4 ms·
As a percentage "rate" it does mean something very specific, and therefore not super intuitively useful. But it's still helpful as a directional metric. If the
by rory 5y ago
As a percentage "rate" it does mean something very specific, and therefore not super intuitively useful.
But it's still helpful as a directional metric. If the U-3 unemployment rate goes up, it's likely the number of people in the other situations you mentioned has gone up as well.
- chiefalchemist 5y agoIt's still too high level. You can't make any meaningful decisions based on it. For example, and we hear similar all the time, "...X jobs were created in the quarter and the unemployment rate fell to Y..." But 1) What were those X jobs? Min wage (or less)? Or high paying? 2) Where were these jobs? Min wage in CA or NJ, or min wage where costs are less. The quantity (i.e., direction) doesn't tell enough, we need quality - at least - as well. Politicians love it as a metric because no one asks "what type of jobs? How well do they pay?" And that alone makes it suspect.
- rory 5y agoSure, it's obvious that you can't capture that complexity in a single number. I could tell you my weight, and it wouldn't tell you if I'm a smoker or a drunk, if I eat my veggies or exercise. But if I'm 400 pounds you can still reasonably predict I'm unhealthy, and if I lose weight from there that's a decent sign I'm getting better.
- chiefalchemist 5y agoBut that's the point, we have a metric that politicians, economists and the media love to parade around as meaningful. The problem is it's not meaningful. It's crap. This is up there with presenting Wall Street IS the economy (for the rest of us). How do we hold people accountable when we allow their bullshit to be accepted and normalized?