Category: Think Tank

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “Do Extended Unemployment Benefits Lengthen Unemployment Spells?”

  1. ByteMe says:

    Conclusion: extending unemployment insurance benefits in weak labor markets has virtually no effect on the rate of job finding but that, on average, unemployment spells are somewhat longer as a subset of UI recipients remain nominally unemployed rather than exit the labor force

    Saved you having to read the details :)

  2. Herman Frank says:

    I don’t need a study to tell me that the unemployment benefits need to be extended and a far more goal-oriented “make-jobs”-program is needed to get Americans back to work. It really doesn’t help if the chairman of Apple declares how smart his company is by lodging profits in a state-less enterprise, thus not having to pay taxes in ANY jurisdiction. There is no benefit for employment, for shareholders, for society at large. Shame on such gerrymandering companies!

    The Fed is pumping $85bln per month in the bond-market to recapitalize the banks for the results of their own casino-gambling (scuse me, “high finance”!). At the same time any reinforcement of the social contract by letting Obamacare do its work by providing general health care, by extending unemployment benefits for the period beyond 6 months, by assisting students in getting an education, by upgrading the general infrastructure of the country is torpedoed “because they don’t deserve it”!


  3. Internet Tourettes says:

    Maybe they should examine if trailer parks cause tornadoes……

  4. DeDude says:

    Even if there were more than a barely detectable effect, the question is so what?

    As long as unemployment is high, all available jobs will be filled. The preumption is that the lack of benefits will force people to take jobs that they don’t like. But during times of high unemployment, they will take that job away from someone else who would like to have it. So from a societal point of view that effect is that a (low level?) job gets filled with someone who hates it, and will leave it as soon as he/she can – and someone who wanted that job will be denied the opportunity. How is that better for businesses or society as a whole?

    • bknezek says:

      DeDude, I have zero credentials as an economist, but I’d like to carry your assertion to its logical end.
      1) If unemployment insurance didn’t exist, pretty much everyone would be forced to find a job (exluding those with fat savings).
      2) All those people would take a job that’s a few steps below their qualifications.
      3) This means that US Citizens would take jobs that are supposedly only acceptable to illegal immigrants.
      4) The demand for illegal aliens would dry up.

      I’m forced to conclude that illegal immigration exists because UI benefits foster a comfort level that keeps hard jobs open to illegal aliens. I think I’m against that – I’ll have to think about it more…

      But with this in mind, I’ll ask another question:
      Is it better for our government to pay people to wait for the perfect job so they can be “happy” in that job? Or should we have a policy that fosters a spirit of responsibility?

      • For your analysis to hold true, there would have to be little or no unemployed people with expired beenfits in states where there are lots of illegal workers — migrant farm and otherwise.

        Check the data — especially int he south — and see how it holds up.


  5. Livermore Shimervore says:

    Shouldn’t the question be:

    A) what would be the cost to an economy in recession if unemployment benefits are shortened or elminated? Would it result in GDP contraction for instance…

    B) would the private sector, ***during recession***, be able to absorb a 6-7% increase in unemployed job seekers?

    At least determine the delta between the two before tackling any other questions on behavior.

  6. Livermore Shimervore says:

    btw, the report seems to argue that long term unemployment benefits increased the unemployment rate by less than half of 1%. The cost of preparing this study increased the budget deficit by 1/100,000th of 1%. Getting the DOT to give that guy in Staten Island a stop sign so that cars aren’t crashing into his front lawn anymore would have been a better use of the tax-payer’s money. Apparently he’s had five crashes in the last two years and they still won’t give him a stop sign.