Historically the unemployment rate has just been one indicator of how the economy is doing. All else being equal[1], economy A with 5% unemployment should be do

Historically the unemployment rate has just been one indicator of how the economy is doing. All else being equal[1], economy A with 5% unemployment should be doing better than economy B with 10% unemployment, at least from a job seeker's standpoint. The danger of being purely quantitatively driven by these historically useful metrics is that there is an absolute focus on keeping the numbers at the right level or moving in the right direction while simultaneously doing things that undercut the value of those metrics. In the previous century, falling unemployment numbers used to indicate that factory workers were returning to work at their old wage and benefits or better that new jobs were being created. However, today it often means that the factory worker who lost their job is now an Uber driver for a fraction of the pay. You used to see stories like 'factory X is bringing back Y thousand good paying jobs as it (re)opens a production line' now the story is 'unemployment is below 4%... shut up and like it' [1] If all else isn't equal, whether comparing economy A to economy B or a previous version of itself, you are right it isn't a meaningful metric at all.