>> You are downplaying reporting of +5% unemployment in 3 months Maybe it is significant, but even if it was the author's data provides no context to evaluate

>> You are downplaying reporting of +5% unemployment in 3 months Maybe it is significant, but even if it was the author's data provides no context to evaluate the 3.9, 3.9, 4.3 million sequence. >> the difference between now and 2019 is that unlike 2019 those persons were either reemployed or counted as unemployed… Are you sure? I can't find this particular statement in the article. Did I miss something? >> now 14M Americans (aged 18-34) are immediately removed from the workforce instead of being counted as unemployed. Again, a single number with no context literally says nothing! If I came to you and said over the last three months our quantity of X increased by 400k from 3.9M, and and the total accumulation of some subset of X was now at 14M, do you have enough information to tell if this is unusually high, low or normal behaviour for X?