- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/w20884.pdf
From the abstract:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ly-due-expiration-unemployment-benefits-obama
I confess I haven't read the whole study yet. And I probably won't because they use things like this:
From the abstract:
We find that a 1% drop in benefit duration leads to a statistically significant increase of employment by 0.0161 log points. In levels, 1.8 million additional jobs were created in 2014 due to the benefit cut. Almost 1 million of these jobs were filled by workers from out of the labor force who would not have participated in the labor market had benefit extensions been reauthorized.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ly-due-expiration-unemployment-benefits-obama
The authors don’t think this happened the way you think it might: It’s not so much that the cut-off drove individuals on benefits back to work, but more that less-generous benefits actually spurred job creation on a macro level, getting employers to hire and drawing into the labor force people who hadn’t been looking for a job. They don’t lay out how that worked, but in their October 2013 paper, argue that extended unemployment benefits artificially boosts wages — when they expire, employers then boost job openings and start hiring people.
I confess I haven't read the whole study yet. And I probably won't because they use things like this:

Last edited: