3.5% to 5.9%. Neither is high. How much of that 2.4% is jobs with liveable wages?

> 3.5% to 5.9%. Neither is high. How much of that 2.4% is jobs with liveable wages?

5.9% x 448.4m EU population = ~26.5m people.

3.5% x 331.9m US population = ~11.6m people.

So if China had a 2% unemployment rate that would be worse unemployment because of the total people effected? And Greece's 12 percent unemployment is fine because it's only 1.2m people?

Edit: did you change your argument after I replied? I swear you were taking about total numbers before.

> So if China had a 2% unemployment rate that would be worse unemployment because of the total people effected? And Greece's 12 percent unemployment is fine because it's only 1.2m people?

1.412B (China population) x 2% = 28.2m people in China unemployed

1.2m people in Greece unemployed

Yes, % is statistics. The absolute number of people is the real impact.

>1.412B (China population) x 2% = 28.2m people in China unemployed

>1.2m people in Greece unemployed

>Yes, % is statistics. The absolute number of people is the real impact.

If that's the case why isn't America copying Greece's economic policy as Greece is leaving only 1.2m unemployed?

Most likely the entire 2.4% in comparison to the EU.

You shouldn't compare the unemployment rates between countries. There are different criteria for "unemployed", so measures in different countries don't measure the same thing.

Labor participation rates are more comparable. The US rate is worse than the EU rate.

I would expect labor force participation rate to go down as your society gets wealthier. More education and more retirement.

Unfortunately, in the US, the rate has been trending upwards in the retirement age bracket for the last 20 years.

https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/civilian-labor-force-particip...

It doesn't increase the cost of employees though. It may make them less productive; or it might make them happier and more productive.

Compared to the tech world HN is obsessed with, a majority of businesses have a more direct relationship between labor and productivity.

If you run a store in NYC that needs three workers at all time to operate, there's no getting around the fact that giving every employee time off will result in less productivity per year per employee. If you run a construction or transportation business - you need a certain number of people (maybe even legally) to operate at any time.

For the tech world and other white collar jobs for which it is true that time off may help the headline above isnt as applicable. While probably still behind european counterparts, many of these jobs in the US already have real vacation time and generous remote work options.

This ignores factors such as accident, defect rate and cost of disabilities associated with not taking time off.

As an observation, one difference between US and EU PTO behaviors is that everyone in the EU tends to take their PTO at the same time around July/August. In the US, it is much more spread out even when they have equivalent amounts of PTO. It creates a different business problem in Europe because everyone stops working at the same time, effectively shutting down business, whereas in the US they can operate at the same cadence all year because use of PTO is so diffuse.

Some of this is probably closely connected to the reality that much of the US has nicer weather for much wider periods of time due to its lower average latitude.

> As an observation, one difference between US and EU PTO behaviors is that everyone in the EU tends to take their PTO at the same time around July/August.

That is very much country dependent and can't be stated as a general rule. While this may be the case in France, where some businesses close for the entire August that's certainly not the case in, for example, Switzerland where a business may close 2 weeks in February.

Most businesses don't close at all and within certain limits employees are free to take their vacation whenever it suits them.