Unemployment occurs when people are without jobs plus they have actively seemed for work within the past four weeks. The unemployment rate is a way of measuring the prevalence of unemployment which is calculated as a percentage by dividing the number of unemployed individuals by all individuals currently in the labour make (the International Labour Group). There never occurs full occupation in the country. But there will vary ways of combating unemployment. There are some countries that reached a minimum unemployment figure. Among this are the post World War II era when there is a huge monetary development occurring. e. g. the United Kingdom in the 1950s and 60s when the average unemployment rate was at about 1. 6 % (John Sloman (2004). Economics. Penguin. p. 811), and in Australia in the 1945 federal established an insurance plan of full employment, which lasted before 1970s when the federal government ran out of money. The latest figures for UK unemployment is "The unemployment rate stands at 7. 7% - down 0. 1% within the one fourth. 29. 19 million individuals were in work in July to Sept based on the labour force review (LFS). The quantity of people used was up by 167, 000 this one fourth or more by nearly 300, 000 from last year. " (HRM Guide, 13 Oct 2010)
As anyone can derive, there is a relationship between crime and unemployment. There were a great deal of studies into this theme as a low level of criminal offenses is socially suitable. Therefore, governments of all countries have attempted to combat the problem of rising criminal offense levels.
A good exemplory case of the last mentioned is post Soviet Russia. Crime rate in the 1980's risen to very high levels. This was the results of the collapse of the Soviet Union, because with it everything collapsed - the law enforcement systems, sociable security, and little standard of living. And, obviously, these are the perfect conditions for an outbreak of criminal offenses. Extreme poverty and unpaid pay, which resulted from a struggling economy, have resulted in property crimes, theft and counterfeiting. By the first 1990s, fraud, burglary, and other property crimes accounted for almost two-thirds of all crime in the country. There was a rapid development of violent crime, including homicides. ( Criminal offenses in the Soviet Time Federal Research Department, Library of Congress). In present times, though, Russia did well in struggling this nightmare of crime. You will find many other countries that have fought and remain combating this issue. By the use of the example of Russia, I wanted showing that unemployment is considered an essential cause of crime in any country, together with law enforcement problems and also labour market opportunities.
Economic theories of the result of criminal offense on unemployment
. . . how many resources and exactly how much abuse should be used to enforce different kinds of legislation? Put equivalently, although more strangely, just how many offenses should be allowed and just how many offenders is going unpunished. " Gary Becker (1968). Becker (1968) is considered to be the first work which formally analyses the issue of criminal offense using an economic model. Becker links the situation of criminal offense to sociable welfare. The assumption is that criminals are as logical as any other person. And, therefore, if they are involved i n offense activities, this means that they are better off by doing so.
The problem of opportunity cost comes up often in these conversations. When a potential offender, despite the knowledge that he has about the abuse he'll get if he commits a criminal offenses, still should go and will it - this means that the prize that he is aiming at justifies the likelihood of him getting caught and convicted. When looking at offense, the idea of rationality is applied not and then criminals, but to all or any parties included - judges, policemen, legislators and potential patients. So, when the institutions that control criminal offense are designed, their main concern is not the crimes that are devoted and exactly how much they "weigh", but the costs that occur to the society. As an example, if it requires half of the population to be converted into judges, policemen, etc to be able to decrease the criminal offense rate by 70%, it could most likely not happen in the true life, because the cost of doing so is too high. Becker created a model, which identifies optimal degrees of punishment by minimising the sociable cost induced by both combating criminal offense and crimes themselves. This model predicts the aggregated way to obtain offences. The number of offences a felony would commit, matching to Becker, would be adversely related to the probability of apprehension and the severity of punishment. In addition, it includes a certain "u" term, which includes all other factors that can impact the predicted final result e. g. income from legal and illegitimate activities, education, risk aversion, etc.
But, this variable "u" is not explicitly examined by Becker. This work was later on extended by Ehrlich (1972, 1973). Ehrlich state governments a person is able to spend some time on both legal and illegitimate activities, however the timeframe that certain dedicates to some of those activities depends on the quantity of utility (come back) that he gets from it. By 1973, Ehrlich designed a numerical model that describes this marriage. Ehrlich bases his model on the "decision making under uncertainty" theory. The assumption used is a person can switch between legal and against the law activities during their life time, depending, as I have mentioned earlier, on the quantity of tool they get from them (activities). There is absolutely no training and no costs involved in changing between your two.
So, it is evident, that an upsurge in opportunities in the legal market, e. g. higher probability of work and higher income would improve the expected utility gained from legal activities therefore and individual, being rational, would spend more time on legal, alternatively than illegal deeds. Therefore, keeping a low level of unemployment, theoretically will decrease the offense level.
Cohen and Felson (1979) have proposed that for a crime to be "done", it need three factors to be satisfied: motivated offenders, suitable patients and the lack of effective legal punishment system. Leading from this, the increase in crime development is triggered by an increase in the first two factors under the 3rd - an inadequate legal system. This debate only facilitates the prediction manufactured in Ehrlich's model. We can deduce an optimistic relationship between the rate of unemployment and the offense rate.
On the other side of the discussion, Cantor and Land (1985) have expected a negative romantic relationship between your rate of unemployment and criminal offenses based on the works of Cohen and Felson. They suggested that the higher the unemployment, the less people there are in the second category (suitable patients). If there are usually more unemployed, those who lost their jobs stay at home and for that reason avoid the chance of having their residence robbed, for example. Also, a higher rate of unemployment is an indicator of a downturn, meaning there is less for the offenders to grab, for example. So, higher unemployment may reduce property crimes. Also, using the same logic, we can deduce a reduction in violent offences again through a decrease in that second factor - suitable subjects. Statistically, most violent offences are committed by strangers, if you stay at home, you avoid that risk.
Cantor and Land have designed an empirical model which tests the desire and opportunity ramifications of unemployment rate on crime. There are many equations under estimation. The dependant variables are the differentiated degrees of offences like homicide, rape, assault, robbery, fraud, burglary, etc. 3rd party parameters are either current or differentiated unemployment rates. The argument in this newspaper is that in case there is a financial meltdown those that become unemployed will receive some unemployment benefits, etc. And therefore they might not turn to criminal activities straight away, but once they are under financial pressure in the event unemployment benefits or an alternative solution source of income expires.
This model has been criticized by several researchers in this area. For instance, Greenberg in 2001 has argued that those who become unemployed might not have the sufficient resources to keep themselves, while out of work. This factor might make them engage in against the law activities, which contradicts the outcomes on the Cantor and Land model. He also questioned the mathematical strategy of the model. Greenberg (2001) claimed that it is mathematically unacceptable if the differencing treatment is only completed on the crime rates however, not the explanatory parameters.
Also, Hale and Sabbagh (1991) have questioned mainly the empirical work of Cantor and Land. The ideas of integration and cointegration were introduced showing that their models are mis-specified. Leading out of this, it is argued that any conclusions attracted from their work are most likely unreliable.
There are other paperwork that only try to derive the net aftereffect of unemployment on criminal offenses, rather than considering determination and opportunity costs. An example is a newspaper compiled by Fleisher (1963). In it, the author argues that there surely is a positive correlation between mother or father unemployment and young ones crime. If there is a high degree of unemployment in the country, individuals become unemployed and it becomes very difficult to allow them to provide for their children, who, therefore, might turn to unlawful activities. Fleisher uses time series data to check this relationship since it gives a more extensive view of the relationship of different variable in an extended time frame. The prediction of the model is justified using an OLS estimation and shows a good and significant correlation between unemployment rate and youth crime.
Some research workers preferred to work with panel data to research this area. For example, a paper written by Raphael and Winter-Ebmer (2001) uses this approach. The debate in this newspaper is that there is a dependent relationship between crime and unemployment. One might be the cause of the other. E. g. high criminal offense rates in the country will deter investment and so add to a rise in unemployment, which is what goes on in countries like Russia. Because Russia is well known for white-collar criminal offenses, it is a serious obstacle to foreign immediate investment. (Forbes. com). Also, individuals who have had a criminal history will dsicover it very hard to discover a job a so remain unemployed. The results of the OLS estimations of the model will be the following: there is a positive romantic relationship between unemployment and property crimes, but, on the other hand, there are insignificant results about the relationship between unemployment and more serious offences like rape and murder. Although, one very interesting point of conclusions of this paper is the negative romantic relationship between unemployment and murder. The explanation of this can potentially be found in Ehrlich's three factor model. Unemployment could decrease the potential interaction between a unlawful and a sufferer.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay