Work and Welfare in the American States: Analyzing the Effects of the JOBS Program

This research seeks to determine whether the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills GOBS) program (established under the 1988 Family Support Act) was successful in reducing the number of welfare recipients among U.S. states for the period 1984 to 1996. Within the context of two theoretical perspectives-developmental and rational choice-we assess the impact of JOBS on AFDC participation rates using a pooled time-series design. At best, JOBS had a minimal effect. We estimate that states with higher proportions of their AFDC populations enrolled in JOBS programs had only slightly lower rates of participation in AFDC. Other forces were far more influential in reducing welfare participation. In particular, states with higher per capita income, lower female unemployment rates, lower poverty rates, and higher wages for low-paying jobs had the lowest welfare recipiency The AFDC participation rates of neighboring states had a significant effect, as well. The analysis showed that more generous AFDC benefits exerted strong upward pressure on a state's welfare rolls.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

Etika akademis

Judul asli : The academic ethicsxxiii, 198 p.; 19 cm

The Significance of Shils

Edward Shils was a widely recognized but misunderstood thinker. The original contexts of his thought are not well understood and greatly distorted by associating him with the concerns of Parsons. Shils provides a fully comparable alternative to the thought of Habermas and Foucault, with essentially similar roots: practice theory, the dissolution of Marxism in the twenties, and Carl Schmitt. Though Shils was indebted to the American sociological tradition, with respect to these issues his sources were outside it: in Hendrik de Man, T. S. Eliot, and Michael Polanyi. It is shown how Shils responded to Schmitt\u27s argument about the inherent conflict between democracy and liberalism in terms of an account of civility and tradition, and how this argument results in a critique of Foucault, Habermas, and collectivistic liberalism