More on length of unemployment

Posted by: Michael Mandel on May 25

A reader suggested that, to be fair, I show DeLong’s chart of unemployment duration, which is adjusted for the business cycle. That is, he estimates what the duration of unemployment would be if the unemployment rate was 6%. Here is his chart.

delong.gif

Antler is arguing that the duration of unemployment has gone down, or at least not gone up. DeLong is firing back, saying that he would have expected the duration of unemployment to have fallen more, considering that the unemployment rate is a lot lower than it was in the early 1980s.

Comments? Which one do you believe?

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.businessweek.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/

Reader Comments

Patrick R. Sullivan

May 26, 2005 10:36 AM

"DeLong is firing back, saying that he would have expected the duration of unemployment to have fallen more..."

Which concedes that Antler is correct, and Krugman is wrong. Krugman is also wrong that people lose their jobs more often now. I've graphed that from 1967 to today at my blog (click on my name to see it)

Michael Mandel

June 5, 2005 10:11 PM

Thanks, Patrick. I've looked at this myself, and I think that all things being equal, it looks like there is somewhat more employment risk.

Thank you for your interest. This blog is no longer active.

 

About

Michael Mandel, BW's award-winning chief economist, provides his unique perspective on the hot economic issues of the day. From globalization to the future of work to the ups and downs of the financial markets, Mandel-named 2006 economic journalist of the year by the World Leadership Forum-offers cutting edge analysis and commentary.

BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!