3 ms·

That's a funny thing to say since you can't get 10x worse than it is--we're already at 25% unemployment. Maybe you can say 2x?

darkerside 6y ago
Depending how you calculate it, that's not necessarily true. Reported unemployment numbers are calculated as a percentage of people who are actively working or seeking work. It's possible for the denominator to increase for some reason (like more people needing to find work due to state and federal aid drying up). Said another way, the current workforce is 25% unemployed. If that corresponds to 5m out of a potential workforce of 25m, but the workforce increased to 100m, unemployment could increase 10x to 50m, while only doubling as a percentage. And I just looked it up and these numbers are totally detached from reality, but I've written too much to delete now, so I'm just going to publish it! (And besides, I think it's still useful to question what's behind statistics)
- ARandumGuy 6y ago
  Part of the issue is that the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports six unemployment numbers, all with different standards for what constitutes 'unemployment.' All of these numbers are useful, but often people throw around different numbers without explaining which unemployment number they're actually talking about, which can result in seeing wildly different numbers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm https://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm
autosharp 6y ago
75% is working right now but if it gets 10x worse then 7.5% will be working.
- quickthrowman 6y ago
  Uh, if 7.5% of people have jobs, there will have been riots and civil disturbances for months, food shortages, utility failures, limited medical care, and so on as the employment rate plummets. It’s not possible to have 7.5% employment without total chaos, might as well be 0% in your (impossible) example.
koheripbal 6y ago
2x more unemployment might be 10x worse, economically. It's not linear.

darkerside 6y ago

Depending how you calculate it, that's not necessarily true. Reported unemployment numbers are calculated as a percentage of people who are actively working or seeking work. It's possible for the denominator to increase for some reason (like more people needing to find work due to state and federal aid drying up). Said another way, the current workforce is 25% unemployed. If that corresponds to 5m out of a potential workforce of 25m, but the workforce increased to 100m, unemployment could increase 10x to 50m, while only doubling as a percentage. And I just looked it up and these numbers are totally detached from reality, but I've written too much to delete now, so I'm just going to publish it! (And besides, I think it's still useful to question what's behind statistics)

ARandumGuy 6y ago
Part of the issue is that the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports six unemployment numbers, all with different standards for what constitutes 'unemployment.' All of these numbers are useful, but often people throw around different numbers without explaining which unemployment number they're actually talking about, which can result in seeing wildly different numbers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm https://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm

autosharp 6y ago

75% is working right now but if it gets 10x worse then 7.5% will be working.

quickthrowman 6y ago
Uh, if 7.5% of people have jobs, there will have been riots and civil disturbances for months, food shortages, utility failures, limited medical care, and so on as the employment rate plummets. It’s not possible to have 7.5% employment without total chaos, might as well be 0% in your (impossible) example.

koheripbal 6y ago

2x more unemployment might be 10x worse, economically. It's not linear.