The alliance's policy is based on achieving full employment through a larger low-wage sector. For a long time, the American model with its minimum wage jobs was seen as the exemplary model for reaching full employment. Minimum wage jobs made it easier for the job seeker who was not so picky to get a job as soon as he lost his old one. But this was before 2008, since in which year the US also suffers from 8-9% unemployment. But even before that there was a so-called equilibrium unemployment rate in the US of 5%.
Even the extreme bourgeois society of the 1800th century, where large parts of the working class were so cheap as to be almost free, there was a great deal of unemployment. What is this due to? Yes, Capital wants high unemployment to drive down the price of labor and make it so desperate that it does not make demands on the working environment.
The communists achieved full employment through repression, but that is perhaps not a model to recommend.
What then remains for models to achieve full employment with? Yes, the Swedish social democratic model that we had until 1991. Through a combination of generous social insurance where it was possible to receive employment support for further education in the event of unemployment and through a public labor market for those who did not get a job in the private sector, we were able for many decades have an unemployment rate of 1-2%. This is largely zero unemployment as certain seasonal occupations are subject to seasonal unemployment.
Neither was the policy of full employment not too expensive for Sweden.
If you combine progressive tax with lower tax for low-income earners and higher tax on large capital and that the state takes back money creation from the private banks, the purchasing power after tax can be high for everyone under a policy of good jobs for all.