Quick pause in the jobs day discourse! Yesterday, a paper from the Becker Friedman Institute came out, with new estimated effects of the CTC on employment (πŸ”Ό) and poverty (πŸ”½). I've got a response at @niskanencenter here: niskanencenter.org/reevaluating-t…
First - this isn't a methodological critique. See for that, and I'm sure other folks are looking at the paper now.

But how should we interpret the findings as given?
1.) The paper reinforces one important claim we've made before - that very few people will stop working because of the money they get from the CTC (what economists' call the "income effect".)
If you, like @Sen_JoeManchin, are concerned that the CTC expansion will create an β€œentitlement society,” this paper should alleviate those concerns.
2.) The paper instead suggests that we might see fewer jobs because of the "substitution effect" of getting rid of the previous CTC phase-in.

That is, the CTC was previously a job subsidy, and now it isn't.
They argue that this is equivalent to getting rid of the EITC, which also subsidizes work.
(Folks might recall that the EITCs effect was hotly debated two years ago - here's a thread: )
If this is true, one question that's worth asking is whether this is a specific policy margin we think government should be pushing on.

How much do we value *parents* being in the workforce instead of at home?
Some folks think that we should generally push this in the opposite direction, encouraging parents to leave the workforce to focus on childcare: slate.com/news-and-polit…
This was even a major argument in @bgmasters's Senate race announcement
@hamandcheese has argued that this is something the government should be neutral on - neither pushing nor pulling.

The fully refundable CTC does just that. niskanencenter.org/bad-arguments-…
3.) Finally, it's worth noting that while the paper is modeling the decisions made by parents, another important player can make decisions here: employers.
If parents really are leaving the labor market in droves, I'd expect firms to come up with ways to stop that from happening!
Most obviously this could be through raising wages, but there's a lot of other options that are available - like making working hours more flexible, or letting people have more notification when they change.
/endthread (I need to go pick up my daughter at daycare)

β€’ β€’ β€’

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Matt Darling πŸŒπŸ’ΈπŸŒ‡

Matt Darling πŸŒπŸ’ΈπŸŒ‡ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @besttrousers

4 Oct
@EconHembre Yeah - I think the majority of critiques can also be applied the EITC.
@EconHembre A plausible defense of the EITC is something like:

1.) Because EITC is implemented through the tax code, the additional administrative burdens are smaller. 2.) EITC is possibly a bit more legible to recipients.
@EconHembre You could also point to the existence of VITA. Not sure if that ways for (there's lots of support to file for EITC) or against (we need a whole program to help people receive EITC!).
Read 4 tweets
28 Sep
Echoes many of the points @PeteTheCitizen has raised about work requirements: petergermanis.com/wp-content/upl…
Basically, a lot of ideas sound good at a surface level, but the actually administrative infrastructure to deliver them might completely change how they are actually delivered.
Read 4 tweets
24 Sep
"Remember the Return-to-Work bonuses that states announced to great fanfare last spring?

In most states, very few people have actually managed to get the bonus.

I've been curious about this for a while- thanks to @ArthurDelaneyHP and @taragolshan for tracking the data down!
In 5/6 of the states, the number of people who got bonuses over the summer is about 1/20 the number of people who left unemployment insurance.

4,269 people received the bonus, while UI continuing claims dropped by 79,055.
Read 8 tweets
22 Sep
Lots of discussion about the role of objectivity in research, jumping off of @Lauren_Farre11's blog post.

I think these conversations can often benefit from specific examples.
Here's one: an @ideas42 blog post from my former colleague Nuha Saho about how his experience as a NYCHA resident gave him a lot of knowledge that aided the design of our RCT: ideas42.org/blog/street-sm…
This is just a nice example of the tensions that are often in play here. When we were designing the posters, we initially just did a mail merge with the administrative data to get the name for each house.

But no one actually uses the "official" name for those complexes.
Read 6 tweets
1 Jul
I know we are all all upset about the Child Allowance Website, but I want to register a Formal Complaint to Administrative Burdens twitter about Massachusett's vaxmillionsgiveaway.com
1.) Why the heck is this opt in? Use a state database that covers 90% of the population (for example, driver's licenses), then confirm vaccination upon being drawn.
2.) You need to respond to winning with TWENTY FOUR HOURS to be eligible Image
Read 4 tweets
24 Jun
This article does not particularly attempt to defend it's thesis statement.
The reasons Democrats have "abandoned" work requirements as a guiding principle is that they do not actually perform their intended function - imposing work requirements does not increase labor force participation.'

When policies do not work, we should move on from them.
For more read @ideas42's paper on work requirements: ideas42.org/wp-content/upl…
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!