When the definition of unemployed is changed to exclude the majority of working age people without jobs then it is no longer a helpful statistic.
U-3 has used the same definition of unemployed since 1940.
Whatever metric you want to use, you should look at that number and how it changes over time, to get a sense of trend lines. LISEP says the “true” unemployment rate is currently 24.3% in May 2025, which is basically the lowest it’s ever been.
Since the metric was created in 1994, the first time that it dipped below 25% was briefly in the late 2010’s, right before COVID, and then has been under 25% since September 2021.
Under this alternative metric of unemployment, the unemployment rate is currently one of the lowest in history.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I don’t know how to make you engage with reality.
Slaves arguing for their continued enslavement is just something i will never understand.
Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You can’t understand because you can’t even read the numbers in your own sources haha
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
“Indignant slave mocks another slave to make themselves feel better.”
Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 14 hours ago
You’re the one saying we shouldn’t be cross comparing different numbers with different meanings… While literally comparing different numbers with different meanings to support your point
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
The comments you’re responding to are not making that kind of general argument though, they are only talking about whether a specific claim makes sense.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Unemployment statistics do not show an accurate picture of the people who are unemployed based on the definition of unemployed that is used by regular human beings.
I understand the stat looks good, because the definition of the stat excludes growing groups of people who we would consider unemployed.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Well what I’m seeing in this thread is two metrics, BLS and LISEP, with the argument being that the distinction between them doesn’t matter because unemployment is right now historically low by both measures (I don’t really know the difference between them myself, or whether these are the only meaningful ways to measure it). And you’re reiterating that there exists some measure where it is high, but I think for that to be a convincing counterargument you would need to say more about what that measure is, show that unemployment is high by that measure, and make an argument why that way of measuring things is more relevant than the other ones.