Asklemmy
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
In every modern economic system, there is a share of individuals in the labor force who are in between employment. What that share is depends entirely on the institutions of the systems those people are in, and so there isn't one golden rule figure to spit out.
I think some economists tried to figure out what the share of unemployed people was supposed to be but there is no golden rule yet
Natural? Absolutely not.
In a capitalist system, where labor is a commodity bought by employers, it will tend to have unemployment. Unemployment is extremely useful for capitalists primarily because it drives the prices of labor down, because unemployed people will be more desperate for a job and accept lower wages, and also it leaves a larger pool of labor to be employed anytime needed.
The market itself cannot fix unemployment, and in fact, tends to worsen it. Unemployment is only fixed through state intervention and programs to employ people. The lowest unemployment rates are found in countries which do not obey the capitalist market logic, namely socialist countries. Cuba had an unemployment rate of 1.2% before the pandemic, Laos has an unemployment rate of 1% and was lower before the pandemic, the USSR had rates of unemployment below 1%.
There's nothing natural about unemployment. It's a state policy to leave a high percentage of the people unemployed, and it only benefits corporate interests.
Absolutely. It's like with housing, in an ideal system there will be some vacant housing but everyone will be housed. There is going to be some give to the system as people move around between houses.
Similarly, people moving between jobs might have a period of unemployment, and that's okay. What is vital is to have a safety net that lets them more or less maintain their standard of living so they're not dissuaded from reaching for better opportunities. A weak or non-existent safety net hands power to employers because employees may not have the option of leaving a bad job to seek out something better.
Yes. Around 99.998%, given current technology. Source: I am a technologist by profession.