Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?
description
Transcript of Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?
![Page 1: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?Alesina, Glaeser and Sacerdote,
Working paper
Why Do Americans Work So Much More Than Europeans?
Prescott, Working paperGoogle scholar cites: 358
![Page 2: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Summary• Americans now work substantially more than
Europeans; wasn’t true 40 years ago• Prescott studies a simple representative agent
model• Finds that taxes can explain all the differences in
labor supply• I will augment Prescott’s work with other info,
especially from Alesina, Glaeser and Sacerdote (henceforth AGS, 2005)– Also, some cameos by Dew-Becker and Gordon, 2007
![Page 3: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
US vs EU E/N
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Empl
oym
ent-P
opul
atio
n R
atio
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
EU-U
S ra
tio
US
EU-15
Ratio(Right hand axis)
![Page 4: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Raw Data for Hours Per Employee
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
US
EU-15
![Page 5: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The basic facts
• European labor supply fell throughout the postwar period– Both intensive and extensive margins
• EU labor productivity caught up to the US• Output per capita never gained• Prescott’s question: what explains the
changes in employment?
![Page 7: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The theory
• Standard RBC framework,
– Where c is consumption, h is hours• Highly stylized, but a reasonable starting
point– Unit IES, no wealth effects on labor supply
• α is key in determining labor supply
0
100loglogmaxt
ttt hcE
![Page 8: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Budget Constraint:
– tc, tax on consumption
– tx, investment tax; x investment; δ depreciation
– th, marginal tax on labor
– tk, capital income tax
– Tt, transfers; Gov’t gives all the tax revenue back
• The key is the price of consumption relative to leisure; depends on tc and th
ttttktth
txtc
Tkkrhwxc
11
11
![Page 9: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Key equilibrium conditions
• Labor supply:• Wage:• Elasticity of hours wrt wages:
– Prescott calibrates α to match the average level of employment
– Elasticity is 0.77– This is roughly the same number one gets by
regressing employment on taxes
wch
1/11/
hkw /1
whtz 11
![Page 10: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Labor Taxes in Europe
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
1980 1985 1990 1995 200010
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Anglo-Saxon(right hand axis)
Continental
Nordic
Mediterranean
![Page 11: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
![Page 12: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Taxes on second earners
• Labor supply increase in the US between ’70 and ’93 is entirely driven by married women– Single women are a small part of the working
age population…• 1986 tax reform reduced taxes on second
earners (see next slide)• A similar reform in Spain raised labor
supply by 12 percent
![Page 13: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
AGS on labor supply elasticity
• Note that α governs both the level of employment and the elasticity wrt taxes– The elasticity is zero if you have no unearned income
• Prescott’s η=0.77• Labor literature says
– ηmen ≈ 0 (upper bound 0.35)– ηwomen ≈ 1
• AGS argue taxes explain at most half the gap between US and Europe
whtz
11
![Page 15: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65+
EU-15 Tortoises
Middle Countries
E/N Ratio to the US
![Page 16: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
50
55
60
65
70
75
1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
Fixed Policy
Predicted
No Post-1995 Dummy
Male Employment
Effect of the post-95 dummy (6.32%)
Effect of the Policy variables (1.47%)
![Page 17: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
Fixed Policy
Predicted
No Post-1995 Dummy
Female Employment
Effect of the post-95 dummy (2.38%)
Effect of the Policy variables (1.75%)
![Page 18: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
AGS’s Alternative Hypothesis• One way to read the results is that there is a big
macro elasticity but a small micro elasticity• Maybe there are complementarities that magnify
micro effects• AGS argue for complemetarity in leisure
– We all coordinate on the weekend– Women happier staying home if they have friends– We want vacation at the same time
• Then unions and gov’t may have a place in solving coordination problems
• Prescott may be right for the wrong reasons
![Page 19: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
The Social Multiplier• A social multiplier assumes that the value
of leisure depends on the leisure taken by others
• Social multiplier means V12>0• Let • Then the social multiplier is 2v1/(2v1-v2)
• v1>v2 implies social multiplier < 2• Too small for micro elasticities to account
for macro regressions
)ˆ1,1())1)(1(( llVwtlUU
)ˆ1)(1()1()1()ˆ1,1( 22
10 llvlvlvllV
![Page 20: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Some suggestive evidence
• People take weekends off together• People tend to work 9–5 instead of
staggering shifts• Holidays are grouped together• Social multiplier might come from
increasing returns in work (e.g. Ciccione and Hall)
![Page 21: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
• However, AGS settle on 0.2 as a reasonable micro estimate of LS elasticity
• A maximum social multiplier of 2 implies a macro elasticity of 0.4– The 0.2 estimate probably includes multiplier effects
already anyway
• Prescott overstates the case – taxes explain at best half the LS difference– And for him to be right, unions and hours limits must
be optimal!
![Page 22: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
What are the alternative explanations?
• Many policy differences between EU and US– Implicit taxes on earnings after retirement age– Unemployment benefits– Tax rates on second earners– Employment protection legislation– Product market regulation
• If Prescott is right, they don’t matter
![Page 23: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Employment Protection Legislation
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Anglo-Saxon
Continental
Nordic
Mediterranean
![Page 24: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
![Page 25: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
A policy proposal
• Suppose we take Prescott’s parameters as given– I.e. the macro elasticity is causal, maybe due to a
social multiplier• Now we can go from a pay-as-you-go to fully
funded social security– Not possible with fixed labor supply
• Proposal: allow people to lower their tax rate by 8.7% and put it in a retirement account– Intuition: leads people to work substantially more– This only works by stopping redistribution
![Page 26: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
• Sets up a big OG model:– Wages grow at 2% per year– People work from age 22 to 63– SS benefits equal 32% of wages at retirement– Prevailing marginal tax is 40%
• Then simulates the effect of the proposed policy change
![Page 27: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
The effects of employment on productivity
• Historically, productivity tends to grow quickly when labor is scarce– Habakkuk hypothesis– Clark paper on cotton mills– US postwar experience
• Does this explain the recent experience of Europe?– Employment rises post-1995, but productivity
slows
![Page 28: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Productivity Regressions• Instrument for
employment changes with labor taxes
• Coefficient on employment is twice what we would expect
• EPL and ARR have independent positive effects on productivity
Employment Rate -0.64***(0.20)
Output Gap 0.68***(0.11)
Product Market 0.56Regulation (0.45)Union Density 0.03
(0.12)Employment 1.66***Protection Legislation (0.65)Unemployment 0.14***Benefits (ARR) (0.05)High Corpratism Dummy -0.49
(0.94)Post-1995 Dummy -0.14
(0.24)
R2 0.63RMSE 0.95N 320
![Page 29: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Conclusions
• Prescott is provocative• Nice implementation of a canonical theory• AGS show that his results are probably too
strong– Taxes explain at most half the variation in LS– Why rule out all the other things Europe does
wrong?• The strong macro elasticities imply policies
limiting employment may be efficient
![Page 30: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Labor’s share of income
0.580
0.600
0.620
0.640
0.660
0.680
0.700
0.720
0.740
0.760
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
EU-15US
![Page 31: Work and Leisure in the US and Europe: Why so Different?](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081517/568160ef550346895dd0273d/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Labor’s share of income
0.580
0.600
0.620
0.640
0.660
0.680
0.700
0.720
0.740
0.760
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
FranceGermanyUK