4 ms·
> unemployment hasn't been this low in 20 years. This is not really accurate. Unemployment is at a 40 year high. (where "unemployment" means "percent of workin
by maxsilver 7y ago
> unemployment hasn't been this low in 20 years.
This is not really accurate. Unemployment is at a 40 year high. (where "unemployment" means "percent of working-aged people without a job")
https://www.theatlas.com/charts/B1SUWjSx7 https://www.theatlas.com/charts/B1SUWjSx7 (that big drop is people losing their jobs). The last time the numbers were this bad was back around 1979.
- burfog 7y agoOne can read a lot into that chart, depending on one's own bias. For example, if jobs get better, then families can live on one income. This is good. We're still way above the workforce participation of the 1950s, which generally was a better time for family life in the USA.
- ska 7y agowhich generally was a better time for family life in the USA. I suspect a good chunk of the population would dispute that statement. In general I think there is a lot of rose colored glasses about that period of time. Regardless - I haven't seen any evidence that we are returning to a general viability of supporting a family on one income, at least supporting it well. Do you know of any?