Consider the possibility that government spending increases the amount of hours to be worked in a given time period, say by providing child care. Assume again that the initial amount of consumption and leisure are still just affordable after an increase in spending. How will an increase in government spending affect consumption, hours worked, output and welfare? [Hint: This exercise requires creatively reinterpreting how we apply our model to the data. Think about how we constructed the bounds on our labor/leisure model in terms of hours worked. Remem- ber our model does not have any sleep requirements built into it for instance.]

Consider the possibility that government spending increases the amount of hours to be worked in a given time period, say by providing child care. Assume again that the initial amount of consumption and leisure are still just affordable after an increase in spending. How will an increase in government spending affect consumption, hours worked, output and welfare? [Hint: This exercise requires creatively reinterpreting how we apply our model to the data. Think about how we constructed the bounds on our labor/leisure model in terms of hours worked. Remem- ber our model does not have any sleep requirements built into it for instance.]

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter16: Labor Markets

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 16.12P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

What factors influence an individual's decision to allocate time between work and leisure in the context of the work-leisure model?
Suppose the economy is in a recession and the unemployment rate is exceptionally high. Show that a technological breakthrough that greatly increases labor productivity could help reduce the unemployment rate without hurting the standard of living of the average worker. (Use diagram and analysis, you only need to use the labor market here.)
Suppose that all social programs simultaneously become more generous. In particular, suppose that there is an increase in UI benefits, and also an increase in welfare benefits, which are represented in the two-sided search model as payments to everyone who is not in the labor force. What will be the effects on the unemployment rate, the vacancy rate, the labour force, the number of active firms, the aggregate output, and the labour market tightness? Draw the two-sided search model diagrams and explain the results and economics intuitions. Imagine you need to explain the mechanisms to your friends who do not seem to have learned the two-sided search model, so you may need to start with introducing key economic concepts very clearly. (Hints: for simplicity, assume the case when there is a uniform payment p to each person not in the labour force, and an increase by p in the employment insurance benefit.)
Consider a simple model where workers can be either employed or unemployed. Suppose the labour force is L= 100 million workers, the job separation rate is 2% per month and the job finding rate is 38% per month. Which of the following is true? A. In steady state, 5 million workers are unemployed B. All of the other options C. In steady state, 38 million workers are employed D. In steady state, there are more workers losing their jobs than there are unemployed workers finding a job
Describe the neoclassical model of labor -leisure choice model by emphasizing the objective function, constraint and optimality conditions?
Consider a simple model where workers can be either employed or unemployed. Suppose the labour force is L = 300 million workers, the job separation rate is 4% per month and the job finding rate is 36% per month. Which of the following is true?Group of answer choices In steady state, fewer workers are losing their jobs than there are unemployed workers finding a job In steady state, 108 million workers are employed None of the other options In steady state, 12 million workers are unemployed
MULTIPLE CHOICE Consider the static model of the household studied in class. When consumption and leisure are both normal goods, a decrease in a lump sum tax leads the household to (1) increase consumption and increase labour supply. (2) increase consumption and reduce labour supply. (3) reduce consumption and increase labour supply. (4) reduce consumption and reduce labour supply.
The economic model of Human Capital Investment assumes that individuals choose their path through post-secondary education based solely on which path will provide them with the highest lifetime income. In reality, individuals often choose a path through post-secondary education that does not maximize their lifetime income, as a result of various factors. Consider Alex, an individual whose path through post-secondary education did not maximize their lifetime income. For each of the following potential reasons, construct a brief story that relates that reason to Alex's choice of post-secondary education. a) Utility/disutility from education b) Relationship between job satisfaction and education c) Uncertainty of different income streams d) Difficulty of financing human capital investments E.g. If the reason is "incomplete information", a potential answer would be: "Alex's high school guidance counsellor gave them a list of potential university programs that suited their strengths.…
Identify the following variables as procyclical, countercyclical, or acyclical: (1) consumption, (2) real wage, (3) employment, and (4) total factor productivity.
if there is unemployment in the labor market, what would you recommend as a set of policies or programs to address such problems. Illustrate your recommendations geometrically (i.e., graphically).
From what I understand, LBC with work-leisure is c_1 + c_2 / (1+r) = w_1(h-l_1) + w_2(h-l_2) / (1+r). When I manipulate this equation, I get all three of them, which is perplexing since apparently not all of them are correct.
recently read an article that concluded that, when adjusted for inflation, paychecks today have nearly the same purchase power as they did 40 years ago. As a layperson, I take this to mean that, while the ordinary American's standard of life hasn't increased in several decades, it hasn't deteriorated either. I'm struggling to reconcile this figure with the "shrinking middle class" and the need for people to work several jobs to make ends meet, both of which have progressively evolved over the same 40-year period. I assume the answer is growing housing, school, and healthcare costs, but aren't these things factored into the inflation adjustment calculation?