首页> 外文期刊>Public choice >Regressive effects of regulation
【24h】

Regressive effects of regulation

机译:监管的回归效应

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Regulation of health and safety has placed an unacknowledged burden on low-income households and workers. Billions of dollars are spent every year on regulations that seek to reduce life-threatening risks that arise from auto travel, air travel, air and water pollution, food, drugs and construction; the list goes on. Today, some form of regulation affects nearly every aspect of our lives (Shleifer, in: Kessler (ed) Regulation vs. litigation: perspectives from economics and law, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2010). All of the regulatory rules ostensibly intend to make consumers or workers better off, but the cost of regulation usually is borne by the same consumers and workers, reducing their ranges of choice; it therefore crowds out private spending. The crowding out effect can be particularly detrimental for low-income households. This special issue explores the various ways in which regulation may have such regressive effects as well as the political determinants of how regulation, despite its unfavorable consequences for low-income households, may come about.
机译:对健康和安全的监管给低收入家庭和工人带来了无法理解的负担。每年在法规上花费数十亿美元,以减少由汽车旅行,航空旅行,空气和水污染,食品,药品和建筑引起的威胁生命的风险;清单继续。如今,某种形式的监管几乎影响到我们生活的各个方面(Shleifer,载于:Kessler(ed)监管与诉讼:经济学和法律的观点,芝加哥大学出版社,芝加哥,2010年)。表面上所有的监管规则都旨在使消费者或工人的境况变得更好,但是法规的成本通常由相同的消费者和工人承担,从而减少了他们的选择范围。因此,它排挤了私人支出。挤出效应对低收入家庭尤其有害。本期专刊探讨了监管可能产生这种回归影响的各种方式,以及监管如何产生的政治决定因素,尽管它对低收入家庭造成不利影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号