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:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word 'extant', as used in the passage, means:

a)
no longer in existence.
b)
the degree or measure of something.
c)
still in existence.
d)
severe.

Correct answer is option 'C'. 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...

Extant means still in existence or current. Thus, option (c) 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. According to the passage, the effect of social welfare schemes for the low-income people is not often felt by

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

View answer

The Constitution of India ensured woman an equal position with man in regard to her rights and responsibilities. Inheritance and other laws were enacted to safeguard her and to give her economic and psychological stability. We see how fragile legislation can be when it is not backed by sturdy and passionate human beings who ensure that legislation is translated into action.In the last few years we find an erosion of womans position not only in India but all over the world.There is a growing materialism and an increasing fundamentalism which seeks to entangle women through an emphasis on tradition, heritage, custom, the Sastras, religious texts and so push her centuries back through a man-made social code that limits womans initiative, creativity and growth.With the explosion in technology in computer literacy and in increasing search for extending areas of artificial intelligence, new challenges have appeared on the horizon. Labour based on the male physique which dominated employment and defined a womans role for centuries is being replaced by skill and intelligence oriented systems for creating wealth. It is possible in the coming decades to erase discrimination based on gender, but in India to introduce such systems that render the human beings less and less important in the production, processes, when seen against a scenario of exploding population, of growing unemployment, can only accentuate tension and conflict. As of today no social, economic and psychological solutions to the problem of employment are available. Reservations for women remain valid on paper. The woman remains a victim.Economic freedom and the independence that arises from it is essential for women. We have to ensure through field studies, through education, through right use of franchise, through an observing eye and ear to unravel this knot of employment for women. This is only possible with the right use of technology and the examination and strengthening of existing technologies.A growing fundamentalism is evident in the horrors that have been perpetrated on women. We are aware how through TV, radio, advertising, magazines, visual and language traps are set up in which woman inevitably falls.This is further accentuated through an educational system, through outdated values and through a close-box culture which binds woman to her manmade role as daughter, wife and mother, so that she exists only in relation to man. In our culture the woman has no independent existence.Can we create a new agenda for woman based on skill, creativity, knowledge, austerity, compassion and responsibility?Q. What is one of the ways of attaining self-sufficiency for women according to 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:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 word extant, as used in the passage, means:a)no longer in existence.b)the degree or measure of something.c)still in existence.d)severe.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam