My id number – 00006885 Question 1

Question 2.

a)

It is easy to find all information such as coefficient, p-value, R- squared etc in this STATA program.

This cut-off point is impractical because it was higher than the average unemployment rate until the fourth quarter of 1966. The number of vacancies was negatively correlated, as expected, indicating an increase of 1% over the reporting period. The unemployment rate in vacancies may be associated with a decrease of 1.15%. The National Insurance Act introduced new standards and a simple unemployment rate, of which all estimates increased by 1.17%, and the impact on vacancy rates was weak, with vacancies up to 1% each. the unemployment rate fell to 0.87%.

_t=2.74+ 1.166*D_t -1.1512*V_t-0.8679 _*(D_tV_t)

b)

according to the regression analysis, it is clear that the p value is less than 0.05. This shows strong prove against the zero hypothesis, as the probability that the zero value is correct is less than 5%. We accept the alternative hypothesis and reject the null hypothesis . The alternative hypothesis clams that the independent variable affected the dependent variable and the results are of great importance. This means that the impact of the level of vacancies on unemployment is statistically significant.

c) after QIV 1966, unemployment rate is , while vacancy rate is not changed. This differs from the average until October 1966, because it differs from the regression, which is approximately 1.67% less.

d) The regression analysis provides sufficient data to conclude that the increase in unemployment benefits in early 1966 had a positive effect on the average unemployment rate and increased by 1.67%. The after researching, this support economic theories that the closer unemployment benefits are to total wages, the less attractive employment will be, which means that people with more generous compensation will not want to find work.

The government has made unemployment benefits more generous and reduced unemployment maintenance costs