tag=1 data=Local Government Policy tag=2 data=Hickey, Maggie tag=3 data=Territory Labor - Party Policy tag=6 data=^d ^mJune ^y1997 tag=8 data=POLITICAL PARTIES-ALP%LOCAL GOVERNMENT tag=10 data=Local Government Policy for election 1997. tag=15 data=POL ; Local Government Policy for election 1997.
Abstract. It has long been thought that government antitrust policy has an effect on aggregate merger and acquisition activity, but the empirical support for this hypothesis has been weak and inconsistent. This paper uses a new empirical specification and a new dataset on mergers and acquisitions to provide support for this conjecture. Regression analysis shows that government policy has a significant influence on mergers and that the nature of the effects depends on the type of merger. Fitting the time series into a two-state Markov switching model shows that conglomerate and horizontal time series follow different dynamics for the last half century, which is most likely caused by the dissimilar treatment of the two types of merger by the government. Only the conglomerate merger and acquisition time series is well described by a two-state Markov switching model. In contrast, the horizontal time series has a break in the early 1980s that may be attributed to the dramatic change in government policy. I am indebted to Professor Frank Gollop, Professor Christopher Baum, and Dr. Robert
The intergenerational impact of public transfers on the economic and social outcome in a society is discussed ambiguously. A considerable amount of research generally found that parental welfare participation may encourage the welfare dependency of future generations and thus perpetuate generational poverty cycles (Gottschalk 1992, Vartanian 1999, Pepper 2000, Page 2004). Public transfers prevent persons from developing their resources or to take advantage of existing opportunities. Human capital such as education and work experience is not valued, and there is little motivation to pursue full-time employment (Hill and Duncan 1987, Mayer 1997, Corak and Heisz 1999). At the other side public transfers are said to result in an overall improvement in the living standards of the poor (Ellwood and Summers 1986). In this view, public transfers and redistributive taxes might be dedicated to narrow the gap between the income of the parents so that the incomes of the children converge to the mean more quickly (Corak 2006). The paper aims to analyze the implications of public transfers on the intergenerational income inequality and poverty trends in Germany and the United States, two countries differing concerning welfare policy regimes, labor market settings and family role models. We analyze the pre- and post-government income of parent-child pairs in different time windows to address to non-linearities in the intergenerational income mobility (Hyson 2003
This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF. The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. While SWF investment objectives to some extent reflect inherent characteristics, notable differences in strategic asset allocation (SAA) exist even amongst SWFs of similar types. Even so, this paper shows that the global crisis may have changed SWF’s asset allocations in ways that may not be ideal or justified in all cases and that a review of investment objectives may be warranted. It also argues for regular macro-risk assessments for the sovereign, the continued importance of SWFs as a stabilizer in international capital markets, as well as the active role they could play in international regulatory reform.