Quote:
Originally Posted by woj
There are dozens of possible explanations... so it's impossible to draw any conclusions from the "employment-population ratio"...
maybe more people are choosing to retire earlier (before 64) causing the ratio to drop?
maybe households are feeling wealthier now, so only one person wants/needs to work instead of 2? maybe more people are choosing different paths in life, starting a business, investing, or perhaps pursuing arts instead of "working"? maybe social standards are changing, so maybe it's more acceptable not to work? maybe younger generation are less materialistic, so they are less interested in work? maybe more people are choosing to study instead of work? etc...
so... claiming that low "employment-population ratio" proves there is no work available is a bit of a stretch... there are dozens of alternative equally possible explanations...
|
How it is impossible to draw conclusions from employment ratio? It is self-explanatory: the amount of work age folks who are employed. It describes just what it is meant to.
By the way, doing business counts as "employed" in that ratio.
The rest of the stuff, you are right. It doesn't give you reasons why people are or aren't employed, but isn't even supposed to do so. It is just one fucking measurement. Even businesses use balanced scorecards.
My claim that there is no job for the most non-employed is based on; that no economy can suddenly create jobs for almost half of their work age population if they all want to be employed. At least with private sector, socialism style yes. As there is also much unemployed folks, who are registered to be wanting a job, it is easy to conclude that if there isn't job for the 5,5 % of folks, there isn't job for the rest 35 %:ish neither.