30704 research outputs found
Sort by
Adjusting to Trade Opening: The Case of Labor Share in India\u27s Manufacturing Industry
Get PDFThe objective of this paper is to study how manufacturing plants in India adjusted to trade liberalization during the period 1998–99 to 2007–08. We estimate how the labor share changed due to tariff reduction. Our results indicate that a decline in output tariffs led to an increase in the labor share of income. In contrast, a fall in input tariffs led to a decrease in the labor share. Controlling for factor intensity, we find that in technology intensive and human capital resource intensive sectors, both a decline in input and output tariff rates led to a decline in labor share. A fall in tariffs only led to an increase in labor share for labor intensive and low-technology plants. Hence, India’s bias towards capital and technology intensive production explains the overall decline in labor share in the post reform period. Furthermore, the empirical results show that labor adjustment occurred more efficiently in Indian states with flexible labor laws
Policies to Reduce Lead Exposure: Lessons from Buffalo and Rochester
Get PDFLead exposure remains a major issue in cities, such as Buffalo and Rochester, with concentrated, segregated poverty and old, deteriorated housing stock. Exploring and comparing local policies and programs in these two cities, the author suggests that increasing the number of proactive housing inspections in high-risk areas and forming a single-purpose non-profit group dedicated to lead education and advocacy are two valuable interventions. He recommends additional policy steps, such as more stringent inspection standards; state adoption of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Renovation and Repair Program; the lowering of state elevated blood level thresholds; a focus on in-person, interactive education by community health workers; and more vigorous enforcement of testing requirements among physicians
Low-Wage Work in Buffalo-Niagara
Get PDFOne-third of the Buffalo-Niagara workforce works in an occupation with a median wage of less than $15 per hour. Common low-wage occupations include food servers, retail salespeople, cashiers, personal care aides, receptionists, janitors, teacher assistants, nursing assistants, home health aides, and security guards. Buffalo-Niagara continues to lose middle-income jobs in sectors such as manufacturing, while gaining low-wage service sector jobs. Improving the wages, benefits, and quality of these jobs is essential to the health and equity of our region
Military Retirement: Background and Recent Developments
Get PDF[Excerpt] The military retirement system is a government-funded, noncontributory, defined benefit system that has historically been viewed as a significant incentive in retaining a career military force. The system currently includes monthly compensation for qualified active and reserve retirees, disability benefits for those deemed medically unfit to serve, and a survivor annuity program for the eligible survivors of deceased retirees. The amount of compensation is dependent on time served, basic pay at retirement, and annual Cost-of-Living-Adjustments (COLAs). Military retirees are also entitled to nonmonetary benefits including exchange and commissary privileges, medical care through TRICARE, and access to Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR) facilities and programs.
Currently, there are three general categories of military retiree, active component, reserve component, and disability retiree. Active component personnel are eligible for retirement (i.e., vested) after completing 20 years of service (YOS). Reserve personnel are eligible after 20 years of creditable service based on a points system, but do not typically begin to draw retirement pay until age 60. Finally, those with a disability retirement do not need to have served 20 years to be eligible for retired pay; however, they must have been found unqualified for further service due to a permanent, stable disability.
In FY2017, approximately $57 billion was paid to 2.3 million military retirees and survivors. Given the size of the program, some have viewed military retirement as a place where substantial budgetary savings could be made. Others have argued that past modifications intended to save money have had a deleterious effect on military recruiting and retention. Military retirees, families, and veterans’ service organizations closely monitor potential changes to the retirement system. When considering alternatives to the current system, Congress may choose to consider the balance among the benefits of the military retirement system as a retention incentive, budget constraints, and the needs and concerns of their constituents
Research Evidence on the Impact of Work Requirements in Need-Tested Programs
Get PDF[Excerpt] Congress is again debating work requirements for programs providing need-tested assistance to low-income families and individuals. Need-tested programs provide benefits and services to individuals and families based on financial need (usually low income). This is in contrast to social insurance programs such as Social Security and Unemployment Insurance, which base their benefits on past work.
Work requirements for cash assistance for parents in needy families with children receiving public benefits have been part of policy debates since the 1960s. Those debates culminated in the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193), which created the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant to replace the pre-1996 cash assistance program of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Since the enactment of the 1996 law, extending work requirements to other need-tested programs has sometimes been raised in policy debates about need-tested programs. Legislation before the 115th Congress—the House-passed version of H.R. 2—would expand work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP). H.R. 5861, reported to the House from the Ways and Means Committee, would alter some of TANF’s rules regarding work. In addition, the Trump Administration is currently granting demonstration waivers for states to implement work requirements for certain recipients of Medicaid, and has proposed expanded work requirements for housing assistance programs.
Work requirements for recipients of government assistance seek to achieve a variety of policy goals. They can attempt to offset work disincentives in government assistance programs and promote a culture of work over dependency on government benefits. Work requirements can also reduce the assistance caseloads, leading to government savings. They can screen out those who decide that the benefit of receiving assistance is not worth the cost of complying with a work requirement. They can also be used to remove from the assistance programs those who do not comply with the societal norm of work.1 In general, the economic status of most individuals is tied to work—either current work, past work, or the work of another family member. Thus, requiring work can be seen as a means of improving the economic status of individuals and families, as it is the primary means of lifting them out of poverty.
What does the research evidence indicate about the impact of work requirements in meeting these policy goals? Most of the research that addresses this issue comes from a set of experiments, conducted prior to the 1996 welfare reform, on alternative approaches to the work and education provisions in TANF’s predecessor program, AFDC. This report summarizes the findings from the pre-1996 welfare-to-work experiments as well as the limits of applying those findings to the current policy debate around work requirements
Permanent Employment-Based Immigration and the Per-country Ceiling
Get PDF[Excerpt] The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies a complex set of categories and numerical limits for admitting lawful permanent residents (LPRs) to the United States that includes economic priorities among the admission criteria. These priorities are addressed primarily through the employment-based immigration system, which consists of five preference categories. Each preference category has specific eligibility criteria; numerical limits; and, in some cases, distinct application processes. The INA allocates 140,000 visas annually for all five employment-based LPR categories, roughly 12% of the 1.1 million LPRs admitted in FY2017. The INA further limits each immigrant-sending country to an annual maximum of 7% of all employment-based LPR admissions, known as the per-country ceiling, or “cap.”
Prospective employment-based immigrants follow two administrative processing trajectories depending on whether they apply from overseas as “new arrivals” seeking LPR status or from within the United States seeking to adjust to LPR status from a temporary status that they currently possess. While some prospective employment-based immigrants can self-petition, most require U.S. employers to petition on their behalf. In both cases, the Department of State (DOS) is responsible for allocating the correct number of employment-based immigrant “visa numbers” or slots, according to numerical limits and the per-country ceiling specified in the INA.
This report reviews the employment-based immigration process by examining six pools of pending petitions and applications, representing prospective employment-based immigrants and any accompanying family members at different stages of the LPR process. While four of these pools represent administrative processing queues, two result from the INA’s numerical limitations on employment-based immigration and the per-country ceiling
