The federal government and urban housing: Ideology and change in public policy

Cities ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-93
Author(s):  
E.Jay Howenstine
2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natália Guimarães Duarte Sátyro ◽  
Eleonora Schettini Martins Cunha

Abstract The article analyzes the transformative capacity of the Ministry of Social Development and Fight against Hunger (MDS) in shaping structural change in Brazilian municipalities. The study is based on the concepts of organizational and institutional learning, on a combination of analytical categories of the institutional and neo-institutional approaches and on traditional means of government control. As for methodology, this study used process tracing, in-depth interviews, and documentary analysis of regulations, decrees, and resolutions that create direct and indirect incentives to induce agreements and cooperation of municipalities with the Ministry. We identified two important causal mechanisms: a) organizational and institutional learning processes; and b) inter-federative cooperation that, combined, generated significant changes in municipal bureaucratic capacity. The findings show the importance of the Union’s transformative capacity in the process of public policy decentralization in Brazil.


2019 ◽  
pp. 147-172
Author(s):  
Lawrence M. Friedman

This chapter focuses on regulation in the early nineteenth century. The nineteenth century is considered the high noon of laissez-faire. Government, by habit and design, kept its hands off the economy and let the market do its magic. The first half of the century, in particular, was strongly pro-enterprise, pro-growth. The aim of public policy was the release of creative energy and that meant economic energy, enterprise energy. Government reflected what its constituents wanted. It did what it could to boost the economy, which could mean subsidy or outright intervention. Government intervention, or government regulation, primarily meant the states, not the federal government.


2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-167
Author(s):  
Matthew Gebhardt

1996 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Wagner

The federal government levies taxes on property transfers at death (the estate tax), during life (the gift tax), and to grandchildren or more remote descendants (the generation-skipping tax). Referred to collectively as “transfer taxes,” these taxes attract little interest in the public policy forum because they produce little revenue—only 1% of annual federal tax revenues, and because most Americans have no first-hand experience with transfer taxes. However, transfer taxes have significantly adverse economic effects that are grossly disproportionate to the tax revenues they generate. Transfer taxes penalize success and the creation of wealth. The adverse effects of transfer taxes on saving and capital formation, therefore, are costs imposed on society as a whole.


2019 ◽  
Vol 278 (3) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Edilson Vitorelli ◽  
Matheus Rodrigues Oliveira

<p>The Federal Fund in Defense of Diffuse Rights and the misuse of its resources</p><p> </p><p>Este artigo analisa, empiricamente, a gestão Fundo Federal de Defesa dos Direitos Difusos (FDD), mecanismo de reparação fluida dos direitos coletivos lesados e não reparados, criado pela Lei nº 7.347, de 1985. O exame do problema demonstra que, embora a arrecadação de receitas tenha sido elevada, ao longo dos últimos anos, a União não aplica os recursos aportados ao fundo, mantendo-os em caixa com o objetivo de realizar políticas públicas de superávit, não relacionadas com a origem dos recursos. Conclui que esse comportamento viola a Constituição e a própria razão de existir do fundo.</p><p> </p><p>This paper, using empirical data, analyses the administration of the Federal Fund for Diffuse Rights (FDD), which is intended, in Brazil, as a mechanism to indemnify groups whose rights have been violated and not redressed. The Fund was created by Law 7.347 of 1985. Our examination of the topic shows that, although substantial revenues amounts have been collected for the fund in the last few years, the money has not been used by the federal government for the purpose intended, but has been withheld in order to comply with public policy for a budget surplus. The paper concludes that this behavior violates the constitution and the very cause of the fund’s existence.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document