The Economic Impact of Andean Cocaine Traffic on Florida

1990 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 137-160
Author(s):  
Robert Grosse
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Additional Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Economic Costs ◽  
Economic Issues ◽  
The Social

This study is intended to establish a framework for analyzing the economic impact of narcotraffic between Colombia, where most of the world's cocaine is refined, and the State of Florida, which is the primary area of entry for Andean cocaine into the United States. The purpose of the study is to analyze the economic costs and benefits of this activity to Florida, as an example that could be extended in both directions — to Colombia and to the entire United States—if additional data were to become available. Only the trade in cocaine is examined, though additional traffic in marijuana does take place and, in some cases, the data are not disaggregated for each drug. Only the economic impact is studied, though the trade obviously impacts the social and political realms as well. Because the tools of analysis are quite different among the disciplines, and because the economic issues need to be sorted out in any discussion of the overall impact of the cocaine trade, only economic issues are treated here.

scholarly journals Monetizing the Burden of Childhood Asthma Due to Traffic Related Air Pollution in the Contiguous United States in 2010

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (15) ◽  
pp. 7864
Author(s):  
Minaal Farrukh ◽  
Haneen Khreis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Air Pollution ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Childhood Asthma ◽  
Ambient Air ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Cost Calculation ◽  
Cost Burden ◽  
Incident Cases

Background: Traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) refers to the wide range of air pollutants emitted by traffic that are dispersed into the ambient air. Emerging evidence shows that TRAP can increase asthma incidence in children. Living with asthma can carry a huge financial burden for individuals and families due to direct and indirect medical expenses, which can include costs of hospitalization, medical visits, medication, missed school days, and loss of wages from missed workdays for caregivers. Objective: The objective of this paper is to estimate the economic impact of childhood asthma incident cases attributable to nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a common traffic-related air pollutant in urban areas, in the United States at the state level. Methods: We calculate the direct and indirect costs of childhood asthma incident cases attributable to NO2 using previously published burden of disease estimates and per person asthma cost estimates. By multiplying the per person indirect and direct costs for each state with the NO2-attributable asthma incident cases in each state, we were able to estimate the total cost of childhood asthma cases attributable to NO2 in the United States. Results: The cost calculation estimates the total direct and indirect annual cost of childhood asthma cases attributable to NO2 in the year 2010 to be $178,900,138.989 (95% CI: $101,019,728.20–$256,980,126.65). The state with the highest cost burden is California with $24,501,859.84 (95% CI: $10,020,182.62–$38,982,261.250), and the state with the lowest cost burden is Montana with $88,880.12 (95% CI: $33,491.06–$144,269.18). Conclusion: This study estimates the annual costs of childhood asthma incident cases attributable to NO2 and demonstrates the importance of conducting economic impacts studies of TRAP. It is important for policy-making institutions to focus on this problem by advocating and supporting more studies on TRAP’s impact on the national economy and health, including these economic impact estimates in the decision-making process, and devising mitigation strategies to reduce TRAP and the population’s exposure.

State Speech vs. Hate Speech

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-100
Author(s):  
Michael Weinman ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Do So ◽  
New View

This is, indeed, another work on the subject of hate speech regulation in the United States. And yet, it is not just another such work. For my goal here is not to settle the jurisprudential arguments regarding the possibility of any specific hate speech regulation, either extant or yet to be conceived, withstanding a Constitutional test. Nor is it my intention to demonstrate, on the basis of a comparative study of existing legislation, that such regulation either is or is not effective in addressing or redressing the social ills of hatred, discrimination, and inequality. Rather, I will achieve greater analytical clarity about just what the harms of hate speech are. I do so in order to reinvigorate the question about regulation with a new view of what exactly the object needing attention is, by demonstrating that though there are real harms here, the state cannot provide a regulatory remedy (at least qua criminal justice). Thus, in my conclusion I will assert that the question of what we might do differently in response to hate speech can only be answered —however provisionally—insofar as we first confront how we need to think differently about it. Specifically, I will argue that we need to replace the emphasis on redressing harms once they have occurred with a new emphasis on addressing, and ultimately eliminating, the conditions which make those harms possible in the first place.

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: What Lies Ahead?

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Weiner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
The United States ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Economic Costs ◽  
25Th Anniversary ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
Political Expediency

AbstractThe Iran-United States Tribunal has recently celebrated its 25th anniversary. Although it has resolved all of the cases brought by private claimants, it is still likely to be many more years before the Tribunal is able to complete the remaining government-to-government cases on its docket. There are multiple reasons why so much time will be required: the pending cases are extremely complex, the governments brief them slowly, and the Tribunal's decision-making process itself is slow. There does not for the foreseeable future appear to be an alternative to continued litigation, because the prospects of a global settlement of the remaining claims before the Tribunal are remote. The parties face challenges in developing reasonable assessments of the legal and economic costs and benefits of settlement. Beyond this, the strained political relations between the United States and Iran would make even a legally and economically rationale settlement extremely difficult to achieve. The challenge facing the Tribunal in the remaining years of its existence, in which the Iran and United States are the only parties before it, is to continue to decide cases in a principled fashion on the basis of the law and the facts, and to resist the temptation to reach compromise decisions in the interests of political expediency.

Fighting “Gooks”

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simeon Man
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
Asian Americans ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Third World ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Experiences ◽  
The State ◽  
The Social ◽  
Collective Experience

This chapter examines the social experiences of Asian Americans who fought in the Vietnam War. Their collective experience of being racialized as “gooks,” alongside the burgeoning movements for Third World liberation in the United States, drove many Asian American veterans to understand the violence of the war as an intrinsic part of the state-sanctioned violence faced by Asian American and other racialized communities in the United States. Asian American veterans came home from the war and became active participants in the Asian American movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Census Counts and Apportionment: The Politics of Representation in the United States

10.1068/d17s ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 619-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Johnston
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Politics Of Representation ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Federal Employees ◽  
Direct Count ◽  
The Social

Census counts are used in the United States as the basis for a derived ‘apportionment count’, which is employed by the President to allocate seats in the House of Representatives across the 50 States. This apportionment count includes not only those individuals recorded by the census (either by direct count or by imputation) as usually resident in each State but in addition federal employees, including military personnel, and their dependents. This practice has been challenged on several occasions in the courts, most recently by the State of Utah, which claimed that it was denied a fourth seat in the House for the period 2002 – 12 as a consequence. Its claim was denied, for reasons which are discussed here and which throw further light (following Hannah, 2001 Environment and Planning D: Society and Space19 515 – 534) on the social constructions involved in the conduct and use of censuses.

State, Centre and Bureaucracy

1981 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Birnbaum
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Social System ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ideal Type ◽  
The State ◽  
Weak State ◽  
The Social

THE STATE, IN THE STRONGEST MEANING OF THE WORD, IS NOT indispensable to the functioning of civil society. Indeed society can often so organize itself as to prevent the emergence of a state intent on establishing itself as an absolute power. The very existence of the state itself, the consequence of particular sociohistorical processes, upsets the whole of the social system which is henceforth ordered around it. The relationships between the nobility, the bourgeoisie, the working class or, today, the middle classes, differ profoundly according to whether these groups were confronted by a strongly institutionalized state or a centre which exercised essentially co-ordinating functions. Still today the political systems which have simultaneously a centre and a state (France) can be distinguished from those which have a weak state without a real centre (Italy) or a centre without a genuine state (Great Britain, the United States) or neither centre nor state (Switzerland). In the first two cases, in varying degrees, the state dominates and manages civil society; in the two latter, civil society manages itself. It is therefore possible to distinguish societies in which the state attempts to dominate the social system by endowing itself with a strong bureaucracy (ideal type: France; paralle development: Prussia, Spain, Italy) from those in which the organization of civil society makes it impossible for a powerful state and a powerful dominating bureaucracy to emerge (ideal type: Great Britain; parallel development: the United States and the consociational democracies like Switzerland). Without claiming to retrace methodically the history of each of these states or of their political centres, I should like to sketch a broad outline of their evolution with the object of showing that the different relations by which the many governing groups are linked together within the different social systems depend sometimes on the formation of the state and sometimes on the simple formation of a political centre.

The Social Question

Divested ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 28-50
Author(s):  
Ken-Hou Lin ◽  
Megan Tobias Neely
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Financial Sector ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Technological Advancement ◽  
Social Question ◽  
The Social ◽  
Natural Result ◽  
Economic Risks

This chapter considers the issue of inequality. It provides a synopsis of the existing explanations for rising inequality and identifies some of their shortcomings before outlining the contours of the investigation into the connection between financialization and inequality. It argues that the rising inequality in the United States is not a “natural” result of apolitical technological advancement and globalization. Instead, the widening economic divide reflects a deeper transformation of how the economy is organized and how resources are distributed. Financialization has motivated or complemented many inequality-inducing developments through three interwoven processes: the extraction of economic rents from the nonfinancial economy to the financial sector, the demise of the capital-labor accord, and the dispersion of economic risks from the state and organizations to families.

scholarly journals Varifrån kommer välfärdsstaten? Om ett modernt nyckelbegrepps långa historia

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Edling
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Conceptual Development ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Welfare State

Where does the welfare state come from? On the long history of a modern key conceptThisarticle charts the history of the term the welfare state in Germany and the United States, the two countries where it was formed. It starts from the premise that political key concepts, such as the welfare state, have multiple meanings and are open to contestation. This means that the objective is to study the different and changing usages and meanings of the term from the 1860s to the 1940s.In the oldest of the four usages, der Wohlfahrtsstaat referred to pre-1789 authoritarian regimes where the welfare of the people constituted the objective and rationale of the state. Gradually during the latter half of the nineteenth century, an alternative understanding emerged in Germany where the culture and welfare state connoted a responsible state, which regulated the modernizing economy. In the early twentieth century, many texts mentioned this new Kultur- und Wohlfahrtsstaat as a fitting label for contemporary Germany. At the same time, this new regulating welfare state became a topic in the United States as well.In the Weimar Republic 1919–33, the idea of the social welfare state was highly contested from the start. This understanding centred on social policy, on the state as the driving force in social reform. Fourthly, the democratic welfare state, a state that catered for the common good and respected civil liberties, was contrasted to authoritarian power states. These four usages should not be seen as separate stages in an orderly historical sequence of conceptual development, but as co-existing layers of meaning that could be mixed in multiple and changing ways. Depending on ideological and political point of view, the modern welfare state, which emerged after 1945, could incorporate one or several of the historical layers (the authoritarian-paternalistic, the regulating, the social and the democratic welfare state). This new idea of the welfare state was a product of the Depression and the War with expanding state activity and ideological mobilization. The United States’ acquired position as global military and moral superpower constituted one prerequisite. The welfare state was in this sense part of the democratic restart after 1945. Two considerations were important for this conception: the state’s responsibility for promoting economic growth and combating unemployment and the emergence of human rights that include social security.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document