he said something to the effect of "unemployment is actually at 10%, because people have given up looking for work." i've seen it tossed around by so many GOPers over the last few years that i was surprised to see someone largely aligned with this administration toss it out.

the problem is that while that's a true statement, that angle is less than accurate. yes, the U6 #s are higher than U3, which is what's traditionally discussed when we talk about unemployment. but U6 is *always* higher than U3, and U6 has improved year over year under this administration the same way that U3 has.

here's U3: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/UNRATE
and here's U6: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/U6RATE

they're two different #s that explain two different things, and should not be used interchangeably. you have to compare U6 to what's normal U6, at least in a good economy.