Low unemployment literally means nothing by itself.
Say you have 100 workers and 10 dont have jobs and are actively looking for jobs/fit unemployment, thats 10% unemployment. Next month you have the same 100 workers and the 10 give up looking for a job and no longer fit what unemployment is, technically your unemployment is 0%, but no jobs were created and its at an all time low!
Thats why you look at U5 and U6 data, which is also near all time lows:
Low unemployment literally means nothing by itself.
Lmao so first you complain about the unemployment statistics not accounting for discouraged workers, then I show statistics which does and now you complain low employment literally doesnt mean anything. Ok, your statement sounds perfectly reasonable, Im sure every economist in the world will say the statement low unemployment literally means nothing is an intelligent statement on how economies work.
But lets play by your rules, what more has to be taken into account with a low unemployment rate that shows we have a growing/strong economy? and whatever that is, is that weighted more or less than the U5 and U6 unemployment rates in terms judging the strength of the economy?
How about the fact that wages are still stagnant compared to inflation? Oh wow, so if people are getting jobs, its not enough to provide.
Also doesnt count for people having to work multiple jobs to survive.
So again, low unemployment by itself literally means nothing. I dont know how I can make this anymore clearer to you. Low unemployment BY ITSELF literally means nothing.
But continue to tout that wasting government resources on make me feel better rallies is a good thing for America and its super low unemployment.
Wrong, unemployment rate is categorized as an economic indicator, the very purpose of economic indicators are to give us snapshots of the overall economy. Meaning, even by itself, an indicator has value. GDP for instance is something else that can be used on its own and have value. You may not get Norway has a better standard of living than the US by looking at GDP, but you can understand the US is a much more advanced nation when you compare our GDP to some country in the third world. Sure indicators by itself doesnt explain the full picture, but to say they have no value by itself is misunderstanding the use of economic indicators.
Additionally, wage growth rates seem be similar what they had been under the Ibama administration: