It does not take any hand waving -- you're trying to redefine a standard variable. U-3 is the 'headline' unemployment number which is near 5% right now. There a

It does not take any hand waving -- you're trying to redefine a standard variable. U-3 is the 'headline' unemployment number which is near 5% right now. There are plenty of other ways to calculate it, including at least 5 published by the BLS. All of them tell the same story: people who want jobs, historically and barring recession, have been by and large able to get them, even if the job itself is not ideal. Your 50% number is more commonly called the 'labor force participation rate' and it's near 63% right now [1], but has trended down for the past few decades. I would argue (as Keynes did) that if work force participation falls and standards of living continues to rise (or stay flat) then society is having good results. [1] http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/94333000-not-labor-force-labor-force-participation-628 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/94333000-not...