I can't help but wonder how people can be unemployed when there's a labor shortage.

Because a good chunk of the 'labour shortage' is for jobs that are exploitative and often involve outright illegal labour practices. One thing the pandemic did was revealed to a lot of people that they could do just as well by spending a bit more time on a side hustle and dropping the jobs that were rife with stuff like wage theft.

Also note that the US unemployment rate is running at its lowest since 1969, (and that 1969 dip involved about a million young men being legally required to take a government job).

"Running a side hustle" is not the same thing as unemployed. You're basically running your own business. You're self-employed. Just because you call it by a new name doesn't mean it's not the same thing. And it doesn't answer the original question of "how can you be unemployed during a labor shortage?"

How about you try paying attention to the rest of my comment? Such as how the 'shortage' is mostly for crap jobs that aren't worth taking, ("any job is better than no job" is a lie pushed by abusive bosses), or how the US unemployment rate is at a multi-generational low.

Or, we could go with the basic answer I assumed anyone would get: Because you don't instantly and automatically get a new job when you lose/leave your previous one.

Of course, by your argument, Cricket-inc isn't unemployed anyway so your question was a non-sequitur.

Ok,I'm going to slowly because you're obviously not paying attention.

Lots of job openings,means at least some of those jobs are good. Or at least tolerable. There are more jobs than there are people to fill them. Thusly,you have your pick of jobs.

Pointing out many people are self-employed only makes it worse since it adds to employment options. So if he can't get the job he wants,he can make it himself.

Ergo,how does one get unemployed when you have a shortage of labor?

Oh, you think that jobs are fungible. They aren't.

Labour shortages happen when there aren't enough people to fill particular jobs. In this case, it's basically about there not being enough people willing to take crap jobs. (Remember: The employer whine of "nobody wants to works these days" is about people not being as willing to put up with rampant wage theft.¹) What's left are jobs that require some particular qualifications and thus cannot be filled by random people. This is how shortages work in most markets, it's not that there is no supply but that the supply is tight enough that some people will be unable to satisfy their particular needs.

And since you either didn't bother reading what you replied to, or you are dishonestly ignoring it: People will always have periods of unemployment because getting a new job _TAKES TIME_. There isn't a magical job fairy who waves a magic wand and instantly gets you a new job when the previous one ends.


1: It's not even about people being unwilling to take a job, they just aren't doing illegal unpaid overtime.

Ok,I see what the problem is. You don't understand how labor negotiations work. I'll try to bring you up to speed.

It's simple supply and demand,really. There's a massive demand for labor and a lack of supply. That's what's know as a "seller's market". This is the opposite of a lack of demand and a surplus of supply. That's a "buyer's market".

Now,in this case,what you're selling is your labor. And if they want it,they're going to have to pay for it. Meaning,you have a bunch of "buyers" who want what you have and you could sell your supply to any one of them. Meaning things like "unpaid overtime" and other forms of "wage theft" are off the table from the get go. You want overtime,you pay for it or I go to someone who will. There's a lot of people who need workers and they're not going to pull that shit.

So yeah,it was an oversight on his part that he didn't secure a new job before leaving his old one,but it shouldn't be too big a deal if he starts looking now and does so from the position of strength afforded by the seller's market he's in.

That clear enough for you?

Yep, it's clear you buy a lot of BS. The very companies that are facing shortages, (and note that there are also sectors that are seeing major layoffs lately), are the ones that insist on those crap conditions. Even the ones that are making concessions in the sectors historically rife with bad practices are running into people saying "yah, no" under the justifiable expectation that those concessions will be temporary at best.

Your belief that a labour shortage, (and remember that with something non-fungible you hit shortages well before total demand is greater than total supply), means anyone would be able to quickly get an acceptable job is, put bluntly, the sort of naive thinking you see out of libertarians who took an econ course back in high school.

Then don't work for them. Most people are hiring,especially at the "mom & pop" level. Like I said,there's good jobs in there somewhere.

You're starting to get it: Most of the people complaining about a shortage are the ones offering crap. What's left are sector-level shortages.

Neither the jobs nor the labour markets involve a fungible product: Not all prospective workers can fill any given job and not all jobs are open to any given job seeker. It doesn't matter how skilled of a coder you are, if you aren't a qualified nurse you aren't getting a nursing job.

Ironically, the improved bargaining position of some workers is making the shortage of workers for lower quality jobs worse. When your spouse is earning enough to go to single-income, there's no need to take a job in retail or hospitality.

It's almost like the labor market is correcting without tons of illegals willing to work for cheap and women leaving the work force. I fail to see how this is "bad" for workers since they can demand more money and better working conditions. You don't need the greatest job in the world,just one that pays enough and treats you well. And those are happening all over since the shit jobs have to clean up their act.

No, they're just relying on people like you to push a "if you don't have a job it's your fault for not taking one that's only sort of crap," narrative.

In a seller's market and jobs everywhere,yes. That's your fault. So quit arguing by proxy on the internet and go get a job,you lazy bum.

The jobs that are everywhere are the crap ones that, contrary to the moralist BS you're spouting, are often worse than no job at all.

Remember, you are the guy who decided to start this over someone saying what amounted to "I saw the writing on the wall and the better choice was to quit now rather than wait a couple months to be fired."

Yeah,but that's no reason not to get a new job. Preferably at someplace better. And I hate to break it to you but good jobs open up all the time too. You just have to find them.

And the good jobs get filled. You're just going to have to face it: The jobs that are wanting for people fall into two categories:

Garbage hospitality and retail jobs, (which are basically the only two sectors in the US with abnormally high unfilled job openings).
Specialist jobs that the vast majority of people can't fill, (and those have shortages on a regular basis).

I feel sorry for you that you have swallowed the myth that there is a moral imperative to have a job at all times. Also that you feel the need to lie about the post that caused your knee to jerk in the first place.

You think hospitality and retail jobs are hard? Wow. Well,that explains a lot. Get some exercise,hippy.

And now you're lying about what I said to the point of making something up out of whole cloth.

Care to respond to what I actually said? or would you like to admit you have no response by continuing to lie?


(I suppose you could have such a hard time reading that you looked at something that said there were two categories and that then separated those categories with not just a full stop but also a carriage return, then assumed both sentences were about a singular thing.)

"The jobs that are wanting for people fall into two categories:

Garbage hospitality and retail jobs, (which are basically the only two sectors in the US with abnormally high unfilled job openings)."

That's what you said. Is it not what you were talking about when you were talking about jobs that were "hard" and "undesirable". Cause that's what it seems like.

Just where do you get "hard" from that? Seriously, where? As I said, you made that up out of whole cloth because you couldn't support your position honestly.

Remember that is _one_ of the _two_ categories. Namely, the jobs that are crap and that can easily be a worse choice than no job.

The other category, as I have pointed out multiple times, are jobs that require rather specific qualifications, (nursing was an example I gave). These jobs often go through cycles of labour shortage and glut, (the shortages encourage people to go into the fields, resulting in a glut a few years down the line, which discourages new entrants, and so on).

Perhaps you were confused because one of the categories, (garbage jobs), involves two sectors, (hospitality and retail), and you are one of those foolish people with a bad habit of only reading to the point that inspires a reply.

So doing an easy job for low pay is "exploitative"? Easy jobs pretty much always pay less. When I think of "exploitative",I think working way too hard for low pay. In other words,a hard job.

So I guess I don't understand your definition of "exploitative",but given your communist bent,I'm guessing any job short of CEO is "exploitative".

I can make unkind assumptions about people too.

When the job involves things like hours of work or true wage rates that are literally illegal, it is more than fair to describe them as exploitative. Even the ones that don't actually stray into the realms of illegality are generally pushing the line of what is allowed and/or taking advantage of weak labour laws.

So don't work for them. Lots of jobs out there that don't do that. Get one of those.

People not working for them is THE VERY SHORTAGE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Repeating your false assertion isn't going to change that.

Many people have decided that the benefits of those jobs aren't worth the costs of having them. No amount of invisible hand fantasies is going to change that.

Being self-employed is still having a job,commie.

To no surprise, once again you have no actual response and have decided to spew out a non sequitur.

You know what? Since you can't be bothered to go beyond your basic assertions.

*PLONK*