The focus of this paper is to evaluate similarities and differences between and within three regions: Africa, Asia, and Latin America/Caribbean. The five variables used (per capita GDP, remittances, openness, capital/labor ratio and freedom) broadly classify economic growth in these regions. For each of the five variables the null hypothesis is that the means of the three regions are equal. One-way analysis of variances is the tool of choice. Furthermore, the full samples are employed to test equality of the means between the three regions and all regions. The results show substantial gaps between the groups as well as factors under consideration.
We use Seemingly Unrelated Regressions (SUR), to explore the impact of three different measures of economic activity -- growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), unemployment, and manufacturing employment -- on poverty among whites, blacks and Hispanics in the United States. This analysis is unique in that we further disaggregate the data, by looking at the impact of growth across racial/ethnic groups in four census regions. We find that the impacts of the various measures of economic activity vary greatly by the group and the region. In particular, Hispanic poverty tends to be strongly related to changes in the unemployment rate, while white poverty tends to be strongly related to changes in manufacturing.
In this paper we explore how blacks influence expenditure and employment decisions of county commission executives. We also explore whether or not this influence varies when county commission executives are elected verses appointed to their positions. The desire to earn votes could mean that elected officials treat voting populations, including blacks, in a manner that is distinctly different from their appointed counterparts. We find that in areas where there is more discretion, elected officials tend to have higher per capita expenditures. However, there does not appear to be any difference in employment practices. We find that having a larger black population is positively related with discretionary spending and employment.
This study examines how information regarding poverty influences support for redistribution. Redistributive policies involve allocating resources to address poverty and inequality. Previous research finds that support for redistributive policies is grounded in attitudes towards government size, social mobility, partisan identity, and political ideology. In this study, we test how information regarding poverty impacts support for redistributive policies. When subjects are given information about the material wellbeing of those in poverty, we expect to find less support for redistributive policies. On the other hand, when subjects are presented with information about the effect of poverty on the decision-making of those in poverty, we expect to find greater support for redistribution. Using survey experiments with undergraduate subjects from a public university in the southern region of the United States, we find no differences in support for redistributive policies in response to these two types of information.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.