tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post6279324851967626131..comments2024-03-27T03:00:27.024-04:00Comments on Facts & other stubborn things: Interesting, but too cynicalEvanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12259004160963531720noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-46108310556579926512014-01-24T13:46:08.867-05:002014-01-24T13:46:08.867-05:00Are you TRYING to make more work for me Ryan?!?!?
...Are you TRYING to make more work for me Ryan?!?!?<br /><br />Looks interesting - I'll take a look.<br /><br />The tenure thing makes sense in terms of human capital theory, and Dube and co-authors have confirmed the reduced turnover point. I'm not sure this necessarily results in bad matches... it depends. Hiring and separation rates decline. If that's because firms are being more selective on the front end there's no necessary reason why bad matches have to increase. But I should become more conversant in search theory. As I said earlier, theory is not my strong suit. I'm not sure anything is my strong suit, but it's not even my least-weak-suit.Daniel Kuehnhttp://www.factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-25284751771669958732014-01-24T13:39:55.043-05:002014-01-24T13:39:55.043-05:00Which in turn increases productivity of the margin...Which in turn increases productivity of the marginal worker to the firm , which is the cause of the increased job tenure. <br /><br />Not sure what the net welfare effects would be. Less turnover would mean worse job matches on average, right? Which may be partially offset by the increased productivity at existing jobs. Ryan Langrillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15080552998325983982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-29961284560983245962014-01-24T13:36:37.060-05:002014-01-24T13:36:37.060-05:00Did you see this? http://www.voxeu.org/article/min...Did you see this? http://www.voxeu.org/article/minimum-wages-and-jobs-new-evidence<br /><br />Makes me think that there may be some sort of tenure-related firm-specific human capital story going on. Ie, increases in the minimum wage allow employers to capture more from firm-specific investment due to an increase in the period of unemployment. (but not necessarily the rate: job tenure increases offset the unemployment period increases). Ryan Langrillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15080552998325983982noreply@blogger.com