Labour skills and sticky wages: Is the problem worse now?

The mass unemployment in the 1930’s has sometimes been put down to “stick wages”. Fundamentally, the value of labour fell but the price didn’t – leading firms to cut back on employment at a faster rate than would have been socially optimal.

Since then, wage stickiness appears to have eased to some degree: Unions are less powerful than they were, and employees have a greater level of understanding about why firms may have to cut nominal wages – leading to less of a psychological impact (Note: These statements are just conjecture – if you don’t agree with them feel free to state in the comments, we could really do another post on it 🙂 ).

However, does that mean that the underlying issue of labour market adjustment has abated? The short answer is no.

Read more

Another sign that our labour market is surprising?

So the unemployment rate was on the low side of expectations. However, as I and others have said – hours worked collapsed, so surely this is the first sign of worse to come.

However, lets think about this a little more. Falling hours worked only really matter (in a welfare maximising sense) if people want to work more hours. Fundamentally, we need to see underemployment ticking up. But is that the case?

Read more

Why the US recession may be the worst in recent history

This graph from the Big Picture really tells it all:

Source (Big Picture)

Employment levels in the US are declining rapidly.

Read more

Fiscal stimulus and leakage

On this fine Waitangi day, Marginal Revolution mentions that Ireland is actually cutting spending in the face of a deteriorating economic climate.

Tyler Cowen gives a few reasons why this may be the way to go for Ireland:

A few things are worth noting.  First, a small open economy has a harder time making fiscal stimulus work.  Second, a small open economy often has to worry more about its credit rating.  Third, a small open economy offers a tougher testing ground for macroeconomic “field experiments” because there are more confounding external factors

Looking solely at the first point, it is “harder to get the stimulus to work” because of “leakage”. Fundamentally, some of the stimulus will lead to an increase in production overseas (through rising imports) rather than greater production at home.

This matters because the purpose of the stimulus is to increase “domestic production” to increase employment to its natural rate.  If all the stimulus does is increase imports then it doesn’t do this.  (Although I would note that if it did solely increase imports, the exchange rate would depreciate, which should lead to some substitution from imports to domestic production)

For small open economies the idea of a fiscal stimulus may become a “prisoner’s dilemma” where all the countries are best off if everyone stimulates but there is the potential for an individual country to “free-ride” by taking the stimulus from overseas and not stimulating themselves.  In this case, each country will individually choose not to stimulate – and they will all end up in a situation where output is stuck below potential (this has been mentioned before by Paul Krugman etc – does anyone have the links, I can’t find them 🙁 )

Stimulus package for bloggers

If we have to have a stimulus package in New Zealand (because the government feels it HAS to do something), then maybe they could have a stimulus for bloggers.  The case is made here (ht Marginal Revolution).  It is a 14 point argument – so it must be right!

I would add that there is a concern surrounding entry – people may flood into the blogger industry trying to get the subsidy as there is virtually no barrier to entry.  Sure this will increase employment – but it will make the cost of the subsidy unbounded.  As a result, they should restrict the subsidy to bloggers on the current Tumeke rankings 😉

December unemployment rate of 4.6%

The unemployment rate rose to 4.6% – definitely on the low end of my expected distribution. However, the participation rate rose to an all time high and employment rose 0.9%. This was very different to the strong (seasonally adjusted) fall in the quarterly employment survey.

This result indicates a stronger labour market than anyone has been picking. However, don’t forget to look at hours worked. Hours worked is the true “labour input” and that has fallen 2.8% on a year ago – the sharpest fall since the recession of the early 90’s. With hours falling like that I can’t see unemployment staying low for long …

What do you guys think?