I wrote two days ago about subsidized unemployment, followed later in the day by this interview.
This controversy raises a fundamental economic issue.
I explained in the interview that employers only hire people when they expect a new worker will generate at least enough revenue to cover the cost of employment.
There’s a similar calculation on the part of individuals, as shown by this satirical cartoon strip.
People decide to take jobs when they expect the additional after-tax income they earn will compensate them for the loss of leisure and/or the unpleasantness of working.
Which is why many people are now choosing not to work since the government has increased the subsidies for idleness (a bad policy that began under Trump).
The Wall Street Journal editorialized about this issue a couple of days ago.
White House economists say there’s no “measurable” evidence that the $300 federal unemployment bonus is discouraging unemployed people from seeking work. They were rebutted by Tuesday’s Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Jolts survey, which showed a record 8.1 million job openings in March. …But these jobs often pay less than what most workers could make on unemployment. That explains why the number of job openings in many industries increased more than the number of new hires in March. …The number of workers who quit their jobs also grew by 125,000. …some quitters may be leaving their jobs because they figure they can make more unemployed for the next six months after Democrats extended the bonus into September.
Dan Henninger also opined on the issue for the WSJ. Here’s some of what he wrote.
President Biden said, “People will come back to work if they’re paid a decent wage.” But what if he’s wrong? What if his $300 unemployment insurance bonus on top of the checks sent directly to millions of people (which began during the Trump presidency) turns out to be a big, long-term mistake? …Mr. Biden and the left expect these outlays effectively to raise the minimum wage by forcing employers to compete with Uncle Sam’s money. …Ideas have consequences. By making unemployment insurance competitive with market wage rates in a pandemic, the Biden Democrats may have done long-term damage to the American work ethic. …The welfare reforms of the 1990s were based on the realization that transfer payments undermined the work ethic. The Biden-Sanders Democrats are dropping that work requirement for recipients of cash payments.
Amen.
I made similar arguments about the erosion of the work ethic last year when discussing this issue.
And this concern applies to other forms of redistribution. Including, most notably, the foolish idea of big per-child handouts.
P.S. The WSJ editorial cited above mentioned the Labor Department’s JOLT data. Those numbers are also useful if you want proof that federal bureaucrats are overpaid, and you’ll also see that the same thing is true for state and local government employees.
