undefined | Better HN

0 pointsb1121mo ago0 comments

Same issue in my country with employment rates. Yes, some of those have been looking for work for so long that they slide from looking to "not looking" automatically. However at the same time, some of those people actually don't want to work.

And if they don't want to work, why would that impinge upon full employment, because what is the plan? Force people to work who are retired, or don't want to? Work or go to jail? "Full employment" is always presumed to be "people wanting to work can find it".

0 comments

AlexCoventry1mo ago

Giving up looking is not necessarily the same as not wanting a job.

b112OP1mo ago

Yes, that's why I specifically mentioned it.

If the best data you have is conjoined, then you must either figure it out, or ignore it.

Do you know what percentage, exactly, are retired vs "giving uo"?

No?

Then when someone says full employment, they're right unless you have specific and precise data to counter that.

We could also discuss people too sick to work. Or on maternity leave. Or wealth vs desire to work. Or 100 other factors.

xp841mo ago

> Then when someone says full employment, they're right unless

That's odd. The burden of proof is not exclusively on one side.

b112OP1mo ago

The burden of proof is predicated upon a well established economic terms. You want to refute those century+ old definitions? Alter them?

Then yes, you have to start the dance. And work at it. And convince the entire planet to change.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

AlexCoventry1mo ago

Giving up looking is not necessarily the same as not wanting a job.

b112OP1mo ago

Yes, that's why I specifically mentioned it.

If the best data you have is conjoined, then you must either figure it out, or ignore it.

Do you know what percentage, exactly, are retired vs "giving uo"?

No?

Then when someone says full employment, they're right unless you have specific and precise data to counter that.

We could also discuss people too sick to work. Or on maternity leave. Or wealth vs desire to work. Or 100 other factors.

xp841mo ago

> Then when someone says full employment, they're right unless

That's odd. The burden of proof is not exclusively on one side.

b112OP1mo ago

The burden of proof is predicated upon a well established economic terms. You want to refute those century+ old definitions? Alter them?

Then yes, you have to start the dance. And work at it. And convince the entire planet to change.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse