Jump to Navigation
Home

Main menu

  • Home
  • News
  • Markets Map
  • Sentiments
  • Topics
  • Data
  • Comments
  • Images
  • Blog
  • About

Secondary menu

  • Latest News
  • Top Rated
  • Most Popular
  • Archive
  • Discussions
  • Sirius XM Decides To Compete
  • Baidu: Margin Loss Is Good For Long Term Investors
  • Progressive Waste: Profiting From Trash
  • Airbus pieces together air show order finale
  • TSMC, GlobalFoundries, And Samsung Can't Save ARM...
  • Should CAI International Trade At A Discount To Peers?
  • MahSat counts on top recruits to log $5 bn sales
  • London’s Iconic Business Addresses
  • US welcomes India as a rising power: John Kerry
  • On the streets amid Brazil's protests

    Research Desk responds: Is unemployment insurance stimulative?

    Fri, 07/02/2010 - 14:26 EDT - Ezra Klein - Washington Post
    • Comments

    By Dylan Matthews

    Patrick_M wants to know whether fellow commenter Kevin_Willis is right in stating:

    "... there is no evidence that indefinite extension of unemployment benefits has much of an economically stimulative effect, that I know of."

    I actually touched on this a couple of weeks ago, when I highlighted Mark Zandi of Moody's comparison of the per-dollar impact of various stimulus policies. Zandi used his econometric model to estimate the effect on GDP, per dollar, of different elements in the 2009 stimulus package. Here's his explanation of the methodology:

    The first step divides the stimulus bill -- both its spending and tax cuts -- into various components. The second step is to derive multipliers for each of these components, using historical data. ... The multipliers are combined with the actual spending to date under the ARRA to derive the change in GDP from the stimulus bill, relative to no stimulus. Finally, the historical relationship between GDP and employment is used to derive an estimate of the net impact of the stimulus on jobs.

    With that process, Zandi estimated that each dollar spent on extending unemployment benefits generated $1.61 in economic growth. Extending benefits had the third-greatest bang-for-the-buck of any component in the stimulus package, after increasing food stamps and subsidizing work-sharing, both temporary measures. To quote Zandi, "No form of the fiscal stimulus has proved more effective during the past two years than emergency UI benefits." The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities looked at the impact on poverty of the extension and found that it saved a total of 800,000 people from falling below the poverty line. So far, then, unemployment benefits have been very effective at stimulating the economy and reducing economic misery among affected families.That said, there's a second part to Kevin Willis's question. He asks not just about the extension of unemployment benefits, but the indefinite extension. This is harder to judge, but let's look at one counterargument raised by opponents of extending benefits. It is sometimes said that extending benefits for too long causes workers to become less motivated to look for jobs, which keeps the unemployment rate high and hurts the economic recovery. A paper from economists Rob Valletta and Katherine Kuang at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco suggests this effect is likely quite small. To show this, they graphed average unemployment duration among both those who have lost their jobs (who are eligible for unemployment benefits) and those who have quit or just entered the job market (who are not). The differential between the two, then, can be said to be caused by extending unemployment benefits:

    unemployment_by_reason.png

    Valletta and Kuang explain:

    As of the fourth quarter of 2009, the expected duration of unemployment had risen about 18.7 weeks for job losers and about 17.1 weeks for leavers and entrants, using the years 2006-2007 as a baseline. The differential increase of 1.6 weeks for job losers is the presumed impact of extended UI benefits on unemployment duration. ...The implied increase in the unemployment rate is quite small, slightly less than 0.4 percentage point, indicating that without UI extensions, the measured unemployment rate would have been 9.6% in December 2009 rather than the observed 10.0%.

    Using the most recent estimate of the size of the labor force, a 0.4 oercent increase in the unemployment rate represents 614,964 people. This is not a trivial number, but losing the stimulative effect of unemployment benefits would increase the unemployment rate as well, likely canceling out this effect. This is not to mention the obvious point that 18.6 weeks of unemployment with benefits to help is a far better situation for families that 17.1 weeks with no assistance. Extending benefits, then, appears to be the economically smart thing to do even given this objection.




    Unemployment benefits - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Economic - Fiscal policy - Mark Zandi

    • Original article
    • Login or register to post comments
     

    Related

    • Research desk explains: How effective would deficit-neutral stimulus be?

      By Dylan Matthews

    • Research desk: What's a dollar of stimulus worth?

      By Dylan Matthews BHeffernan1 asks:

    • Research Desk: How much "other" stimulus has been passed?

      By Dylan Matthews roquelaure_79 asks:

    • Research Desk responds: What would the stimulative impact of a payroll tax holiday be?

      By Dylan Matthews FormerSwingVoter asks: Any idea what the economic impact of an employee-only payroll tax holiday would be? Since it’s a Republican idea, it might actually stand a chance of passing, assuming they didn't actually call it “stimulus".

    • ARRA's Impact: The Kauffmann Survey

      From the just-released Kauffman Economic Outlook, authored by Tim Kane, an indicator of what some economists thought the ARRA accomplished, in terms of unemployment.

    • Research Desk investigates: Do the rich spend less of new income than the poor?

      By Dylan Matthews PtitSeb did not ask this exactly, but this quotation he posted from Mark Zandi raises an interesting question:

    • Stabenow: ‘To take money from job creation to fund unemployment benefits makes no sense.’

    • Fiscal cliffs, multipliers, and the myth of central bank independence

      THE cryptic phrase "fiscal cliff" is creeping into news reports and economic analyses (including our own). Alongside "grexit" and "hard landing" it lurks as a mysterious and malevolent force waiting to wreak havoc on the global economy. The fiscal cliff is an American afflication. At the end of this year several major budget items are scheduled to expire, including an extension of the Bush tax cuts, an extension of the stimulus payroll tax cut, and an extension of emergency unemployment benefits.

    • Research desk compares: What's the fiscal impact of estate tax cuts vs. unemployment insurance?

      By Dylan Matthews byelin asks:

    • Outlining the stimulus and deficits debate

      I've been frustrated by the imprecision afflicting the debate over stimulus and deficits. Yesterday, for instance, saw a column by David Brooks that many viewed as anti-stimulus but in fact advocated the two forms of stimulus -- unemployment benefits and state and local aid -- presently on the table. So it may be worth spending a couple of minutes outlining the various positions in this debate. For the purposes of this post, I'm just going to assume all positions are held with total sincerity, as this is simply to outline different poles in the debate.

    Latest

    A Surprising Barrier To Clean Water: Human Nature
    A Surprising Barrier To Clean Water: Human Nature
    CNG takes step forward as final MBO stage is completed
    CNG takes step forward as final MBO stage is...

    User login

    • Create new account
    • Request new password
    • Click on the icon to sign in with your social network login or enter your Bullfax.com login

    Our Blog

    • Oil Prices, India’s Inflation, Panama Canal and Bank Lending in Our News for Today 06/14/2013
    • SoftBank: Sprint to the finish
    • Royal Bank of Scotland, World Bank, European Stocks and Apple in Our Daily Round-Up for 06/13/2013

    Markets Map

    Markets Map

    Follow Us

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS
    S&P 500: 1628.93 -1.4% FTSE: 6249.24 -1.59% Nikk.: 13014.58 -1.77% DAX: 8029.17 -2.09% HSI: 20419.461 -2.78% FX: EUR/GBP: 1.1677 USD/EUR: 1.322 JPY/USD: 98.185 Commodities: Gold: 1308.55

    Bullfax.com - Market News & Analysis 2008-2011
    Contact Us | About Us | Terms & Conditions

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS .

    Secondary menu

    • Latest News
    • Top Rated
    • Most Popular
    • Archive
    • Discussions