It would have a different base, but it would not be biased by psychological notions like "actively looking for work". It is based on purely demographic data, and therefore would be a better indicator. Of course, the percentages would be different: for example, if everyone who wanted to work had a job, the unemployment rate according to my methodology would still be, say 3%. That would be considered the effective minimum possible rate. But I do not like rates that refer to non-demographic and unmeasurable quantitites like "actively looking for work". This scale would be immune to such vagaries.

In other words, it is a different scale, but more objectively measurable. and therefore superior: 1 - ((persons actually working) /( persons capable of working)).