> Compare unemployment in the Great Depression vs Great Recession:
The second chart I linked does exactly that. The point is to not look at the absolute numbers because, the unemployment trend in 2008 was reversed by fiscal policy, but during the great depression there was no such intervention.
Until the central banks intervened, unemployment was tracking almost exactly with the great depression.
You also can't compare the absolute unemployment numbers for a lot of other reasons. A major one is that unemployment (The U6 number, i.e. "real unemployment") in the first half of the century was consistently 10%+ higher than it is today. That's because of less women in the workforce.
In 1929, the workforce was considered fully employed with an unemployment rate (U6) of 15%. In 2008, we considered a fully employed workforce to be just 5% unemployment.
The second chart I linked does exactly that. The point is to not look at the absolute numbers because, the unemployment trend in 2008 was reversed by fiscal policy, but during the great depression there was no such intervention.
Until the central banks intervened, unemployment was tracking almost exactly with the great depression.
You also can't compare the absolute unemployment numbers for a lot of other reasons. A major one is that unemployment (The U6 number, i.e. "real unemployment") in the first half of the century was consistently 10%+ higher than it is today. That's because of less women in the workforce.
In 1929, the workforce was considered fully employed with an unemployment rate (U6) of 15%. In 2008, we considered a fully employed workforce to be just 5% unemployment.