Hi, In an impact analysis where you have a change in household or labor income due to cost savings the impact comes back with 0 direct effects. It seems like these dollars need to be added back into the total impact line. But if that is the case I don't know why you wouldn't have programmed it to do so, so I'm wondering if I am wrong. It feels a lot like the analysis by parts example you gave in the webinar the other day. On the other hand it might be correct to think about these household changes in income as only being valuable in the economy when they are spent and that is what the model shows with the induced effects. If these direct effects do need to be added back in to the direct line and total line, that brings up a question of whether they should also go into value added direct effects as well. Since there are no direct materials associated with a cost savings, say tax reduction, it seems like 100 percent should go into VA but then which part of the VA does it come from? Other profit type income? This question also pushes me toward not dropping them back into the direct effects line and adding them to the induced effects. If there are unique aspects associated with a Labor income analysis that I'd miss I'd appreciate a heads up on that as well. Thank you!
Please sign in to leave a comment.