Quote:
Originally Posted by Alawen
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
We've been using the same number during my entire lifetime; this is the fourth major recession I've lived through. Suddenly it's not good enough anymore and using it is a giant conspiracy of misdirection?
|
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Agreed.
It's the only number that makes sense to use. First of all, labor force participation rate is highly misunderstood. Tanzania and Rwanda are among the global leaders in labor force participation -- it's not always a good thing when LFP is up. Second of all, you can't start guessing who are and aren't discouraged workers, and you certainly can't fault the economy for failing to integrate citizens that have stopped searching for employment in order to retire early, return to education, or brush up on the historicity of Jesus (I kid). It is only natural that following a major economic downturn, labor participation will decline -- and it's not always a bad thing.
Anyway, our labor participation rate is still higher than the UK's was in 2007, pre-crisis, and they've managed to avoid mass hysteria and barter systems -- so I think we should be cool.