Thailand's Unemployment Rate Is 0.6%
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
No single number is going to say much about the health of the economy, that much is obvious.
How many there should be?
> Technically employed, but driving the wage down.
If they are sustaining themselves with the work they are doing, I don't see what is so "technical" about it.
So in the end nobody is lying but the basic structure of the system is different which makes different true numbers. to make a more reasonable comparison the unofficial workers should be counted instead of the unemployed. But the thing is that they are hard to count.
Forget the government numbers. The reality is that in Thailand, as in most countries, the public assistance/social safety net available is so inadequate it might as well not exist. Its not that the government doesn't try. Its just that the reality of contemporary economics means that providing an adequate social safety net, even in the wealthiest countries, is difficult to impossible. Well, let me qualify that a bit. The last I heard, they did have public healthcare, although the standards lag far behind private providers.
There may be a way to make the rules more fair for poorer people or poorer countries or to make people more secure in terms of basic needs. Right now though the structures don't align well with those goals. And most countries have to work within the same economic structure but with vastly fewer resources than the US.
What strikes me though is that a number like this should be reason for panic. Economies try to shoot for unemployment numbers (realistically calculated ones) around 5%. (varies, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_employment )
As unemployment drops below 5%, it becomes harder to find workers in many fields, and the problem gets worse the lower you go. Down around 2-3% and you're facing an acute labor shortage, which leads to inflation and reduces investment in your country because there's no workers to fill new openings.
But in short, I agree with you, the numbers rest on simply faulty logic, because if they were calculated by other means, Thailand's economy should be in crisis. But it isn't.
Let's assume for a moment that the number in the article is correct, it's important to understand that Thailand's culture has a form of social security build in. In Thailand it's very normal for children to take not only care of their parents (financially) but also the rest of their family. So, maybe from a cultural point of view, Thailand doesn't need a social security system and might also be the reason why the number in the article is so low.