3 ms·

Country A has 5% "official" unemployment. But 20% of the population has simply given up seeking employment, lives at home with their parents, and plays video ga

Country A has 5% "official" unemployment. But 20% of the population has simply given up seeking employment, lives at home with their parents, and plays video games all day. Another 30% of the population is employed part-time and barely covers their bills, even though they would like full-time work. Country B has 5% "official" unemployment. Everyone who would like to work is either employed or seeking employment. And everyone who is employed is employed to their desired level. You argue that A and B are equatable for the purposes of this discussion, because the 5% "official" unemployment is calculated the same way. I argue that they are not, because things excluded from that calculation have a very real impact on the economic stability of the population.

snowwrestler 11y ago
The numbers are equatable, even if they don't measure what you would prefer they measure. But if you'd like to supply alternate unemployment data, I'm sure many readers would appreciate it. As it is, your post is hypothetical. And anyway, unemployment has been measured the same way for decades. If the question is whether we stand on a societal precipice right now, then criticizing how unemployment is measured is not relevant. Of course it has shortcomings. But it has had the same shortcomings for a long time, so the shortcomings themselves are not proof that we stand on a precipice now.
- jdmichal 11y ago
  > The numbers are equatable, even if they don't measure what you would prefer they measure. I never claimed otherwise. I claimed that the number as measured excludes many things that are relevant to the discussion. And, therefore, using that number as the basis of an argument is flawed. > But if you'd like to supply alternate unemployment data, I'm sure many readers would appreciate it. As it is, your post is hypothetical. Just because someone can point out a problem does not mean that they are capable of providing a solution. This is the equivalent of labeling a ticket as invalid because someone can't tell you what line of code to change. I pointed out a problem in an argument; it is not my duty to then fix the argument. > And anyway, unemployment has been measured the same way for decades. If the question is whether we stand on a societal precipice right now, then criticizing how unemployment is measured is not relevant. Of course it has shortcomings. But it has had the same shortcomings for a long time, so the shortcomings themselves are not proof that we stand on a precipice now. Again, I did not claim any of that. Specifically, I did not claim that we are on a precipice. I did claim that using the official unemployment calculation is not necessarily sufficient for claiming that we are not on a precipice. Which is what the person I responded to did claim.
  - snowwrestler 11y ago
    > Specifically, I did not claim that we are on a precipice. I did claim that using the official unemployment calculation is not necessarily sufficient for claiming that we are not on a precipice. This is a good point: you're right that those are not the same claims. Sometimes I am imprecise about who said exactly what in HN threads. We still haven't resolved whether or not we're on a precipice, though. :-)
    - jdmichal 11y ago
      > We still haven't resolved whether or not we're on a precipice, though. :-) Indeed. We've had a lot of social wins recently, so I personally still hold out hope. I think navigating automation is going to be one of the defining points of this age, as navigating mechanization and industrialization was of the preceding age. Humanity will survive, but not necessarily all the structures that we've become accommodated to.

snowwrestler 11y ago

The numbers are equatable, even if they don't measure what you would prefer they measure. But if you'd like to supply alternate unemployment data, I'm sure many readers would appreciate it. As it is, your post is hypothetical. And anyway, unemployment has been measured the same way for decades. If the question is whether we stand on a societal precipice right now, then criticizing how unemployment is measured is not relevant. Of course it has shortcomings. But it has had the same shortcomings for a long time, so the shortcomings themselves are not proof that we stand on a precipice now.

jdmichal 11y ago
> The numbers are equatable, even if they don't measure what you would prefer they measure. I never claimed otherwise. I claimed that the number as measured excludes many things that are relevant to the discussion. And, therefore, using that number as the basis of an argument is flawed. > But if you'd like to supply alternate unemployment data, I'm sure many readers would appreciate it. As it is, your post is hypothetical. Just because someone can point out a problem does not mean that they are capable of providing a solution. This is the equivalent of labeling a ticket as invalid because someone can't tell you what line of code to change. I pointed out a problem in an argument; it is not my duty to then fix the argument. > And anyway, unemployment has been measured the same way for decades. If the question is whether we stand on a societal precipice right now, then criticizing how unemployment is measured is not relevant. Of course it has shortcomings. But it has had the same shortcomings for a long time, so the shortcomings themselves are not proof that we stand on a precipice now. Again, I did not claim any of that. Specifically, I did not claim that we are on a precipice. I did claim that using the official unemployment calculation is not necessarily sufficient for claiming that we are not on a precipice. Which is what the person I responded to did claim.
- snowwrestler 11y ago
  > Specifically, I did not claim that we are on a precipice. I did claim that using the official unemployment calculation is not necessarily sufficient for claiming that we are not on a precipice. This is a good point: you're right that those are not the same claims. Sometimes I am imprecise about who said exactly what in HN threads. We still haven't resolved whether or not we're on a precipice, though. :-)
  - jdmichal 11y ago
    > We still haven't resolved whether or not we're on a precipice, though. :-) Indeed. We've had a lot of social wins recently, so I personally still hold out hope. I think navigating automation is going to be one of the defining points of this age, as navigating mechanization and industrialization was of the preceding age. Humanity will survive, but not necessarily all the structures that we've become accommodated to.