Search results

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine how leading a childhood characterized by transnational mobility affects youths’ understanding of and relationship to their ethnic identity.

Study approach: This study examines the effects of transnational mobility on ethnic identity by focusing on the specific case of Indian Americans who grew up in the USA and Bangalore, a city in southwest India, before relocating to the USA for college. The analysis for this chapter comes from semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 20 transnational Indian American youth.

Findings: The data analysis reveals that by spending part of their childhood in India, transnational Indian American youth were able to learn more about their Indian ethnic identity, which helped them resolve issues related to their status as an ethnic minority in the USA, reframe how they define their ethnic identity, and reevaluate the status of their ethnic identity relative to their counterparts in the USA.

Originality: This study focuses on the unique case of Indian American youth who had a childhood characterized by transnational mobility. As such, this work contributes to the literature on children and youths’ transnational mobility through its focus on the migration patterns of relatively elite and socially privileged children and youth. Additionally, it adds to our understanding of the effects of migration between the USA and India by addressing how these processes affect children and youth. Last, it adds to the literature on Indian Americans by focusing on an understudied subpopulation within this group. The study motivates future research on the diversity that exists among transnationally mobile Indian American children and youth.

This is the first paper in a volume devoted exclusively to antitrust law and economics. It summarizes the other papers and addresses two issues. First, after showing that the federal courts generally view consumer welfare as the ultimate goal of antitrust law, it asks what they mean by that term. It concludes that recent decisions appear more likely to equate consumer welfare with the well-being of consumers in the relevant market than with economic efficiency. Second, it asks whether a buyer must possess monopsony power to induce a price discrimination that is not cost justified. It concludes that a buyer can often obtain an unjustified concession simply by wielding bargaining power, but the resulting concession may frequently – though not always – improve consumer welfare.

The boundaries of Little Italy are not precise, and have shifted over time. In the 19th century, the district extended south of Canal Street into the area identified by Jacob Riis as the “Mulberry Bend,” and described as “the foul core of New York’s slums.”³ By the 1960s, Little Italy had retreated across Canal Street, as the Italian population began to leave the neighborhood for other areas in the city. For the purposes of this paper, Little Italy shall be understood as comprising three census tracts in New York City’s Manhattan county, numbers 41, 43, and 45. This area, lying within a short walking distance of City Hall, is roughly bounded by Canal Street on the south, Bowery on the East, Broadway on the west, and East Houston street to the north. Nicknamed the Mulberry District, it became the first and largest Italian enclave in the United States between 1870s and 1924. While there had been an Italian community in New York for generations, historian George Pozetta has argued that the winter of 1872–1873 was pivotal in the development of this community, when more than 2000 poor Italian immigrants, arrived at Castle Garden, the immigrant reception center, unable to care for themselves.⁴ These immigrants were quickly fitted in to the preexisting Italian community, taking advantage of the contacts provided by the bossi, typically northern Italian men who had arrived earlier, to find jobs in such local enterprises as groceries and saloons, and with American employers. Once the new comers settled, a process of chain-migration began. By the later 1870s, the bossi were acting as agents for gangs of labor sent out from New York to work in other areas across North American. As a result, the Mulberry district became a sort of transshipment point for Italian labor.