So if you are living by yourself and have plenty of savings so you don't need to work for the foreseeable future you have to be "unemployed"? That can't be right. Arguably, putting "unemployed" would be fraud as you are not claiming benefits or looking for work.
I'd say that was unemployed, though by choice in that case.
You're not a "homemaker" if you sit at home watching TV and drinking beer. It's quite clear what it means. As I said, use the older term "housewife" or "house husband" instead to make sense of it - the description you give is definitely not that, it's someone choosing not to work.
Do you spend most of the day shopping, cleaning, cooking, repairing clothes, ferrying your kids around, whatever, and receive no formal wage for doing so? Then you're a homemaker. Do you do that, but for someone elderly or infirm rather than your own household? Then you're an informal carer, though in reality if you do both they probably won't care which of the two you pick. Do you sit around watching TV and drinking beer, and every other Saturday run the Hoover round as it's getting a bit disgusting? That's an unemployed single bloke.
Above a certain age I suppose it could be "retired", but only if at that point you genuinely intended (regardless of any change of mind later) not to return to full time work.
Just be honest. This sort of thing is only a problem if you're trying to find ways around stuff.
That said, there are examples where it can cause some genuine confusion. Is a communal parking area a driveway or on-street, for example (most insurers only offer three options - driveway, on-street or garage - though I've seen the odd one that has "residents' parking area" which is a better fit). Driveway is often marked up if it's a nice car, because you can easily see which house to break into to nick the keys.
It would be a lot easier if they didn't ask ambiguous questions. Why don't they say, "are you looking for more than x jobs per day?" That is an objective question. "Unemployed" is open to interpretation.
It only is if you are trying to find ways to get away with paying less by making a declaration that is false but not false enough to be provably so.
Similarly with mileage. They ask you estimate your mileage, but a year later then can say that you were way out and then you end up going to jail for fraud. Even if you overestimate "to be safe", you are still lying in their eyes.
I've never heard of an insurer who cared if you gave too high a mileage, because that
is a simple case of the higher you go the more it costs, because the more you drive the more you are likely to crash on simple probabilities. I seem to recall one usual breakpoint being 7500 miles, but I forget the others - have a play with a quote site and you'll see it.
If you look like you're going to go over because you genuinely underestimated, you're meant to make a change to the policy. Which of course you'll have to pay for, but you would if you put the higher figure on at the start, give or take an admin fee. So it's not really
much different in reality to buying an Off Peak ticket, then realising you really wanted an Anytime, so going and excessing it.