3 ms·
But wouldn't comparing U6 to U3 be misleading? U6 has always been a double of U3, more or less. Right now U6 looks like U6 in the late 90s.
by blackhaz 8y ago
But wouldn't comparing U6 to U3 be misleading? U6 has always been a double of U3, more or less. Right now U6 looks like U6 in the late 90s.
- AmericanChopper 8y agoIf you want to talk about the economy’s ability to generate jobs, then U3 is the best metric. U6 contains everybody who chooses not to look for employment for whatever personal reason, whether they’re discouraged or simply just don’t really need or want a job.
- rtisdale 8y agoIt's about what each of these statistics measure. As another user mentioned, the U3 is a very narrow definition that is largely useful for measuring the cost of unemployment benefits, it does not give a true idea of the real unemployment rate. This article goes into the differences and their relevance https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-unemployment-rate-u6-vs-u3.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-... >The U-3 unemployment rate is a comparatively narrow technical measure that leaves out a whole swath of out-of-work people who are willing and able to take a job but who don't fit the narrow BLS definition of "unemployed." For example, a stonemason who wants to work but who has become discouraged by a lack of opportunity in the midst of a deep economic recession would not be included in U-3 unemployment. A marketing executive who is laid off at age 57 and stops scheduling new job interviews due to her experience of age discrimination would not be included in U-3 unemployment. A person who only works one six-hour shift per week because no full-time jobs are available in his area would not be included in U-3 unemployment.