[Ads-l] Jobless = anyone not employed, including retirees

[Jonathan Lighter]

This is indeed an unfortunate usage (though I can't think of a simple
synonym) because it seems to fall in line with the claim of some that
the "real" unemployment rate is "probably closer to twenty or
twenty-five per cent."

And yes, a very large number of Americans aged 1 day to 110 years are,
literally, "without jobs."

With so many more women working outside the home (and if you're a
homemaker, male or female, the more inclusive definition considers you
"unemployed"), it could even be that this so-called "true unemployment
rate" is actually lower than it would have been fifty years ago, when
America was "great."

JL




On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:06 PM, Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at gmail.com> wrote:
> I saw this webpage today:
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/06/03/plurality-of-sanders-donations-come-from-jobless.html
>
> This, to me, is a bad use of jobless, even if technically correct. Are
> children jobless? Non-working spouses? Anecdotal proof of "lies, damned
> lies, and statistics", in my book.
>
> DanG
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org



-- 
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org