Saving: He. et al. the role of uncertainty

Question 1

Natural experiment used by the paper?

Answer 1

Severe layoffs in SOE sector 1995-2002

Question 2

What was the breaking of the iron rice bowl?

Answer 2

When workers were laid off, they lost the associated benefits (eg. housing, pensions, healthcare) tf the term refers to the loss of this and guaranteed job security

Question 3

Key finding of the paper?

Answer 3

Precautionary saving accounted for roughly 30% of total savings in period 1995-2002

Question 4

Why were so many workers let go?

Answer 4

Roughly 50% in ‘95-‘96 of SOEs were reporting losses tf many went bankrupt or were privatized -> lots of layoffs and increased uncertainty for those who weren’t laid off

Question 5

Data used in paper?

Answer 5

CHIP, compares ‘95-‘02, both urban and rural households

Question 6

Pre vs post reform? How can this help in analysis?

Answer 6

Pre: SOE and gov. workers got iron rice bowl, after only gov. workers did
Means can compare changes in savings rates for SOE and government workers

Question 7

Summary of stats pre and post reform?

Answer 7

Pre: Gov. workers have slightly higher permanent income (PI) and financial wealth (FW)
Post: Gap widens between two groups, rise in house ownership for both groups

Question 8

See

Answer 8

bottom of page 1 side 2