The headline of the article makes what I assume to be a deliberate error as they claim that the CEO said unemployment needs to rise to 50%, where as he said by 50%.

The article headline as written is stating that the CEO wants unemployment to increase to 50% where as the actual statement says it should go from the existing 3.6% to 5.4%.

Not that I agree with him though, but I just think the article is being ridiculous.

But yes in general low unemployment favours the workers while high unemployment favours the employers.

“There’s been a systematic change where employees feel the employer is extremely lucky to have them, as opposed to the other way around,” he said.

“We’ve got to kill that attitude and that has to come through hurting the economy.”

Or, maybe employers should offer reasonable pay, benefits and working hours. The only reason he wants unemployment to increase is because he can get workers for cheaper in that environment. It seems that he only love supply and demand mechanics when it benefit them.

Labour shortages outside of regulated industries are the easiest free markets problem to solve that exists: pay people more and treat them better.

I would suggest that people don't engage with this Two Minutes Hate.

I think these cartoonishly evil CEOs make inflammatory statements on purpose to draw attention away from their very real regulatory capture and increasing monopolies that are achieved not by making loud and stupid statements like this, but with handshakes, gourmet dinners, elite clubs, and private airplane trips.

The correct response, in my opinion, is not to engage, but to reply to them by consistently electing (on an average) political leaders who err on the side of socialism.

He’s just saying the quiet part out loud.

I agree that at most 50% of people who technically can work should work. However all should have their basic living expenses, healthcare and education covered regardless of their work status. There's really no reason for preventing people from enjoying all the economic value that the last 50 years or more of development brought to the rich.

I guess he can't see the irony in such a statement!?

Not only a millionaire CEO, one that runs a luxury properties developer. The same one who said that millenials can't afford housing because they spend money on "avocado toast".