The empiricist Doug, befogged by capitalist ideology and blythely
ignoring the inherent biases of his ruling-class sources (perhaps
influenced by the ruling-class nature of his alma mater) ;-) ;-),
presents the statistics below and asks: >>Why is the experience
of unemployment near record lows for the series?<<
exper
unemp of
rate unemp ratio
1960s 4.8% 15.2% 3.22
1970s 6.2% 16.8% 2.74
1980s 7.3% 17.0% 2.34
1990s 6.4% 14.6% 2.30
The fall of the ratio of the percentage of people in the labor
force who've had experience with unemployment (the second column)
to the unemployment rate (the first) has clearly fallen (as shown
in the third column). I don't know why. But I can ask: how does
it work out if we aggregate according to business cycle rather
than decade? Also, we should also examine the _duration_ of
unemployment spells: is it possible that fewer people are
unemployed but each of those spells is longer? A cursory glance
at table B-40 of the 1996 ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT
suggests that spells are getting longer.
And what about spells of unemployment that lead to exits from the
labor force? Further, avoiding spells of unemployment depends on
not just the employer but the employee: could it be that the
general rise in the cost of job loss has encouraged people to
cling to their current jobs for dear life even though the boss
has a greater ability to get rid of them?
It's also possible that the decline of real wages & benefits
relative to labor productivity has encouraged businesses to hold
onto workers a bit more.
(isn't "empiricist Doug" redundant?)
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine (Yale 1974) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
