tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post893943842950007488..comments2024-03-28T11:48:09.419-07:00Comments on Idiosyncratic Whisk: More Non-Evidence of Part-Time Work ShiftKevin Erdmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07431566729667544886noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post-24217656581058385902014-08-26T16:31:47.088-07:002014-08-26T16:31:47.088-07:00Excellent points. Thanks for your input. Lots to...Excellent points. Thanks for your input. Lots to think about.Kevin Erdmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07431566729667544886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post-8910792104657670662014-08-26T13:03:10.915-07:002014-08-26T13:03:10.915-07:00That's fair. My point was more about multiple ...That's fair. My point was more about multiple margins and other confirmatory evidence, rather than a smoking gun. Lots of weak signals in a portfolio (e.g. that capital expenditure measure) may be combined whereas a single measure is swamped by the noise. How big a signal are we expecting in a perfect experiment?<br /><br />There's also a few caveats (which you may have discussed, new to your blog via Scott Sumner). The discrepancy between the "large amount of survey and anecdotal evidence" (comment) and whether "employers are experiencing higher costs for full time workers" (post) may be that the surveys are forward looking and there are reasons firms are not adjusting now (maybe they expect the costs to be postponed indefinitely a la the medicare "doc fix"). The employer mandate is postponed until 2016-2017...so how much of the forecasted costs are actually in play right now? ACA has fallen off the blogosphere so I don't recall any recent estimates (in fact, didn't the CBO say they refuse to analyze the impact anymore because of all the ad hoc changes?).Me, who else?https://www.blogger.com/profile/08630992388708347274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post-29454433884832819382014-08-26T13:02:31.764-07:002014-08-26T13:02:31.764-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Me, who else?https://www.blogger.com/profile/08630992388708347274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post-21061116884494635842014-08-26T09:58:23.121-07:002014-08-26T09:58:23.121-07:00Your scenario is plausible. But, I think it is da...Your scenario is plausible. But, I think it is dangerous to think in terms of narratives. On the margin, if an added variable has made full time workers relatively more expensive, we should expect to see an increase in quantity of part time workers and an increase in wages for part time workers, as - at the margin - employers and workers would converge on a new work balance with neutral costs.<br /><br />I'm with you, that I would expect it to happen, and maybe some of the increased quantity of part time work is related to it. But, I'm surprised at how sparse the confirmation in the data is, given the large amount of survey and anecdotal evidence.Kevin Erdmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07431566729667544886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1110014885778996459.post-16246893272120662662014-08-26T06:40:30.729-07:002014-08-26T06:40:30.729-07:00Or part-time prices stay the same and you substitu...Or part-time prices stay the same and you substitute more expensive full-time workers for a mix of less expensive part-time and capital. Some more anecdotes are the touchscreen order stations that replace servers at restaurants. What's a good measure of labor saving capital expenditures for the subset of firms where the ACA is binding?<br /><br />http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303552104577436233174389816<br />http://www.bitrebels.com/technology/order-dinner-from-a-touchscreen-menu/<br /><br />(Your graph does not show full-time workers becoming more expensive, but I assume that is because earnings does not include all the fringe benefits for total compensation.)Me, who else?https://www.blogger.com/profile/08630992388708347274noreply@blogger.com