All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   One of the most critical yet troublesome soc... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
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 1930's. 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?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is h...
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.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT 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 1930's. 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?

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 1930's. 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?

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 1930's. 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

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 1930's. 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

Direction: You have been given some passages followed by questions based on this passage. You are required to choose the most appropriate option which follows from the passage. Only the information given in the passage should be used for choosing the answer and no external knowledge of law howsoever prominent is to be applied.Vicarious liability has been considered by England's highest courts in a flood of cases in recent years and the law has taken another step forward with judgments from the Supreme Court; Originally, the doctrine of vicarious liability was confined to cases where a wrongdoer was employed by a defendant.It was later recognised that a relationship can give rise to vicarious liability even in the absence of a contract of employment, e.g., where an employer lends his employee to a third party, the third party may be treated as the employer for vicarious liability purposes.In the Christian Brothers Case, the Court considered the general approach in deciding whether a relationship other than one of employment can give rise to vicarious liability, subject to there being a sufficient connection between that relationship and the tort in question and extended the scope of the doctrine.That case concerned whether the defendant, an international unincorporated association whose mission was to provide children with a Christian education, was vicariously liable for the sexual abuse of children by members of the institute, otherwise known as brothers, who taught at an approved school. The Supreme Court held that it was.Lord Phillips stated that: "The relationship that gives rise to vicarious liability is in the vast majority of cases that of employer and employee under a contract of employment. The employer will be vicariously liable when the employee commits a tort in the course of his employment. There is no difficulty in identifying a number of policy reasons that usually make it fair, just and reasonable to impose vicarious liability on the employer when these criteria are satisfied: The employer is more likely to have the means to compensate the victim than the employee and can be expected to have insured against that liability; The tort will have been committed as a result of activity being taken by the employee on behalf of the employer; The employee's activity is likely to be part of the business activity of the employer; The employee will, to a greater or lesser degree, have been under the control of the employer." He added that:"Where the defendant and tortfeasor are not bound by a contract of employment, but their relationship has the same incidents, that relationship can give rise to vicarious liability on the ground that it's 'akin to that between an employer and an employee."Q. With reference to the above passage which of the following is its most apt assessment?

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

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 1930's. 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?
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 1930's. 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 CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT 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 1930's. 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 CLAT 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 1930's. 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 1930's. 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 CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT 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 1930's. 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 1930's. 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 1930's. 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 1930's. 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 1930's. 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 CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup