thetonestarr said:
Kasz216 said:
thetonestarr said:
=|
Yeah, y'all are right. Silly me.
The rate is still pretty high.
edit: The number categorized as "unemployed" in the US is currently 14 million. So it's still vastly greater than the 3.2m and the point absolutely still stands.
|
The point doesn't stand as much as you'd think.
Thing is... 5% unemployment is standard. When times were GREAT we had 5% unemployment. (And really 5% unemployment is way better then say, basically all of europe was back when times were good.)
Unemployment is currently at 9.1%.
So around 7.4 million of those people would be unemployed when times were good.
Leaving us with 6.6 million... so by filling those 3.2 million jobs we'd cut the "problem" unemployment nearly in half.
Though it'd likely rise again as the drop in the unemployment rate would lead to more people who aren't currently looking for jobs begin looking again.
|
Yes, but you can't look at it like that. We have 14m unemployed. Filling those spots would still leave at least 10.8 million unemployed, assuming NOBODY else loses their jobs. That would leave us at an unemployment rate of 7.02%, which is still considered high and, again, is assuming that NOBODY is ADDED to the ranks of the unemployed, which is beyond impossible.
|
It's high, but it's not THAT high.
You might not consider it high at all depending on why you think our unemployment is naturally lower then Europeon unemployment.
