• HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Low unemployment is a good thing- to a certain percentage (3% i think?). Not 0%.

    People are arguing saying we expect some people living it tents - no, we expect to have people unemployed for a short time while they swap jobs, or seasonal workers out of season, or new grads looking for their first role.

      • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Uh… people and the economy??? To copy paste my other comment

        I’ll happy tell a new grad they don’t have to work full time in a minimum wage job while they work through the process of acquiring their first post-grad role, or the student to enjoy their gap year traveling the country. Happily tell the seasonal worker who did 15 hour days over summer they made enough to have 6 months off. The stay at home parent that they are doing a good thing even though they aren’t getting paid for it, or the person transferring between jobs that they don’t have to start the day after resigning from their other role.

      • frezik
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you want the capitalist answer, at zero unemployment, companies have no room for expansion at all. Can’t make more product unless a new technology comes around to do more with the amount of people you already have. At the same time, wages will have an upward pressure as companies try to keep people, which in turn drives inflation. Alternatively, companies try to extract more value from people by working them harder and longer (which is more or less what’s been going on for the last few years). So the answer would be that everyone is harmed to some degree when employment is too low.

        Of course, it is not hard to imagine systems where everyone is employed just to pitch in a couple hours a week to get all the necessary work done, and are otherwise free to follow other pursuits.

      • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Happy to. I’ll happy tell a new grad they don’t have to work full time in a minimum wage job while they work through the process of acquiring their first post-grad role, or the student to enjoy their gap year traveling the country. Happily tell the seasonal worker who did 15 hour days over summer they made enough to have 6 months off. The stay at home parent that they are doing a good thing even though they aren’t getting paid for it, or the person transferring between jobs that they don’t have to start the day after resigning from their other role. Do you want to tell them all to get back into paid employment right now to keep unemployment at 0%?

        • rainynight65@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is a difference between unemployed but needing to work in order to afford food and shelter, and unemployed but being able to stay out of the workforce for a while. A lot of people need work but can’t find any. Certain degrees of unemployment are fine if those who can’t find work are taken care of, through a social safety net and similar.

          • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Correct - but the unemployment rate doesn’t take that into account.

            I lie, I gave a few bad examples. Those of working age but not looking (like the SAHP) are out of workforce and not included in unemployment rate. But seasonal, grads looking for the right job and those transferring between jobs are still unemployed and form that 3% i mentioned. The other type (structural unemployment) that relates to not having the skills that employers search for we should have as close to 0% as possible and that part is a concern.