Suchergebnisse

AN ANALYSIS OF FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY REVEALS THE RISE OF A "COERCIVE FEDERALISM," WHICH COMBINES FEDERAL MANDATES AND PREEMPTIONS WITH TAX-CODE MEASURES THAT RESTRICT STATE AND LOCAL POWERS AND SHIFT COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. SOME OBSERVERS HAVE DESCRIBED THIS DEVELOPMENT AS "PERMISSIVE FEDERALISM"; YET, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME LESS, NOT MORE PERMISSIVE. NEVERTHELESS, THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM, THE REAGAN-BUSH NEW FEDERALISM, THE FEDERAL BUDGET DEFICIT, AND THE CHANGING VIEWS OF THE SUPREME COURT MAY SIGNAL THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW BALANCE OF POWER IN THE FEDERAL SYSTEM. STATE AND LOCAL REVENUES GREW FASTER THAN THE FEDERAL REVENUES IN THE 1980S, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LOST MUCH OF ITS LUSTER AS A CENTER OF PROGRESSIVE INNOVATION. INCREASINGLY, THE STATES HAVE BECOME VIEWED AS CENTERS OF INNOVATION AND EXPERIMENTATION.

This article focuses on two types of state policies that shape county revenue decisions. First, states can impose tax & expenditure limits (TELS) designed to restrict county financial discretion & limit the general taxing authority of counties. The authors construct a state restrictiveness scale that is used to measure the impact of TELs & taxing authority on county revenue decisions. Second, state aid to counties plays an important role in many county financial decisions. The impact of state aid is analyzed to determine whether aid compensates counties for revenue losses that may result from state restrictiveness. Results suggest that state restrictiveness induces counties to reduce their reliance on tax revenues & related resident tax burdens. However, state restrictiveness leads to greater reliance on fees to maintain budgets & higher fee burdens on residents. States appear to provide aid to those counties most constrained by state restrictive policies, & states may direct more aid to counties that shift resident revenue burdens from taxes to fees. 5 Tables, 40 References. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThe trend toward automation of the trading activity on stock exchanges has spread around the world in recent years. Using rescaled range analysis, we test the effect of automation at the TSE on the market's efficiency using daily and monthly return data. Significant departures from a random walk model were found for selected individual stocks in the daily data. However, monthly returns of various stock indexes were more closely described by a random walk process. Differences in the daily and monthly data may be attributable to the effects of aggregation and indexation on return data. In addition, several simple 'technical' trading strategies were compared with a 'buy and hold' strategy using daily data for 25 stocks. Despite the presence of non‐random patterns in the return data, the technical trading rules could not exploit this information to out‐perform the buy and hold strategy. Thus, the presence of deviations from a random walk do not necessarily translate into abnormal performance. Overall, the results suggest automation did not significantly alter the degree of market efficiency at the TSE.