The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (14 comments)

  1. Maybe I am being too nearsighted here, but that seems pretty counter initiative. How do you just leave the labor force once you have NO income, not even unemployment benefits. In my mind that’s when the sirens and bells and whistles would all start going off and tell me I need to take a job ANYWHERE simply to continue eating, not “meh, well now that my benefits have expired I guess I’m done looking for a job”.

    Maybe everyone is going back to school?

    1. Or living with Mom.

    2. Roger Wilco

      When there are no jobs to be had it doesn’t matter how little pay you’ll take or hard you’re looking for a job. Unemployment benefits require you to be job hunting. The definition of in the work force is employed or seeking employment. Without the unemployment benefits, these people now spend their time in food bank lines instead of filling out job application.

  2. Todd Mason

    One scenario: The wife lost her job at the state DMV office. (Online transactions are creating redundancies in many state offices.) Taxed at the couple’s cumulative marginal rate, and facing extra expenses for day care, she may not find work that pays enough. Another scenario: a construction tradesman has been supplementing UI benefits with off-the-books work while he looks for work. He goes completely underground when benefits end. And another: a 60-year-old gives up and cashes in such retirement savings as he has to stay alive until SS eligibility.

    Some of this explains why northern European countries have lower jobless rates and higher labor force participation rates even though McDonalds workers earn $20/hour. The wife gets childcare. The worker with skills match issues finds work that pays well anyway. Ubiquitous unions protect older workers. Everyone pays higher prices and higher taxes.

  3. When you dig a bit deeper blah blah blah” you get lines like this: “In other words, it looks like the cut in unemployment benefits moved people out of the labor force rather than into employment.“…

    Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, eh?

    There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that…

    Well if the BLS is to be believed it seems that N. Carolina saw an increase of 80,000+ people in the workforce between Oct. of 2012 to Oct. of 2013…

    1. Different BLS data sources. Labor force, unemployment rate, employment levels is from the household survey, which is the data source of the blog post. Your source is nonfarm employment from the payroll survey. The 2 data sources doesn’t always track, particularly over shorter horizons.

      1. June – October payroll survey says +41,600 jobs.

      2. Your source is nonfarm employment from the payroll survey“…

        Exactly and considering what time of year its nonfarm is going to be the number that matters…

        Maybe we should pay attention to Charles Biderman of TrimTabs….

  4. John Thacker

    “The state’s labor force participation rate tells the story. It plunged from 62.2% in June, before the benefits cut, to 61.4% in October. If that rate had merely stayed steady, the state’s jobless rate would have increased to 9.1% rather than sharply declining.”

    Except that the plunge started in January, which is interesting.

    Still, given the increase in the nonfarm payroll, I think it’s difficult to draw conclusions.

    Both the labor force participation and all other numbers show strong NC performance from September 2012 to January 2013, followed by a decline from the January peak until around September 2013. I think it’s a bit much to conclude that a change in July 2013 was responsible.

  5. John Thacker

    Isn’t it odd to compare June to July, considering that the peak was in January?

    The bad performance in nonfarm payrolls is from January until July. Performance both before then and afterwards is better. I think it’s difficult to make a conclusion from this.

  6. There’s no real evidence that the end of the unemployment extensions in NC actually forced people out of the workforce. What we do know is that it gave people less incentive to claim that they were in the workforce. I’m a disability attorney. The majority of my clients claim to be in the workforce until their unemployment benefits run out. The real question is whether cutting long term benefits actually discourages workers from looking for work, and there’s really no evidence of that here.

  7. When you dig a bit deeper, things look less bright“…

    Well jimbo maybe not…

    Consider the following from Scott Lincoime of N. Carolina:
    What North Carolina Teaches Us About Unemployment Benefits And Confirmation Bias

    Sometimes people see what they want to see, not what the data actually say

  8. Sorry, but I think you’ve simply gotten wrong. It’s out of character for you. For one thing, you have to look at changes in North Carolina’s labor force participation over time, not just since June, if you want to assess the potential causal relationships between exiting extended benefits and labor market measures. Second, you have to use the most recent data available, November rather than October.

    If you do this, you find that North Carolinians have left the state’s labor force at a slower rate in the five months since end of extended benefits (about 10,000 a month) than they did in the five months before the end of extended benefits (about 13,600 a month). You also see that the number of employed North Carolinians in the household survey rose by 22,251 from June to November. According to the separate (and more reliable) BLS payroll survey, NC gained about 39,000 jobs during the period.

    It is too early to come to any definitive conclusions. Right now, however, what can fairly be said about the preliminary data is that 1) the end of extended benefits had no apparent negative effect on labor-force participation, which was already declining before the change and has since declined at a slower rate; and 2) the end of extended benefits may well have had the result predicted by many labor-market economists: an increase in the propensity of employers to create new jobs and in the propensity of unemployed workers to take them.

  9. Robert Whittier

    Normally, you are data-driven, and indeed you cite some data in your article. Data continues to accumulate, and the WSJ in an editorial today cites December data to reach the opposite conclusion.

    Not an economist myself, I rely partially only on my own instincts and partially on the opinions of those better informed. Will you be revisiting this topic as more data accumulates, or is your opinion written in stone?

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content