tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post295364786525412398..comments2024-03-28T09:22:36.967+13:00Comments on Offsetting Behaviour: Parental leave and benefitsEric Cramptonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-23829634088794153772012-04-12T20:41:53.317+12:002012-04-12T20:41:53.317+12:00Of course, if you want equality between the sexes,...Of course, if you want equality between the sexes, you need to make men just as risky to employ. Military Age and Child-Bearing age are roughly the same, so this is why I recommended <a href="http://brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2006/08/to-make-maternity-leave-fair-we-need.html" rel="nofollow">invading France</a>.Jackarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04477130724830922566noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-78626595389112286532012-04-11T14:52:11.679+12:002012-04-11T14:52:11.679+12:00Thanks for the Ruhm piece. The IZA piece linked wo...Thanks for the Ruhm piece. The IZA piece linked would suggest longer term childhood outcomes aren't much affected either though. <br /><br />I'm not sure what the education-fertility cross-effects would be in New Zealand. Here, a woman on mat leave gets her gross weekly wage up to a cap of $460 - that's less than minimum wage on a 40 hour week here. In other words, something that doesn't amount to much for a higher earning family but that might induce folks on lower salaries to have an additional child. Extending from 14 to 26 weeks of less-than-minimum-wage might have education-fertility effects that run in the opposite direction to those you might hope. <br /><br />The bigger policy move set to address the education-fertility gradient here is the proposed change to the Domestic Purposes Benefit that reduces the extra benefit that women on the DPB get from having an additional child.Eric Cramptonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-40067603403858477772012-04-11T12:58:00.086+12:002012-04-11T12:58:00.086+12:00Eric, my reading of the literature (see, e.g. this...Eric, my reading of the literature (see, e.g. this classic piece by Ruhm http://qje.oxfordjournals.org/content/113/1/285.abstract) is that it's really when leaves start stretching for more than a year that significant negative labour market impacts appear. My guess is the benefits in terms of children's and family's well-being of going from 14 to 26 weeks is enough to outweigh the negative labour market impacts.<br /><br />I know Michael Baker didn't find much of a positive impact of breast-feeding on children's outcomes, but he was looking at a very short time period. I attribute the fact that I get sick less often than some of my contemporaries in part to being breast-fed (supposedly breast feeding strengthens the immune system). The point is that the beneficial effects of breast-feeding may be manifested over decades, not over months or years.<br /><br />Look at the US, and look at the strong negative relationship between female education and fertility - a relationship that is much weaker or non-existent in Canada, don't know about NZ. Do you really want to go there?Frances Woolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04289318268301647625noreply@blogger.com