4 ms·

If we compare the unemployment rate as measured then to today it's quite comparable https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1940/population-labor

If we compare the unemployment rate as measured then to today it's quite comparable https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1940/population-labor-force/population-labor-force.pdf https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1940/... Labor force participation rate according to this was 53% in 1930 The labor force participation rate for people age 16 and older was 62.6 percent in May 2023

Bostonian 3y ago
Labor force participation is not comparable between then and now, because a larger fraction of the population was married, and married women, officially not in the work force, were more likely to be housewives, with larger families and fewer labor-saving devices. The unemployment rate tells you how much slack there is in the labor market.
- pauldenton 3y ago
  I'll just mention that Women entered the workforce during WW1 and WW2 as men went overseas to fight. Rosie the Riveter. Also there's been a long list of changes in how U-3 and U-6 Unemployment is measured. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-unemployment-rate-u6-vs-u3.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-... Here are a few examples of individuals who wouldn't be included in the U-3 rate: A stonemason who wants to work but became discouraged by a lack of opportunity in the midst of a deep economic recession A marketing executive who was laid off at age 57 and stopped scheduling new job interviews because they repeatedly encountered age discrimination A person who only works one six-hour shift per week because no full-time jobs are available in their area In 1930 the 2 former would be considered Unemployed while the third would be considered underemployed. Labor force participation rate includes people who retire early, or spend excessive time in academia because they don't want to enter the job market in a recession, or people who stop looking for work and enroll in school after not being able to find work.

Bostonian 3y ago

Labor force participation is not comparable between then and now, because a larger fraction of the population was married, and married women, officially not in the work force, were more likely to be housewives, with larger families and fewer labor-saving devices. The unemployment rate tells you how much slack there is in the labor market.

pauldenton 3y ago
I'll just mention that Women entered the workforce during WW1 and WW2 as men went overseas to fight. Rosie the Riveter. Also there's been a long list of changes in how U-3 and U-6 Unemployment is measured. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-unemployment-rate-u6-vs-u3.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080415/true-... Here are a few examples of individuals who wouldn't be included in the U-3 rate: A stonemason who wants to work but became discouraged by a lack of opportunity in the midst of a deep economic recession A marketing executive who was laid off at age 57 and stopped scheduling new job interviews because they repeatedly encountered age discrimination A person who only works one six-hour shift per week because no full-time jobs are available in their area In 1930 the 2 former would be considered Unemployed while the third would be considered underemployed. Labor force participation rate includes people who retire early, or spend excessive time in academia because they don't want to enter the job market in a recession, or people who stop looking for work and enroll in school after not being able to find work.