Question A:
The $300 supplement to weekly unemployment benefits available from now through September 6 constitutes a major disincentive to work for lower-wage workers.
Responses
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
7%
0%
0%
16%
49%
23%
5%
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
0%
18%
55%
20%
9%
Question B:
The $300 supplement to weekly unemployment benefits available from now through September 6 is likely to lead to re-employment wages for currently unemployed workers that are higher by an economically meaningful amount.
Responses
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
7%
0%
0%
14%
44%
35%
0%
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
0%
16%
46%
38%
0%
Question C:
Click to write the question text
Responses
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
0%
2%
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
© 2025. Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets.
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Question A Participant Responses
Participant |
University |
Vote |
Confidence |
Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Probably yes. Slow response of employment to demand doesn't seem to be due to other factors. But no hard evidence and still some uncertainty
-see background information here |
||||
![]() Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
"Major" is probably too strong, but with COVID improving and labor demand rebounding, UI benefit levels matter more now than before.
-see background information here -see background information here -see background information here |
||||
![]() Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Since there's no evidence on this Q yet, only the WSJ editorial page can be certain that it constitutes a major disincentive to work!
|
||||
![]() Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
I haven't seen a study that is current.
|
||||
![]() David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
the "major" part makes me uncertain.
|
||||
![]() Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
$300 of extra money per week is quite meaningful to a low wage worker. Certainly enough to affect decisions.
|
||||
![]() Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
I go for "minor disincentive." More important are childcare responsibilities, fear of COVID in jobs with close personal contact.
|
||||
![]() Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Not likely "major"
|
||||
![]() Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
It depends. In sectors where demand has not yet recovered, the $300 is not the issue. Where demand has recovered, the disincentive may exist
|
||||
![]() Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
So far slow hiring is not really correlated w/UI generosity either across sectors or across states. Once things are “normal” again, then yes
|
||||
![]() Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Only for people eligible for benefits
|
||||
![]() Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
I don't think we know enough about it. Fears of getting Covid may be a more important factor.
|
||||
![]() Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
The existing evidence is now dated but shows that moral hazard is not large. That could be changing but no evidence yet that it has.
|
||||
![]() Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
How many think with the uncertainty about how reopening will proceed and the risk of reversals and another layoff, why take a job now?
|
||||
![]() Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
There will be some adverse effect on employment, just not clear how much
-see background information here |
||||
![]() Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
major too strong, but significant
|
||||
![]() Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Anecdotal cases of benefit recipients declining work will abound, but the evidence is that the effect is not major.
-see background information here |
||||
![]() José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
It is a disincentive but not sure about major
|
||||
![]() Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Clearly a disincentive, but major? Compared with the effect of schools being closed?
|
||||
![]() Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
Many workers are still get more in UI than their old wage.
|
||||
![]() James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
"Major" is probably too strong, but it does permit some workers to search more/longer for better jobs.
|
Question B Participant Responses
Participant |
University |
Vote |
Confidence |
Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Theory strongly suggests yes. But with low employment growth and the supplement set to expire, the hoped-for impact may be small or absent.
-see background information here |
||||
![]() Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
I expect wages in low wage, higher turnover jobs to rise, but firms will not make big wage changes in response to a temporary policy.
|
||||
![]() Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
Too complex to guess. Workers can wait for a good opportunity. But long term unemployed people often have bad opportunities.
|
||||
![]() Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
I go for "economically marginal" instead of "economically meaningful," following the logic of my answer to the first question.
|
||||
![]() Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
labor supply increases, wages rise? But wages may rise along with price inflation.
|
||||
![]() Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
IFF they get re-employed, probably yes. By how much is uncertain, depends on the industry and state.
|
||||
![]() Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
Maybe for some but not overall (yet)
|
||||
![]() Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
![]() Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
I want to believe this but little evidence from the US that this is the case.
|
||||
![]() Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Higher UI benefits allows workers to spend more time looking for a good job, in terms of wages or other job characteristics.
|
||||
![]() Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Depends on how sticky wages are.
-see background information here |
||||
![]() Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
could add a few basis points to wage inflation
|
||||
![]() Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
Extensive unemployment ins. empirical evidence not able to show such wage effects. This is a much bigger experiment that we will learn from.
|
||||
![]() Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
It will be difficult to distinguish this effect from the effect of looming inflation.
|
||||
![]() José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
Higher UI increases workers bargaining position and also allows searching for better matches. Not sure about economically meaningful amount.
|
||||
![]() Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
There is no evidence that higher UI raises reemployment wages (perhaps surprisingly)
-see background information here |
||||
![]() James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
![]() Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|