This is how economics goes astray. Being easily and consistently measurable is one virtue. It's nice that "unemployment" can be measured this way monthly witho

This is how economics goes astray. Being easily and consistently measurable is one virtue. It's nice that "unemployment" can be measured this way monthly without too much measurement controversy. Useful for charting trends with high resolution. That doesn't change the fact that it is not an estimate of "unemployment," defined in a way that we care about more. If you ignore the involuntarily retired 58 year old because measurement is subjective then you are undercounting by a lot. You're not undercounting evenly, especially over time, geo or in extreme circumstances (like recession). It's an issue if the primary unemployment measure does not even estimate "unemployment" harmonious with a common sense definition