demand curve for labor is not vertical At any given time the demand for labor is dependent on the price of labor.
"If the sale price is higher than the market-clearing price, then supply will exceed demand, and a surplus inventory will build up over the long run [unemployment will increase]. If the sale price is lower than the market-clearing price, then demand will exceed supply, and in the long run shortages [shortages of labour pushing its price up] will result.
"How many new jobs are suited to current unemployed?"
People that don't have the necessary skills either go to retraining, become long term unemployed, or drop out from the work force.
The total number of l long term unemployed was in 2017 around 170,200
According to the Economist 7 out of 20 unemployed man in the USA at a certain stage stop looking for work.
Applying the same percentage to Australia 1.89% of the working population must have given up looking for a job or 224,219 people.
There are approximately 2 million students enrolling on vocation education and training in Australia each year. If 5% of them are mature students seeking to improve their skills in order to get a job through that process then their number would be 100.000.
"How many of the 19.4% unemployed got any of the 400,000 new jobs claimed to have been created in last 12 months?
During the last 12 months the unemployment rate dropped from 5.7% to 5.5% This means that around 24,000 people that previously were not working did find a job, this on the basis that the participation rate stayed the same. However, during that same period the participation rate went from 64.6% to 65.8% meaning that another 234,000 persons that did not intend to work in 2016 did get a job in 2017.
"How many of new jobs were government jobs? "
Government has been following an expansionary fiscal policy leading to the creation of jobs directly and indirectly. This means that lots of private sector jobs are dependent upon government expenditure.
It amuses me the idea that if government employs a doctor directly by means of a civil servant contract that must be bad as such doctor becomes a public servant while if government employs that same doctor by means of a private contract for the supply of services then that must be good as he, the very same doctor, is now a self-employed person.
