IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ecopol/v26y2014i3p457-482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do People with Specific Skills Want More Social Insurance? Not in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey F. Timmons
  • Jerry Nickelsburg

Abstract

type="main" xml:id="ecpo12043-abs-0001"> Skill specificity is thought to increase preferences for social insurance (Iversen and Soskice, 2001, American Political Science Review 95,875), especially where employment protections are low, notably the United States (Gingrich and Ansell, 2012, Comparative Political Studies 45, 1624). The compensating differentials literature, by contrast, suggests that neither skill specificity, nor labor market protections affect preferences when wages adjust for differences in risks and investment costs. We examine these competing predictions using U.S. data on general and specific skills. Absolute and relative skill specificity have a robust positive correlation with income, but are negatively correlated with preferences for social protection. Our results strongly support the compensating differentials approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey F. Timmons & Jerry Nickelsburg, 2014. "Do People with Specific Skills Want More Social Insurance? Not in the United States," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 457-482, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ecopol:v:26:y:2014:i:3:p:457-482
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ecpo.2014.26.issue-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ecopol:v:26:y:2014:i:3:p:457-482. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0954-1985 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.