Is having years of unrelated experience almost the same as having years of unemployment in the eyes of finance recruiters?

Between those two options I would say no I would prefer work experience in general and having to put the time and effort into work rather than doing nothing. I personally ding people with major gaps in the resume unless I can see what they were doing during it, and if it makes sense. Are they trying to improve themselves? That said, there tends to always be someone who has transferable related experience who would outshine these two.

Applicants with work experience typically trump the ones without, that is what I believe. Question would be why (in this example) the person with a finance degree wouldn't be able to secure a job. Was it because there were no internships? Not networking skills? Simply not fit for finance? Are there any other issues?

But as stated before, there are way more applicants than positions available... so neither of the examples would get a job, realistically speaking.

Person with some job wins over person with no job, demonstrates they can at least get through an interview, show up to work and not get fired. but neither of these people would even get an interview.

If you can't get a job in finance, do something business related. Can't get a much more entry level job than fast food... marketing jobs, do accounting for someone, data management, back office... any of those would be far better off than no job or a very menial job.