4 ms·

Dube, Lester, Reich focused on the short run. The paper I linked (Sorkin) agreed with their findings in the short run > This short-run employment response is

Dube, Lester, Reich focused on the short run. The paper I linked (Sorkin) agreed with their findings in the short run > This short-run employment response is in line with both our estimates in this paper, as well as recent work studying the restaurant industry, such as Dube, Lester, and Reich (2010), Neumark, Salas, and Wascher (2014), and Allegretto et al. (2016) The disagreement is over the long run effects: > We find that the short-run employment effect captures only a small share of the long-run employment effect generated in the model. ... > much of the recent research suggesting that minimum wage hikes barely reduce the number of jobs in the short run should be taken with caution. The longer-run disemployment effects are potentially large. So when you say "no effect was found" it's because they were only looking in the short run.

crdoconnor 9y ago
>Dube, Lester, Reich focused on the short run. Umm... no. From the abstract: >Our findings are robust to allowing for long-term effects of minimum wage changes Read the paper. Seriously.
- fiter 9y ago
  That paper does not give a lot of motivation for why it uses the control that most strongly changes the results: heterogeneous (space) time variance. Why would it look like minimum wage increases decrease employment when considering US macroeconomic trends, but not when considering finer grained trends? If you increase your minimum wage you're losing out on employment compared to the US as a whole but locally there's no change in employment levels.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    It does give the motivation: "We show that this heterogeneity is spatial in nature. We also show that in the presence of such spatial heterogeneity, the precision of the individual case study estimates is overstated. By essentially pooling all such local comparisons and allowing for spatial autocorrelation, we address the dual problems of omitted variables bias and bias in the estimated standard errors"
    - fiter 9y ago
      That states an intuitive statistical fact about spacial unevenness of economics but it does not necessarily correspond to a reasoning why you should add it as a variable. Based on the abstract of this paper, we don't know whether adding a variable will decrease or increase the bias: http://www.sas.rochester.edu/psc/clarke/405/Omit.pdf http://www.sas.rochester.edu/psc/clarke/405/Omit.pdf

crdoconnor 9y ago

>Dube, Lester, Reich focused on the short run. Umm... no. From the abstract: >Our findings are robust to allowing for long-term effects of minimum wage changes Read the paper. Seriously.

fiter 9y ago
That paper does not give a lot of motivation for why it uses the control that most strongly changes the results: heterogeneous (space) time variance. Why would it look like minimum wage increases decrease employment when considering US macroeconomic trends, but not when considering finer grained trends? If you increase your minimum wage you're losing out on employment compared to the US as a whole but locally there's no change in employment levels.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  It does give the motivation: "We show that this heterogeneity is spatial in nature. We also show that in the presence of such spatial heterogeneity, the precision of the individual case study estimates is overstated. By essentially pooling all such local comparisons and allowing for spatial autocorrelation, we address the dual problems of omitted variables bias and bias in the estimated standard errors"
  - fiter 9y ago
    That states an intuitive statistical fact about spacial unevenness of economics but it does not necessarily correspond to a reasoning why you should add it as a variable. Based on the abstract of this paper, we don't know whether adding a variable will decrease or increase the bias: http://www.sas.rochester.edu/psc/clarke/405/Omit.pdf http://www.sas.rochester.edu/psc/clarke/405/Omit.pdf