4 ms·
I think you're correct to highlight the labor force participation rate but there doesn't appear to be an upper age cutoff on these stats, which is going to skew
by philipkglass 10y ago
I think you're correct to highlight the labor force participation rate but there doesn't appear to be an upper age cutoff on these stats, which is going to skew things.
"16 years and older employed or looking for work..."
Shouldn't it be something like 16 years to 66 years old? The boomers are getting older. Or even better, 20 to 70. I'm not really worried if people are delaying entry to work because they're still full time students or stopping work after they become eligible for full Social Security benefits.
- x3n0ph3n3 10y agoInterestingly enough, it's incidental to prime-age men (25-54) and more correlated with marital status than race or age: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/the-missing-men/488858/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/the-mis...