Posted on 07/22/2014 6:18:16 PM PDT by Libloather
If unemployment benefits were cut off earlier in 2013, the long-term unemployed would have been more likely to be re-employed, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
If the benefits, called the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, expired earlier in 2013, “workers with 46 or more weeks of continuous unemployment would have been 1.2 to 2.1 percentage points more likely to become re-employed,” the St. Louis Fed reported. “Similarly, the long-term unemployed would have been 0.4 to 0.5 percentage points more likely to exit the labor force entirely.”
(Excerpt) Read more at bizjournals.com ...
No sh**.
Win-win!
Our tax dollars at work.
If you want less of something (employment, for instance), tax it.
Hello McFly
Perter Diamond, Ph. D. , M.I.T., won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2010 for “discovering” the same thing. From the Nobel press release:
“This year’s three Laureates have formulated a theoretical
framework for search markets. Peter Diamond has analyzed
the foundations of search markets. Dale Mortensen
and Christopher Pissarides have expanded the theory
and have applied it to the labor market. The Laureates’
models help us understand the ways in which unemployment,
job vacancies, and wages are affected by regulation
and economic policy. This may refer to benefit levels in
unemployment insurance or rules in regard to hiring
and firing. One conclusion is that more generous unemployment
benefits give rise to higher unemployment and
longer search times.”http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2010/press.pdf
Wait...paying people not to work encourages people not to work?
Amazing!
No wonder these guys are in charge!
Unfortunately, the O-conomy does tend to hinder legitimate employment searches. I know this from experience, having returned to the work force last month after over five months unemployment.
During that time I applied for over 200 positions and found myself completely ignored by most employers despite a 30-year career in my field and being eminently qualified for the overwhelming majority of positions I applied for.
Getting back to full employment was an absolute priority for me — but it’s a lot more than just saying ‘I’ll sit home and suck up benefits’.
liberals rebel at common sense.
Glad you found something!
what the bear does in the woods.
LIKE: I don't believe it...But vote for me...and I can get u a lil bit more of it!!...
In other news, water is wet.
Cousin swore and grumbled about those dirty Republicans when his unemployment was not extended. Once the spigot was turned off, he found a job in a week. One that he could have had all along, but it was easier sitting around when money was coming in for doing nothing. Liberals do not understand this. Granted, the higher your skill level and expected salary, the harder it might be to find something commensurate. But for lower level jobs, in most places you can find one if you’re looking.
Someone should tell Rosa DeLiar in CT
There was a study years ago in Sweden, which found that people found jobs near to the time their benefits ran out, regardless of the length of benefit.
Probably why employment numbers improved recently...
But you know what’s friggin hilarious, busting your hump looking for a job running out of benefits ( oh sorry freebies) and still not being able to get a job! It’s a friggin party!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.