1 Labour Economics Homework 1 Report Part I. Labour force survey data Part II. Net income flow, IRR & NPV exercise Part III. Reading data exercise (column sum) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Part I. Labour force survey data March of Year Age UE LFP PT rate 1976 20-24 9.93% 65.92% 13.43% 1981 25-29 8.33% 68.77% 19.05% 1986 30-34 10.06% 72.77% 26.21% 1991 35-39 9.04% 78.19% 26.50% 1996 40-44 8.09% 79.00% 23.41% UE, LFP and PT rate for every 5 years since 1976 March We extracted the data from the labor force survey of female (aged 20-24) beginning in March 1976, then we repeated the same cohort for every five years of the same month. The unemployment rate (UE rate) in 1976 was 9.93% and it slightly decreased to 8.33% in 1981 when the cohort was 25-29 years old. Then the rate reached the peak of 10.06% in 1986 when the cohort was 30-34. A possible assumption of this change would be fewer women looked for jobs when they came to their marriageable age 25-29 and many of them started to look for jobs again after maternity. The rate declined slowly for the last 10 years to 1996 when the rate was 8.09%. The initial LFP in 1976 was 65.92% and it increased throughout the years to 1996 with rate of 79%. An assumption of the increase in LFP was due to increase in part-time participation. The part time work rate was calculated by number of women working part-time divided by the number of women employed. We observed a significant increase in every five years since 1976 when the rate was 13.43% and by 1991 the rate was as high as 26.5%, when the same cohort was 35-39 years old. A possible reason for this increase in part-time job participation was that women needed to spend time taking care of their children and families. At the same time, they wanted to work to gain extra earnings. The rate tended to decrease when they became older.
Transcript
1
Labour Economics Homework 1 Report
Part I. Labour force survey dataPart II. Net income flow, IRR & NPV exercisePart III. Reading data exercise (column sum)
March of Year Age UE LFP PT rate1976 20-24 9.93% 65.92% 13.43%1981 25-29 8.33% 68.77% 19.05%1986 30-34 10.06% 72.77% 26.21%1991 35-39 9.04% 78.19% 26.50%1996 40-44 8.09% 79.00% 23.41%
UE, LFP and PT rate for every 5 years since 1976 March
We extracted the data from the labor force survey of female (aged 20-24) beginning in March 1976, then we repeated the samecohort for every five years of the same month. The unemployment rate (UE rate) in 1976 was 9.93% and it slightly decreased to 8.33% in1981 when the cohort was 25-29 years old. Then the rate reached the peak of 10.06% in 1986 when the cohort was 30-34. A possibleassumption of this change would be fewer women looked for jobs when they came to their marriageable age 25-29 and many of themstarted to look for jobs again after maternity. The rate declined slowly for the last 10 years to 1996 when the rate was 8.09%.
The initial LFP in 1976 was 65.92% and it increased throughout the years to 1996 with rate of 79%. An assumption of the increasein LFP was due to increase in part-time participation. The part time work rate was calculated by number of women working part-timedivided by the number of women employed. We observed a significant increase in every five years since 1976 when the rate was 13.43%and by 1991 the rate was as high as 26.5%, when the same cohort was 35-39 years old. A possible reason for this increase in part-time jobparticipation was that women needed to spend time taking care of their children and families. At the same time, they wanted to work togain extra earnings. The rate tended to decrease when they became older.
2
Part II. Net income flow, IRR & NPV exerciseEnter the Month your were born: 3
The graph shows the correlation between the net present value (NPV) of university investment, and the real interest rates that individualscan borrow to pay for tuition or other expenses during the years in school. The NPV of future earnings decrease as individuals pay higherinterest rates. The internal rate of return (IRR) is approximately 5.5015%, (the excel rounded it to 6%) which corresponds with zero netreturn of investment. At this rate, individuals are indifferent between 1) investing in university education at borrowing rate 5.5% and 2)simply not going to university. For interest rates lower than the 5.5% IRR, individuals are better off and will invest in university education,as they receive positive NPV of future earnings. On the other hand, when interest rates are above 5.5%, individuals are worse off and willnot choose to invest in university education.
We read in “file hw1.txt” into a spreadsheet, and calculate the sum of the “benefit” column by using the sum function. The result is792986.3844 (in dollars).
ECON 360 HOMEWORK #1 REPORT: "THE EDUCATION DECISION"
N.B. Most of the steps were performed as outlined in the document "Homework #1"<http://: www.econ.queensu.ca/pub/faculty/ferrall/econ360/homework/hw1.htm>. Forpurposes of clarity and style, this report is titled, and divided into three major sections(with appendices), each representing one of the major tasks that was performed.
I) LABOUR FORCE SURVEY (LFS) CALCULATIONS
1. Description
Using the STATA™ software in the Dunning 350 and Mackintosh-Corry
basement computing labs, I downloaded five sets of LFS data for the years 1977-1997 in
five year intervals for analysis. The first three sets were taken from the January edition,
while the remaining two were June editions. In particular, the files lfs77jan_11.dta,
lfs82jan_11.dta, lfs87jan_11.dta, lfs92jun_dta and lfs97jun_dta were each downloaded
and extracted separately, from the QED Data Server "Edith", and the following steps
were performed (see Appendix I for the complete STATA log file):
1) Keeping observations which had only the field values SEX = 1 (indicating a male
respondent) and AGE_12 = {4, 5, 6, 7, 8} (beginning with AGE_12 = 4 for lfs77jan,
representing an age of 30-34 years, and increasing by one for each LFS processed
thereafter) using the keep if command.
2) Tabulation of LFS statistics (labour force status; full-time or part-time and main or
only job) by weighted frequency using the tabl command.
3) Displaying the calculation of: i) the labour force participation rate (LFP), ii) the
unemployment rate (UE), and iii) the part-time work rate using the di command.
2
I) LFS CALCULATIONS (continued)
2. OBSERVATIONS
My findings are summarized in the table below:
Labour Force
Survey (MM/YY)
Labour Force
Participation Rate
Unemployment
Rate
Part-time work
Rate
01/77 .9483 .06052937 .01584722
01/82 .9458 (↓) .06861916 (↑) .02134613 (↑)
01/87 .9361 (↓) .06772781 (↓) .0303967 (↑)
06/92 .9279 (↓) .06800302 (↑) .03135314 (↑)
06/97 .98653 (↑) .05720559 (↓) .04123282 (↑)
Figure 1: Summary table of LFP, UER, and part-time work rate
My calculations show, in terms of a 1977 base year: i) declining rates of LFP for this
cohort except in 1997, ii) alternating trends of increase and decrease of the UER for this
cohort and iii) an increasing trend of the rate of part-time work for this cohort. The
calculations were performed on a relatively small subset of available LFS data so that, in
my opinion, other than to guess that these findings are probably consistent with the state
of the physical economy, a meaningful analysis of these observations cannot be
performed here without further research.
3
II) PRESENT DISCOUNTED VALUE (PDV) CALCULATIONS
N.B. The Excel worksheet used is reproduced in Appendix II.
1. Description
The provided Microsoft Excel data file hw1data.xls was downloaded into a new
worksheet and the requested entry (my birth month, August = 8) was entered into the
colored cell B2. This changed the values of the "Net Revenue" column D as its entries
contain a formula involving that cell. Next, I altered the blank column E by giving a cell
E3 the title "Net Income Flow" (NIF) and set the contents of the E4:E33 cell range to be
the difference between the corresponding "Net Revenue" and "Opportunity Cost" cells.
Similarly, I altered column F to become the "Interest Rate" column with 30 values
ranging from 0.000 to 0.232, in increments of 0.08, using the Fill Down -> Series menu
command.
To perform the Present Discounted Value (PDV) calculation (column G), I
entered the formula =NPV(F4, E4) into cell G4 and used the Fill Down command to
create all corresponding entries.
2. Observations
The X-Y "scatter" chart on the next page, showing the PDV of the total NIF against the
interest rate, was generated using the Insert -> Chart menu command and the interactive
"Chart Wizard":
4
Present Discounted Value of all NIFs vs. interest rate i
$0.00
$20,000.00
$40,000.00
$60,000.00
$80,000.00
$100,000.00
$120,000.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250
i
PD
V
PDV of all NIFs @ i-rate
Figure 2: Chart comparing PDV with interest rate
I observed that the PDV of the NIFs trends downward with increasing interest rates.
Next, to calculate the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of the NIFs, I used the Excel
Help -> Contents menu command to learn how to set up the IRR formula in cell H4 as
=IRR(E4:E33). This gave me a value of 6%. I also learned that Excel uses a default
5
"guess" value of 10% as a seed or target to the iterative IRR calculation though I am not
sure of the guess value's significance to my answer.
III) EXTERNAL DATA SOURCE
1. Description
I downloaded the formatted text file hw1.txt into Excel by first using the Help
menu command and learning to then use the Data -> Get External Data -> Import Text
File commands and following the prompts to get the formatted data into columns I and J,
rows 4 to 54 of my current worksheet. The columns were titled "age" and "benefits" by
default, respectively. Then, from previous knowledge, I entered the formula
=SUM(J4:J52) into cell J53.
2. Observations
The sum total of the benefits values of column J was 792986.4.
IV) CONCLUSION
This homework assignment provided me with experience in using different
software packages, performing basic spreadsheet calculations, and browsing electronic
economics data sources, which I will continue to require on subsequent assignments for
this course. Although I have been using these programs for many years, I found it helpful
to proceed almost step-by-step in completing the exercise in order to reinforce ideas and
. Qextract sex age_12 lfsstat ftptmain fweight, ds(99) exec
getting information about file 99 ...
loading variables from 99 (lfs77jan) only (no data yet)... done
loading data from 99 (lfs77jan) ... (99 : lfs77jan : labour force survey)
(note: file lfs77jan_11.dta not found)
file lfs77jan_11.dta saved
done
1028.5k 1/21/03 19:02 lfs77jan_11.dta
. codebook sex, t(20)
sex --------------------------------------------------------- sex of respondent
type: numeric (byte)
label: sex
range: [1,2] units: 1
1
Mr. Ferrall
ECON 360
January 24th, 2003
Total # of pages: 5
Economics 360: Assignment #1
Part A: Labour Force Survey
For this part of the assignment, I chose to start with the males in the 20-24 agerange beginning in January 1976, all the way through till January 1996. Here is the tableas follows:
Year Age Group UE rate LFP rate Part Time Work rate1976 20-24 13.96% 81.89% 7.72%1981 25-29 8.68% 93.13% 3.89%1986 30-34 9.41% 94.38% 3.03%1991 35-39 9.25% 93.08% 3.75%1996 40-44 9.80% 91.21% 4.80%
Looking at this data, we can see that the unemployment rate of people between 20and 24 have a very high unemployment rate as well part time work rate. But as we cansee, only a few years later, this unemployment rate dramatically decreases as well as thepart time work rate. We also see the labour force participation rate increase dramaticallyas well. This could be due to the fact that these people have possibly received moreeducation and now can attain full time jobs that pay well.
Check on the next page for the report on the excel question.
Part B: IRR/PDV Excercise:
2
As you can see, using January as the birth month, we get a different number forthe net income flow and this gives us the internal rate of return to be 5% for the entireamount of time. On the next page is the table for the PDV and how it changes dependingon the interest rate:
As we can see, the present discount value equals zero when it gets close to theinternal rate of return for the net income flow. However, as the interest rate increases, thepresent discount value becomes more negative. It is interesting though because after16%, the present discount value seems to go back up again.
On the next page are the results from the summation exercise:
Table 1 contains the results for a young person who has just started their career. The LFPR is only 48.3%in 1976 since the majority of age group 1(15-19) were in school. The LFPR rises to 83.2% in 1979indicating that most people in age group two (20-24) were finished school. The LFPR rises again to 92%for age group 3(25-29). This is likely due to university and collage students entering the labour force. ThePTWR was very high for age group 1, since most people in this group are in school and do not have timefor a full time job. The UER was very high for age group 2 (20-24) and gets lower for the higher agegroups. This is because at this age group there is a large number of people finishing school and entering
2
the labour force (takes time to find a job). The unemployment in 1983 seems high. This may have beendue to a recession.
Table 2 shows the results for a person near the end of their career. The LFPR starts to decrease as peoplestart to retire. The PTWR increases for age group 9. The unemployment rate also rises for age group 9.This might mean that workers are being laid off before they are ready to retire or have voluntarily retiredearly with a retirement package.
Internal Rate of Return
The internal rate of return is the interest rate that causes the cash flows of the benefits to equal the cashflow of the costs. It is the interest rate where marginal cost equals the marginal benefit.
Econ 360 HW #1,practice data Enter the Month yourwere born (1-12): 4
#211. Labour Force Survey – 1991-May(sex ==1 & age_12 ==4)-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.employed, at work | 1012460 80.74 80.74employed, absent from work | 50438 4.02 84.76unemployed, temporary layoff | 6659 0.53 85.29unemployed, job searcher | 99435 7.93 93.22unemployed, future start | 2385 0.19 93.41not in labour force | 82662 6.59 100.00
2. The table below gives the value of UE rate and LFP rate and part time working rate on each of the outputs above.
DATA UE RATE LFP RATE PART TIME WORKINGRATE
1981- May 0.12276 0.9054 5.67 %1986 – May 0.11102 0.9410 4.28 %1991 – May 0.09261 0.93401 2.85 %1996 - May 0.08688 0.9202 4.13 %
Note: UE RATE = U / LFLFPRATE = LF / POP
From the table above, we can discover that the unemployment rate was decreasing each and LFP rate was very stable and same as thepart time working rate. From the decreasing unemployment rate, we may give the hypothesis that our economy was in health conditionand was getting strong. With a constant LFP rate, our economy vs labour force was stable as well. Also, with a lower part timeworking rate, people in the labour force have very stable life and the variation of changing job will stay low.
STEP 8: ( EXCEL exercise)
Opportunity Cost
Net Revenue(including direct
costs) Net Income Flow4965.00 -10032.92308 (14997.9230769231)5715.00 -10032.92308 (15747.9230769231)6544.00 -10032.92308 (16576.9230769231)7453.00 -10032.92308 (17485.9230769231)8444.00 8714.769231 270.76923076929517.00 9933.230769 416.2307692308
IRR will be calculated by using excel internal function IRR (reference values, guess value).
Reading Data exercise:
SUM =
792986.3844 Command: =SUM(B2:B50)
age benefit
17 -14595.3
18 -11567.6
19 -8651.26
20 -5846.35
21 -3152.83
22 -570.715
23 1900
24 4259.314
25 6507.229
26 8643.742
27 10668.86
28 12582.57
29 14384.88
30 16075.8
31 17655.31
32 19123.42
33 20480.13
34 21725.45
35 22859.36
36 23881.87
37 24792.98
38 25592.69
39 26281
40 26857.91
41 27323.42
42 27677.53
43 27920.24
44 28051.55
45 28071.46
46 27979.97
47 27777.08
48 27462.78
49 27037.09
50 26500
51 25851.51
52 25091.62
53 24220.32
54 23237.63
55 22143.54
56 20938.04
57 19621.15
58 18192.85
59 16653.16
60 15002.06
61 13239.57
62 11365.67
63 9380.379
64 7283.683
65 5075.587
Year (age of cohort) Unemployment rate LFP rate Part-time work rate1976(20-24) 11.96 81.49 7.171981(25-29) 7.36 94.11 3.101986(30-34) 9.72 95.17 2.771991(35-39) 9.42 93.54 3.421996(40-45) 8.70 90.93 3.97
This data shows a high unemployment rate and low labor force participation rate for thecohort of 20-24. This makes sense for this age group, as some would be in school andnot working full-time or looking for a job. The higher part-time work rate corresponds tothis notion. The LFP rate and unemployment rate peaks in the cohort of 30-34 suggestingthat this is the age with the maximum number of people working or actively seekingemployment. At this age, the part-time work rate is also the lowest. As this group ages,the unemployment rate and LFP rate are decreasing meaning less people are working andless people are actively seeking employment or are unable to find work. As well, thepart-time rate is increasing implying that people are choosing to work part-time instead ofbeing unemployed.
PDV/IRRDiscount Rate Present Value IRR=4%25% -$43030.8220% -$43370.1810% -$29713.285% $8256.030% $136428.67
The column sum command is SUM(B2:B50) and returns 792986.4.
The graph shows the unemployment rate (UE) and labour force participation rate (LFP) between 1976 and1996. Starting with the year 1976, a five-year age group represents numbers for UE and LFP. The twonumbers in 1976 in the table are statistical values for the age group 20 to 24 in 1976. The two numbers-5.51 and 89.04- are the UE and LFP for the age group 25 to 29 in 1981. The same interpretation is appliedfor the remaining years. The LFP is relatively low in 1976. However, between 1981 and 1996 it is almostconstant throughout the periods. The UE fluctuates during the 1978-1996 period. Especially, in 1981 therewas the highest unemployment rate.
Year Part-time rate1976 4.931981 2.731986 2.411991 2.711996 4
The UE and LFP between 1978 and 1996
7.15 5.51 6.9 7.38 6.54
75.78
89.04 88.49 86.61 85.89
1 2 3 4 5
Year
UE
an
d L
FP
UE
LFP
Part time work rate between 1976 and 1996 is the highest in 1997. After 1976, it starts decreasing andduring 1981 and 1991 it was constant. After 1991, it starts increasing again.
ð The sum of column is 792986.3844. It is a sum of all the numbersfrom age 17 to 65.
Summaryð The internal rate of return is r* when the PD function is zero. By using Excel, I could find out
that IRR in this particular exercise is 6%.ð There is only one interest rate in calculating PDV. However, in this exercise I randomly
picked two different interest rates in order to see how the PDV is related to the internal rate ofreturn given different interest rates.
ð The two interest rates are 20% and 4%. Since the internal rate of return is 6%, one is higherand the other is lower than the internal rate or return.
ð Depending on how the graph looks like, the profitable return can be determined. Suppose thatthe graph of PDV is downward sloping from left to right. If the interest rate is less than theIRR, the PDV is positive and thus profitable. However, the opposite is true when the interestrate is higher than the IRR.
ð However, different shapes of PDV graph will make it hard to find out the profitability. Forexample, the formula for the PDV is quadratic. Then, there will be more than one internal rateof return. Thus, it will be relatively hard to see the profitability.
Assignment 1
LFS Data
YEAR UE rate LFP rate PTW rate1976- Jan 0.0954 0.665 0.1331981-Jan 0.0832 0.6719 0.19081986-Jan 0.099 0.72 0.261991-Jan 0.0922 0.77537 0.25571996-Jan 0.077 0.794 0.251The table above displays the Unemployment rate, the Labor Force Participation rate and the Part-TimeWork rate for the years 1976 to 1996, at 5 year intervals at January of that year. As shown above, theLabor Force Participation rate increases with the years, as it is 0.665 in 1976 and 0.794 in 1996. The Part-Time Participation rate follows a similar pattern, as it generally increases with the increase in years; 0.133in 1976 and 0.251 in 1996; as more people are entering the labor force, more people are engaging in part-time work. The Unemployment rate, though not as consistent, follows an opposite pattern from the othertwo rates, as it decreases throughout the years, as it is 0.0954 in 1976 and 0.077 in 1996. In general, as theyears increase, an increase in the Labor Force Participation rate, is accompanied by an increase in the Part-Time Work rate and a decrease in the Unemployment rate. Showing that as people get older, from their20’s, more are entering the work force. However as they age, more are engaging in part-time work.
IRR ExerciseWe used a “birthday month” variable of 11 and we have forwarded the file to our email account if you wishto see it, just let us know…sorry for the lame link!.We calculated net income flow by subtracting opportunity cost from net revenue for each row. Forexample =D4-C4. To calculate the IRR we used the IRR formula, =IRR(E4:E33). We attained an IRR value of 6%.
We then found our PDV for interest rates of 10%, 15% and 20% using the formula: = PV(10, B4, -E4), forexample for an interest rate of 10% and for row 4.
Reading Data ExerciseWe downloaded and read in the data contained in the hw1.txt file onto an Excel spreadsheet. We thencalculated the sum of the column labelled “Benefit” by using the formula =SUM(B2:B50). We received avalue of 792986.4.
Labour Force Survey Results For Women born in 1962 to 1967
Labour force participation in 1977 is less than 50%. This may be attributed tosocial conditions at the time. In the 70's many women did not work and it was difficultfor women who wanted work to find work. The part-time work rate is also high in 1977for women. These 3 rates are all significantly different from what is seen later on. Thelabour force participation increases by close to 25% in 5 years and continues to increasebut slowly. The unemployment rate also drops significantly in 1987. It was high (15.7and 13.4) in the late 70's and early 80's but fell to 9% or lower in the late 80's and 90's.Part-time work for women was also seen to drop dramatically from 48.8 % to 16.44% in1982. Then it began to rise but only up to 26%.
Month & Year Age Group LFP UER Part-time Rate*May 1977 15 to 19 .451 .157 .488May 1982 20 to 24 .755 .134 .164May 1987 25 to 29 .76 .092 .191May 1992 30 to 34 .77 .093 .251May 1997 35 to 39 .773 .07 .267*The part time work rate was found by dividing the number of part time workers by the number ofemployed workers.
Present Value and Internal Rate of Return of Net Income Flow For a Person Born in May
The internal rate of return of net income flow is 6%. The following graph shows the NetPresent Value as a function of the interest rate. The graph shows the point where presentvalue equals 0 is approximately .06.
Present Value of Net Income Flow as a Function of Interest Rate
($60,000.00)
($40,000.00)
($20,000.00)
$0.00
$20,000.00
$40,000.00
$60,000.00
$80,000.00
$100,000.00
$120,000.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
4 0.01 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
I n t e r e s t R a t e s
Series1
Reading in Data Exercise
The sum of benefits received from age 17 to 65 equals $792986.40.
ECON360 Assignment 1
Result of the LFS data problem
Month/Year data # age of the group Unemployment Rate Labour Force Participation Part-time work rateAug/1976 94 20-24 8.10% 99.0% 2.79%Aug/1981 154 25-29 4.76% 94.6% 1.99%Aug/1986 214 30-34 6.92% 96.0% 2.00%Aug/1991 274 35-39 7.04% 93.1% 2.79%Aug/1996 334 40-44 6.40% 92.0% 3.40%
I find that the labour force participation is generally declining, as the group grows older,there is a substantial increase in part-time work rate when the group is 40-44. Theunemployment rate fluctuates, which I believe is the effect of the general economic statusof the country, than anything to do with their age increase.
Result of the PDV exerciseInterest rate 0.05 0.06 0.06052 0.06053 0.07 0.08Sum of PV $12,713.41 $565.40 $8.38 -$2.27 -$9,046.62 -$16,662.54
And from the IRR exercise, I found that the IRR is 6.05278%The fact that the sum of PV for 6.052% interest is positive and the sum of PV of 6.053%interest is negative assured that. So if the interest rate is 6.05278%, then going touniversity is not different from not going. If interest rate is lower than 6.05278%, then itis beneficial to go to university.
For the data reading exercise, the sum of the benefit column is 792986.4
Econ 360 Assignment 1
Log file from Stata
98. labour force survey-1976-dec
-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 756270 88.34 88.34 employed, absent from work | 20700 2.42 90.76unemployed, temporary layoff | 7639 0.89 91.65 unemployed, job searcher | 31380 3.67 95.31 unemployed, future start | 1524 0.18 95.49 not in labour force | 38591 4.51 100.00----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 856104 100.00
-> tabulation of ftptmain
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.--------------+------------------------------------------- full-time | 759775 97.79 97.79 part-time | 17195 2.21 100.00---------------+----------------------------------------- Total | 776970 100.00
clear
158. labour force survey-1981-dec
-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 723429 86.88 86.88 employed, absent from work | 27716 3.33 90.21unemployed, temporary layoff | 8549 1.03 91.24 unemployed, job searcher | 32201 3.87 95.10 unemployed, future start | 775 0.09 95.20 not in labour force | 39987 4.80 100.00----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 832657 100.00
-> tabulation of ftptmain
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.--------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 737266 98.15 98.15 part-time | 13879 1.85 100.00---------------+----------------------------------- Total | 751145 100.00
. clear
218. labour force survey-1986-dec
-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------- employed, at work | 710384 85.27 85.27 employed, absent from work | 28655 3.44 88.71unemployed, temporary layoff | 534 0.06 88.77 unemployed, job searcher | 47029 5.65 94.42 unemployed, future start | 148 0.02 94.44 not in labour force | 46340 5.56 100.00----------------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Total | 833090 100.00
-> tabulation of ftptmain
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.--------------+----------------------------------------- full-time | 719823 97.40 97.40 part-time | 19216 2.60 100.00---------------+----------------------------------------- Total | 739039 100.00
. clear
278. labour force survey-1991-dec
-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.----------------------------------------+------------------------------------------ employed, at work | 679211 81.08 81.08 employed, absent from work | 36772 4.39 85.47unemployed, temporary layoff | 6716 0.80 86.27
unemployed, job searcher | 51655 6.17 92.43 unemployed, future start | 402 0.05 92.48 not in labour force | 62987 7.52 100.00-----------------------------------------+------------------------------------------- Total | 837743 100.00
-> tabulation of ftptmain
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.--------------+--------------------------------------------- full-time | 695486 97.14 97.14 part-time | 20497 2.86 100.00---------------+-------------------------------------------- Total | 715983 100.00
. clear
338. labour force survey-1996-dec
-> tabulation of lfsstat
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.----------------------------------------+--------------------------------------------- employed, at work | 656748 75.58 75.58 employed, absent from work | 41167 4.74 80.32unemployed, temporary layoff | 3367 0.39 80.71 unemployed, job searcher | 51173 5.89 86.60 unemployed, future start | 377 0.04 86.64 not in labour force | 116076 13.36 100.00----------------------------------------+-------------------------------------------- Total | 868908 100.00
-> tabulation of ftptmain
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.--------------+------------------------------------------- full-time | 661729 94.82 94.82 part-time | 36186 5.18 100.00---------------+------------------------------------------- Total | 697915 100.00
Calculate the UE rate, the LFP rate, and the Part-time work rate from the aboveoutput.
From the above table, we can observe trends such as increasing in UE Rate and Part TimeWorking Rate, and decreasing in LFP Rate. There are a lot of possibility that makes the UE Ratewent up, such as more and more immigrants were not able to find jobs while there were stillimmigrants constantly coming into Canada. And that explain the sharp fall in LFP Rate of 1996survey, there were large number of immigrants came to Canada but the job space available werestill limited. Finally, reason for the Part Time Working Rate to rise might be the government hadimplement bad policies and gave firms the incentive to hire more part time works.
Opportunity Cost
Net Revenue(including direct
costs) Net Income Flow4965.00 -10032.92308 -14997.92307692315715.00 -10032.92308 -15747.92307692316544.00 -10032.92308 -16576.92307692317453.00 -10032.92308 -17485.92307692318444.00 8714.769231 270.76923076929517.00 9933.230769 416.2307692308
Rate PDV of the net income flow0.00 $147,607.850.01 $105,640.020.02 $73,239.920.03 $48,159.200.04 $28,700.580.05 $13,577.480.08 -$14,473.530.10 -$24,291.930.13 -$32,024.720.16 -$35,199.250.20 -$36,072.610.22 -$35,786.900.25 -$34,913.96
The Labour Force Survey data used in this report is that of women born 1958 to1962.The data from June 1977 1982, 1987, 1992, and 1997 was extracted and computed. The resultsof this exercise follow below.
The participation rate of women born between 1958 and 1962 increased substantiallyfrom June 1977 to June 1982. This is likely a result of these women finishing school andentering the work force. While only half of these women were employed while at schoolattending age (15 to 19) but five years later, they have will be beyond schooling age and mostwill be entering their careers. After 1982, the participation rate remains fairly consistent. Theunemployment rate decreases though time from 1977 to 1997. It is likely that the significantdecrease from 1977 to 1982 is again the result of these women finishing school. Those withmore education have a higher likelihood of getting a job. The decrease over time is likely theresult of increased work experience and more jobs being available for women. The 1977 parttime work rate is high because, again, most of these women are in school and can therefore onlywork part time. The 1982 part time rate is lowest because at this age (20 to 24) these women arestarting their careers. They have finished school and are focused on their jobs. The increaseafter 1982 is caused by these women having children at home to take care of, making a part timejob more convenient to work around school hours. Also, the amount of nonstandard work,including part time work, has increased over the last couple of decades, causing part time workmore available and full time less available.
Year Labour ForceParticipation
Unemployment Rate Part Time Work Rate
June 1977 49.48% 17.91% 36.20%
June 1982 76.90% 13.90% 13.00%
June 1987 76.97% 9.86% 17.27%
June 1992 77.26% 9.50% 21.49%
June 1997 76.80% 8.14% 22.81%
Data Extracted:
June 1977
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.-----------------------------+-----------------------------------
ployed, at work | 452786 39.36 39.36employed, absent from work | 14435 1.25 40.62unemployed, temporary layoff | 1288 0.11 40.73unemployed, job searcher | 93988 8.17 48.90unemployed, future start | 6634 0.58 49.48not in labour force | 581176 50.52 100.00-----------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 1150307 100.00
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 261215 55.91 55.91 part-time | 206006 44.09 100.00------------+----------------------------------- Total | 467221 100.00
________________________________________________
June 1982
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.-----------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 754770 62.19 62.19 employed, absent from work | 48673 4.01 66.20unemployed, temporary layoff | 3801 0.31 66.51 unemployed, job searcher | 119803 9.87 76.38 unemployed, future start | 6219 0.51 76.90 not in labour force | 280400 23.10 100.00-----------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 1213666 100.00
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 682164 84.91 84.91 part-time | 121279 15.09 100.00------------+----------------------------------- Total | 803443 100.00__________________________________________________
June 1987
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.-----------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 771356 63.39 63.39 employed, absent from work | 72862 5.99 69.38unemployed, temporary layoff | 2424 0.20 69.58
unemployed, job searcher | 87174 7.16 76.74 unemployed, future start | 2747 0.23 76.97 not in labour force | 280262 23.03 100.00-----------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 1216825 100.00
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 682433 80.84 80.84 part-time | 161785 19.16 100.00------------+----------------------------------- Total | 844218 100.00
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.-----------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 808465 63.89 63.89 employed, absent from work | 76360 6.03 69.92unemployed, temporary layoff | 5777 0.46 70.38 unemployed, job searcher | 85138 6.73 77.11 unemployed, future start | 1978 0.16 77.26 not in labour force | 287708 22.74 100.00-----------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 1265426 100.00
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 674702 76.25 76.25 part-time | 210123 23.75 100.00------------+----------------------------------- Total | 884825 100.00
labour force status | Freq. Percent Cum.-----------------------------+----------------------------------- employed, at work | 833798 64.99 64.99 employed, absent from work | 71268 5.55 70.54unemployed, temporary layoff | 3243 0.25 70.80 unemployed, job searcher | 73912 5.76 76.56 unemployed, future start | 3086 0.24 76.80 not in labour force | 297696 23.20 100.00-----------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 1283003 100.00
full-time | or | part-time | main or | only job | Freq. Percent Cum.------------+----------------------------------- full-time | 680336 75.17 75.17 part-time | 224730 24.83 100.00------------+----------------------------------- Total | 905066 100.00
The IRR/PDV exercise follows. The interest rates used for the PDV computation were 0.05, 0.1,0.15, 0.2, 0.25.
Econ 360 HW #1, practice dataEnter the Month your were born (1-12):
This results are very similar to what I expected. I followed a group of girls born between 1970-75.Between the ages 15 – 19 they had a low participation rate and low employment rate. This is not surprisingsince the girls would have been in school, what is surpising is that 42.81% of employed girls were workingfull-time, indicating a lot would have either gone straight to work out of school or dropped out of school.As the women got older, participation rates increased to a steady level of roughly 75%. This is a lot higherthan I expected, I figured more women would not have been actively looking for work while they werebearing children. The last observation is not surprising, which is, as the group got older they shifted frompart-time work to full-time work. Lastly, the unemployment rate was steady throughout the period. It wasroughly 6-8% during the period, which is similar to today’s unemployment rate for the entire population.
IRR/PDV Exercise
The Excel function NPV (r, cash flows) was used to compute the following NPV’s for thecorresponding interest rates:
The pattern, as seen in the graph, is that as interest rates increase, NPV decreases.
The reading data exercise was completed by using the Excel formula for a sum, which is simplySUM(data). The sum came out to be 792986.4. The text file was imported by simply opening the file andfollowing instructions from the import wizard.
