huw posted on 3/7/2010 7:37:00 PM
You and Bryan are arguing two separate isues at the same time - that extending benefits perpetuates unemployment, lots of support for that. And also that extending benefits increases unemployment - no research presented to back that claim up.

Nathan Benefield posted on 3/7/2010 3:46:00 PM
Fact 1: There are few jobs than there otherwise would be, had we not extended unemployment benefits

Fact 2: There are many people (a small fraction of the unemployed, but a large number of the individuals nonetheless) who would be employed had not unemployment benefits been extended.

Concluding Fact: The unemployment rate/number of unemployed is higher than it otherwise would have been.

Even Paul Krugman (at least the textbook-writing economist version of Krugman) acknowledges that the *length* of unemployment benefits affects the unemployment rate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703915204575103720332317434.html

huw posted on 3/7/2010 2:58:00 PM


Interestingly in todays Huffington Post there is a claim that former Congressman Tom Delay made the same argument as CF "unemployment benefits increase unemployment" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/07/tom-delay-jim-bunning-was_n_489050.html
Actually the Huffington Post is incorrect, Mr. Delay is too smart to say something that stupid. What he exactly said was, "unemployment benefits keep people from going and finding jobs." Something very similar to what the Fed and Summers are saying. But very different from what the Huffington Post and Commonwealth Foundation are suggesting, "Extending benefits cause unemployment." That's logical impossibility.

Nathan Benefield posted on 3/7/2010 12:45:00 PM
Huw,

You're wrong. Extending unemployment benefits increases unemployment.

It a) reduces incentives to find employment and b) increases the cost for employers to keep jobs.

Your metaphor doesn't work because unlike the dead (Jesus and Lazarus excepted), the unemployed can become employed.

huw posted on 3/7/2010 12:21:00 PM
i made no suggestions. I merely pointed out that CF's statement,
"benefit extensions increase unemployment" is obviously not true. Again, these folks are already unemployed. It's like shooting a dead person, they're already dead, they don't die more.

Nathan Benefield posted on 3/7/2010 12:14:00 PM
Huw,

Your suggestion that the presence of unemployment benefits does increase the level of unemployment, but an extension to the length of those benefits (in fact the increase has be from 26 weeks to 92 weeks) - and thus increasing the cost to employers for every job in existence - would have absolutely no effect on unemployment?

Sorry, but you can't say something completely devoid of logic and call anyone else illogical in the same comment.

huw posted on 3/7/2010 12:52:00 AM
It's becoming a full time job correcting the illogical nonsense in this blog. CF's Bryan actually states, "benefit extensions increase unemployment." The quotes from the Fed and Summers suggest that if unemployment compensation ended the unemployment rate would go down. They do not say that unemployment is caused by the extension of benefits. Unemployment is caused by a variety of factors usually outside the workers control - lack of sales, movement of facilities abroad etc. It is, obviously not caused by the extension of benefits - THESE FOLKS ARE ALREADY UNEMPLOYED! It is not that Bryan is cold or heartless, she just isn't logical.

Post Your Comment Here

Name *
E-mail *
Response *
Enter the characters as they appear in the box to the right *
	Want to make commenting easier?  Get a MyCommonwealthFoundation account here
	* = Required
	Please notify when other comments are posted in this thread