GDP is only designed to measure the size of an economy, but how well it’s serving the people who participate in it. Unemployment tells you only how many people have a “job”, but it tells you nothing about whether thirst jobs pay a liveable wage or how many people are working multiple jobs to get by.
Other measures, like homelessness and child poverty, are direct measures of his of how many people are getting completely fucked by the economy.
When combining measures, I think it makes most sense to just completely ignore metrics like GDP in favor of direct measures of well-being. No matter how high the GDP is, homeless people’s lives suck. No matter how low unemployment is, poor kids are still being set up for failure later in life. People living paycheck to paycheck can’t use a soaring S&P 500 to pay for a medical emergency.
Understandable for GDP, but unemployment should be a factor you consider in measures of well-being. Employment is one of the most important factors in a person’s life path. Unemployed people run into more financial difficulties, is associated with health problems, and results in society wide effect like increased crime.
As the person above mentioned, the employeement rate means absolutely nothing if those jobs don’t pay enough. It’s why employment is a useless metric, sure unemployment is low but how are people doing? Well, the amount of people living paycheck to paycheck and kids going hungry has skyrocketed. Shit, I’d bet half the reason jobs fill quickly is because many people are working more than one. If you need the equivalent of 3-4 working people to maintain a one bedroom apartment for two people then the economy is dog shit. People shouldn’t have to double their work just to get by but that’s what’s happening to damn near the entire generation of the most highly educated workforce of all time.
Some measures are a lot better than others.
GDP is only designed to measure the size of an economy, but how well it’s serving the people who participate in it. Unemployment tells you only how many people have a “job”, but it tells you nothing about whether thirst jobs pay a liveable wage or how many people are working multiple jobs to get by.
Other measures, like homelessness and child poverty, are direct measures of his of how many people are getting completely fucked by the economy.
When combining measures, I think it makes most sense to just completely ignore metrics like GDP in favor of direct measures of well-being. No matter how high the GDP is, homeless people’s lives suck. No matter how low unemployment is, poor kids are still being set up for failure later in life. People living paycheck to paycheck can’t use a soaring S&P 500 to pay for a medical emergency.
Understandable for GDP, but unemployment should be a factor you consider in measures of well-being. Employment is one of the most important factors in a person’s life path. Unemployed people run into more financial difficulties, is associated with health problems, and results in society wide effect like increased crime.
As the person above mentioned, the employeement rate means absolutely nothing if those jobs don’t pay enough. It’s why employment is a useless metric, sure unemployment is low but how are people doing? Well, the amount of people living paycheck to paycheck and kids going hungry has skyrocketed. Shit, I’d bet half the reason jobs fill quickly is because many people are working more than one. If you need the equivalent of 3-4 working people to maintain a one bedroom apartment for two people then the economy is dog shit. People shouldn’t have to double their work just to get by but that’s what’s happening to damn near the entire generation of the most highly educated workforce of all time.
I’d say unemployment is a semi-useless metric: if it’s high, things are definitely bad, but if it’s low, things aren’t necessarily good.
This- you can’t claim unemployment when you lost one job but still have another, if you need both to get by you’re just fucked.