For comparative tracking we do need to stick to the same criteria, I'm with you. I also agree some political factions, in particular those not in control, favo

For comparative tracking we do need to stick to the same criteria, I'm with you. I also agree some political factions, in particular those not in control, favour higher numbers. Those in place would rather minimise it. The stance to use criteria that exclude people who would gladly work, if decent opportunities were available to them, to me is dishonest. I don't know if the numbers this article proposes, based on a very inclusive criteria is more honest, but at least it tells us what the ratio looks like if we included more segments. Nobody would argue against the fact a good part is effectively not working, thus technically "unemployed".