Search

Begin New Search Topic Welfare Political Geography North America

1. Flawed Plan to Keep Out Welfare‐​Using Immigrants

Author:
David Bier
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The Trump administration has proposed a new regulation that would greatly expand an old rule banning legal residence to immigrants deemed “likely to become a public charge”—that is, someone who the government has the responsibility to care for (USCIS 2018). The rule does not, nor could it, change eligibility for welfare programs for noncitizens in the United States. Instead, it requires applicants to prove that they are not likely, in the future, to become so dependent on welfare that they become a “public charge.” Therefore, the question regarding this regulation is not whether it is appropriate for noncitizens to become dependent on welfare, but whether the government will accurately predict their likelihood of doing so.
Topic:
Immigration, Welfare, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. The Stupendous US Record Gets Suppressed

Author:
Amity Shlaes
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Social and Economic Research - CASE
Abstract:
In recent years, the consensus regarding the American past has slipped leftward, and then leftward again. No longer is American history a story of opportunity, or of military or domestic triumph. America’s has become, rather, a story of wrongs, racial and social. Today, any historical figure who failed at any time to support abolition, or, worse, took the Confederate side in the Civil War, must be expunged from history. Wrongs must be righted, and equality of result enforced. The equality campaign spills over into a less obvious field, one that might otherwise provide a useful check upon the non-empirical claims of the humanities: economics. In a discipline that once showcased the power of markets, an axiom is taking hold: equal incomes lead to general prosperity, and point toward utopia. Teachers, book club presidents, and especially professors withhold any evidence to the contrary. Universities lead the shift, and the population follows. Today, millennials, those born between 1982 and 2000, outnumber baby boomers by the millions, and polls suggest that they support redistribution specifically, and government action generally, more than their predecessors. A 2014 Reason/Rupe poll found 48 percent of millennials agreeing that government should “do more” to solve problems, whereas 37 percent said that government was doing “too many things.” A full 58 percent of the youngest of millennials, those 18-24 when surveyed, held a “positive” view of socialism, in dramatic contrast with their parents: only 23 percent of those aged 55 to 64 viewed socialism positively.
Topic:
Government, Markets, History, Economy, Economic growth, Tax Systems, Free Trade, and Welfare
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. HOW LIBERAL IS NEOLIBERALISM? RETHINKING THE CONCEPTIONS OF THE WELFARE STATE, LEGISLATIVE ORGANS, SOCIAL JUSTICE, AND COMPETITION IN HAYEK’S THOUGHT

Author:
Selma TOKTAŞ
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Alternative Politics
Institution:
Department of International Relations, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey
Abstract:
With the expansion of US-led economic policy following the economic depression of the 1970s and the proliferation of new information and communication technologies, the 1980s became a crucial period signaling dramatic changes all around the world. By the end of these years, the Keynesian economy, which accredited states as active and interventionist players in the economy in order to ensure both growth and equity, began to break down. In this period economic liberalism gained power again and political and economic theories and practices turned towards neoliberalism. As a result, deregulation, privatization and the withdrawal of the state from many areas were accelerated. All these changes were significant and affected the structure of almost everything, including education, culture, life and trends in thought. Friedrich A. von Hayek was one of the pioneers of this transformation. Therefore, this descriptive study attempts to understand the points where neoliberalism combines with liberalism and how it is separated from liberalism through Hayek's views about the welfare state, legislative body, social justice, and competition terms. In other words, this study aims to explore the extent to which Hayek’s neoliberalism is a continuation or a break from liberalism.
Topic:
Economic structure, Neoliberalism, Social Justice, Welfare, and Liberalism
Political Geography:
United States, North America, and Global Focus

4. Preferences on Redistribution in Fragmented Labor Markets in Latin America and the Caribbean

Author:
Sarah Berens
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
This study investigates the extent to which labor market duali- zation polarizes preferences on redistribution between formal and in- formal sector workers in Latin America and the Caribbean. Differences in welfare state costs and benefits for these labor market groups are likely to fuel diverging incentives regarding welfare consumption. The article tests whether or not informal workers are driven mainly by eco- nomic self-interest to increase gains from public welfare goods. The study employed a hierarchical model on pooled survey data from the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) 2008 and 2010 to analyze the risk exposure of formal and informal workers and, subse- quently, their preferences on redistribution. The analysis reveals that while economic self-interest is an influential factor for formal workers, it is (unexpectedly) much less so for informal workers. Also, an increased economically insecure environment, reflected by high unemployment rates, does not motivate informal workers to an exceptional degree to turn towards the state for redistribution, despite greater exposure to economic risk. Labor market dualization does not translate into polariza- tion at the individual level regarding redistributive preferences in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Topic:
Inequality, Welfare, Labor Market, and Redistribution
Political Geography:
South America, Latin America, Caribbean, and North America

5. Aging Eagle and Dark Clouds on the Security Horizon

Author:
Dong-Joon Jo
Publication Date:
10-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
The financial crisis in 2008 exposed a latent weakness that the United States would not have resources enough to cope with its population aging and maintain its global leadership. The crisis led the federal government to increase its welfare spending, bail out faltering industries, and rely on measures of economic stimulation. These measures resulted in the swelling of the public debt, which increased by $5,077 billion from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2010, and intensified the U.S. federal government’s budgetary difficulties in meeting the welfare and medical needs of senior citizens and carrying out the war on terror abroad (See Figure 1). The belief in the sustainability of the public debt severely weakened, as the interest expense on the public debt rose to 8.6 percent of the total federal spending in 2010; the belief in the comparability between U.S. domestic welfare and its global leadership eroded. The financial crisis evoked a fairly routine set of behavior in partisan politics in 2011. When the public debt was about to reach the ceiling in 2011, Republicans and majority members of the Tea Party threatened not to agree on raising the debt ceiling. They pressured the Barack Obama administration to reduce the federal budget and governmental regulations. Meanwhile, the Obama administration and Democrats wanted to raise the maximum amount of governmental borrowing and keep boosting the economy. In the gunfire between the two parties loomed the possibility of sovereign default. Amid the partisan conflict the credit rating of the U.S. government bonds was downgraded for the first time in history; major market indexes plunged in the third quarter of 2011. The Budget Control Act was the result of bipartisan negotiations, accommodating conflicting goals and instruments from both sides. It provided breathing room for the Obama administration and Democrats by allowing the debt ceiling to increase by $900 billion two times in 2011 and additionally by $1.2 trillion in 2012. Meanwhile, it reduced the budgetary leeway of the administration and gave more power to the House, where Republicans and Tea Party members held the majority. More specifically, it established binding limits on annual appropriations bills to reduce the funding for discretionary programs, relative to the funding in the Congressional Budget Office’s 2010 baseline; it set up a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, the “Supercommittee,” to come up with a bill to reduce deficits by at least $1.5 trillion through 2021. The legislation appeared to keep the partisan gunfire under control.
Topic:
Security, Financial Crisis, Budget, and Welfare
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America