Sure the term might not be ideal but it serves a purpose. Living in the current US with 24k a year is miserable (more or less depending on location).
When people bring up unemployment in terms of public policy, they generally are discussing actionable problems. Like "the unemployment rate is 6% so the gov should make incentives to hire more people".
These discussions could (ought to) include people that can't afford a car in the non-walkable US, or who have to live with relatives or roommates because affordable housing is a fantasy. "Maybe someone working full time should be able to afford their own place and eat more than rice and ramen"
Someone making 15k a year working 40 hours is functionlly unemployed, in every sense of the phrase imo
Someone making 15k a year working 40 hours is functionlly unemployed, in every sense of the phrase imo
We have a much better metric for that though, which is the poverty rate.
You can be employed and in poverty and you can be unemployed and not be in poverty. You can even be earning less than a living wage and be out of poverty if you have savings or other financial assistance from family, etc.
Tracking unemployment for what it is makes sense. Muddling the term doesn’t.
Like "the unemployment rate is 6% so the gov should make incentives to hire more people".
So like, to make those people earning under 24k get a second job?
I don't see how you can use unemployment rate to justify making jobs when it already includes people who have jobs. The two need to be split up so the real number can be used for that argument.
Comments
That's why they use the qualifier "functionally".
Sure the term might not be ideal but it serves a purpose. Living in the current US with 24k a year is miserable (more or less depending on location).
When people bring up unemployment in terms of public policy, they generally are discussing actionable problems. Like "the unemployment rate is 6% so the gov should make incentives to hire more people".
These discussions could (ought to) include people that can't afford a car in the non-walkable US, or who have to live with relatives or roommates because affordable housing is a fantasy. "Maybe someone working full time should be able to afford their own place and eat more than rice and ramen"
Someone making 15k a year working 40 hours is functionlly unemployed, in every sense of the phrase imo
We have a much better metric for that though, which is the poverty rate.
You can be employed and in poverty and you can be unemployed and not be in poverty. You can even be earning less than a living wage and be out of poverty if you have savings or other financial assistance from family, etc.
Tracking unemployment for what it is makes sense. Muddling the term doesn’t.
So like, to make those people earning under 24k get a second job?
I don't see how you can use unemployment rate to justify making jobs when it already includes people who have jobs. The two need to be split up so the real number can be used for that argument.