One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions andquot;labor market problemsandquot; to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Class 12 Exam > Class 12 Questions > One of the most critical yet troublesome soci...

Join the Discussion on the App

Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.

Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.

As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.

Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:

a)
the causes of unemployment.
b)
lack of training for the work force.
c)
bad relationships among labor unions.
d)
lack of jobs with sufficient income.

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Languages: Mock Test - 2

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is ho...

Option (a) is incorrect as the passage primarily talks about the effects of unemployment rather than its causes. Options (b) and (c) are also wrong because training and labor unions are not discussed in the passage and are hence out of scope. Hence, option (d) is the correct answer.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam

Similar Class 12 Doubts

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. Which of the following is the most appropriate response to the issue raised by the author in the passage?

View answer

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. Which of the following reflects the main idea of the passage?

View answer

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The word extant, as used in the passage, means

View answer

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. According to the passage, the effect of social welfare schemes for the low-income people is not often felt by

View answer

Relationships are how we relate to others. We have relationships with everyone we know and those who are close to us. Each and every interaction we have with another person is the act of relating. If we have a problem relating to others, it affects our ability to have supportive relationships. We have to ask ourselves if our relationships are supportive, and if they are not, then ask why they are not,Everyone wants the perfect romance or marriage, but not everyone looks at the mechanics of how to have one. If we fail to have supportive relationships in our life, how can we have the "perfect love" relationships? Through the act of supporting, we honour and validate who the other person is.This is turn, validates who we are. So, both are supported; no one loses; no egos are involved; and, so doing, we honour the relationship.This is what it means to have a supportive relationship. This is the desired goal. Now, how do we accomplish it?Our conduct patterns, positive or negative get set as we grow up. In order to clear a problem, one must identify the original cause which created a behavioural pattern, move through the experience of that situation and experience the emotions associated with it.The healing process is a time when we must love the self. If we beat up the self about the experience which had caused us harm or our past reaction to it, then we cannot heal. In being loving to the self, we validate what we had experienced at that time.Our emotions are always valid. So, it is important for us to do this self-validation in order to heal. Love is the energy which helps us heal-whether we give this love to ourselves or receive it from another.Loving relations start with the self. When we look at having supportive relationship in our life, why not start with the self?Because that is where love comes from. This is what transforms our relationships and our lives. We must love the self first. And we cannot do that until we have healed and become whole. Spiritually we must rise, and our spiritual quotient must be high.For, it is not about what we can receive from love, but what we can contribute or give to love. The more we give, the more are the returns.Q. According to the author from where does love start?

View answer

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930s. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. The author mentions "labor market problems" to mean:a)the causes of unemployment.b)lack of training for the work force.c)bad relationships among labor unions.d)lack of jobs with sufficient income.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam