Must-Read: Nick Bunker: What will happen if the U.S. overtime threshold is raised?

Must-Read: Nick Bunker: What will happen if the U.S. overtime threshold is raised?: “President Obama late last week announced…

… [an] increase the income threshold under which workers are eligible for overtime compensation… [from] $23,660 a year… to $50,400. If the rule is implemented, any worker without management duties making under $50,400 a year would be eligible for overtime if they work more than 40 hours in a week. On its face, this seems like a significant raise for many workers…. [But] currently, the amount of research on the topic isn’t conclusive enough to determine how an almost doubling of the overtime threshold would affect the broader labor market. An individual’s view of the likely results are, at this point, determined by their overall view of the labor market. To get a better understanding, we simply need more research. Hopefully, it’ll be on the way.

What will happen if the U.S. overtime threshold is raised?

President Obama late last week announced that the U.S. Department of Labor is proposing a change to overtime regulations. Specifically, the regulation would increase the income threshold under which workers are eligible for overtime compensation if they work longer than 40 hours a week. The threshold is currently at roughly $23,660 a year, whereas the proposed rule would lift it up to $50,400. If the rule is implemented, any worker without management duties making under $50,400 a year would be eligible for overtime if they work more than 40 hours in a week. On its face, this seems like a significant raise for many workers. But what does the economics research say?

First, how many people would be affected by the increase in the threshold? Currently, 8 percent of salaried workers are covered by overtime regulations, according to data from the Economic Policy Institute. According to calculations by the Department of Labor, the higher threshold would cover an additional 5 million workers in its first year while EPI pegs that number as closer to 6 million workers. So the share of workers covered would rise to about 45 percent.

The larger question is how employers will respond to the higher threshold. The effects could be quite different depending upon your understanding of the labor market. And unlike the effects of raising the minimum wage, which have been studied at great depth, there is little research which looks at the implications of a higher threshold for earnings and employment via increased overtime pay. So we can’t point to a large body of empirical studies for the answers.

Theoretically, however, employers could react to the higher threshold and the prospect of paying workers more for work in excess of 40 hours a week in two ways. The first is that employers will find a way to change the mix of compensation so they end up paying the worker the same amount anyway. The employer might reduce the wage rate for workers so that when overtime kicks in, the total wage bill ends up being the same. A study by Anthony Barkume of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics finds just this anticipated outcome. This result makes sense if we believe labor markets are perfectly competitive.

But if the labor market isn’t perfectly competitive, and raising the proposed overtime threshold increases the bargaining power of workers, then something very different could happen. That’s the result of a 1991 study by the University of Texas’s Stephen J. Trejo, who finds that lifting the overtime threshold will indeed boost wages. Another possible implication is that employers hire more workers to do the job that existing employees would be doing if they worked overtime.

Currently, the amount of research on the topic isn’t conclusive enough to determine how an almost doubling of the overtime threshold would affect the broader labor market. An individual’s view of the likely results are, at this point, determined by their overall view of the labor market. To get a better understanding, we simply need more research. Hopefully, it’ll be on the way.

Over at Grasping Reality: David Glasner: Weekend Reading: Ludwig von Mises’s Unwitting Affirmation of the Hawtrey-Cassel Explanation of the Great Depression

Over at Grasping Reality: David Glasner: Weekend Reading: Ludwig von Mises’s Unwitting Affirmation of the Hawtrey-Cassel Explanation of the Great Depression: “The parallels with the antinomies of the thought of the Ludwig von Mises of today–John Taylor–are, I think, rather striking:

David Glasner: “In looking up some sources for my previous post on the gold-exchange standard…

…I checked, as I like to do from time to time, my old copy of The Theory of Money and Credit by Ludwig von Mises. Mises published The Theory of Money and Credit in 1912 (in German of course) when he was about 31 years old, a significant achievement. In 1924 he published a second enlarged edition addressing many issues that became relevant in the aftermath the World War and the attempts then underway to restore the gold standard. So one finds in the 1934 English translation of the 1924 German edition a whole section of Part III, chapter 6 devoted to the Gold-Exchange Standard…

Over at Grasping Reality: Steve Randy Waldman: Weekend Reading: Greece

Over at Grasping RealitySteve Randy Waldman: Weekend Reading: Greece: “I’ll end this ramble with…

…a discussion of a fashionable view that in fact, the Greece crisis is not about the money at all, it is merely about creditors wresting political control from the concededly fucked up Greek state in order to make reforms in the long term interest of the Greek public. Anyone familiar with corporate finance ought to be immediately skeptical of this claim. A state cannot be liquidated. In bankruptcy terms, it must be reorganized. Corporate bankruptcy laws wisely limit the control rights of unconverted creditors during reorganizations, because creditors have no interest in maximizing the value of firm assets. Their claim to any upside is capped, their downside is large, they seek the fastest possible exit that makes them mostly whole. The incentives of impaired creditors are simply not well aligned with maximizing the long-term value of an enterprise…

Over at Grasping Reality: Arthur Goldhammer: Weekend Reading: The Old Continent Creaks

Over at Grasping RealityArthur Goldhammer: Weekend Reading: The Old Continent Creaks: “Austerity and the failures of the technocratic elite have created the current populist backlash. France’s experience is instructive—and, possibly, ominous:

What’s the matter with Europe? Wherever one looks these days, there are signs of deep trouble. Economic growth has stagnated. Deflation threatens. Unemployment is rampant in many member states of the European Union. Support for the former mainstream parties of the center-right and center-left is waning. Populist parties of the far right and far left are on the rise. Anti-Islamic movements such as PEGIDA in Germany have attracted worrisome support, while in France the xenophobic National Front has topped all other parties in recent polls. Terrorist attacks by native-born citizens in Paris and Copenhagen have raised fears that the social fabric has irreparably deteriorated—fears compounded by the flight of several thousand young Europeans to join the Islamic State in Syria. And to top it all off, Ukraine has been racked by civil war and threatened with disintegration since Russian-backed separatists rejected the rule of the government in Kiev…

Must-Read: Thomas Piketty: Germany Has Never Repaid

Thomas Piketty: Germany Has Never Repaid: “What struck me while I was writing is that Germany…

…is really the single best example of a country that, throughout its history, has never repaid its external debt…. However, it has frequently made other nations pay up…. The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice…. When I hear the Germans say that they maintain a very moral stance about debt and strongly believe that debts must be repaid, then I think: what a huge joke! Germany is the country that has never repaid its debts. It has no standing to lecture other nations…

Things to Read at Nighttime on July 4, 2015

Must- and Should-Reads:

Might Like to Be Aware of:

Department of “HUH!? WTF!?!?”: Greek Crisis Troika-Defending Ideologues Edition

Angel Ubide writes:

Ummmm…

“Pre-Syriza growth” would return Greek GDP to its 1975-1999 trend… never.

“Pre-Syriza growth” was at a pace that would not return Greek real GDP to the 2007 level of the 1975-1999 trend (if you think that was Greece’s “real” potential output in 2007) until… 2023.

“Pre-Syriza growth” was at a pace that would not return Greek real GDP to the 2007 level of potential output (if you think that was Greece’s “real” potential output in 2007) until… 2037.

Splitting the difference, “pre-Syriza growth” would not return Greece to the center-point of estimates of 2007 potential output until 2030. And “pre-Syriza growth” would reduce Greek unemployment from its current levels… never:

Graph Gross Domestic Product by Expenditure in Constant Prices Total Gross Domestic Product for Greece© FRED St Louis Fed

Must-Read: Simon Wren-Lewis: The Ideologues of the Eurozone

Must-Read: Simon Wren-Lewis, who is very smart and has followed the Eurozone crisis much more closely than I have, seems to have joined the Ancient, Hermetic, and Occult Order of the Shrill: “Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Euro R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn!”. We wish him luck with his new appointment at Miskatonic University in picturesque Arkham, Massachusetts. And we are seriously considering, after reading him, whether the Euro project needs to blown up–indeed, whether the fundamental flaw was in U.S. occupation authorities allowing the formation of the Bundesrepublik, because a European Union that now had five members named “Brandenburg”, “Saxony”, “Bavaria”, “Rhineland”, and “Hanover” would be likely to have a much healthier politics and economics than our current one, with one member named “Germany”:

Simon Wren-Lewis: The Ideologues of the Eurozone: “It was all going so well…

…True, Greek GDP did shrink by 25% over 4 years, unemployment rose to 25% and youth unemployment to 50%, but before Syriza’s election Greek GDP had actually stopped falling. Further austerity was planned so that Greece could start to pay interest on its enormous debts, together with various ‘reforms’ that were so obviously in the interests of the Greek economy, and the consensus forecast was that the Greek economy might start to grow at a pace that would also stop unemployment rising. Who knows, in a decade or so it might even fall below 20%. But then disaster struck. The Greek people went and spoilt everything by electing a government that suggested that there might be an alternative…. The real blame must lie with the ‘populist’ politicians who pretended there could be an alternative. The ever patient and understanding Troika negotiators then had to deal with ‘adolescent ideologues’… cheered on by pundits and economists on the left in the UK and US who wanted nothing more than to use Greece as part of a ‘proxy war’ to get more Keynesian policies in their own countries.

If you think the above parody is over the top, click on the two links. The hypocrisy of some of the commentary on Greece is amazing. When the ‘adolescent ideologue’ Mr Tsipras shows a statesman-like maturity in being prepared to compromise… he is accused of inconsistency…. When those who he is negotiating with push him further than he is prepared to go, he is accused of ‘taking Greece to the brink’ by having the temerity to ask the Greek people to choose…. The OECD estimate that the output gap in Greece is currently well over 10%. In plain English that means that those currently unemployed could be producing something useful and GDP could easily expand by at least 10% without generating any increase in inflation. (Greek inflation is currently around -2%)…