I'll interprete 'golden age of welfare state' as the time when the concept of welfare state is sustainable.
What we see today is a collapse in the welfre state: the quality of the health service, and even the financial viability of the welfare system whereby today's workers basically finance today's retirees, causing an increasing problem as the population ages, with less workers supporting more retirees.
At the same time, the private sector is coming up with alternatives such as insurance annuities, health insurance... As more people move towards the private solutions to palliate the defficiencies of the public system, those who cannot afford to do so seem stuck on a sinking ship.
So, yes, the welfare state in its present form is sinking, and definitley past the 'golden age'.
On the other hand, we should ask whether the ship might not just do fine with some repairs.
The most fundmental issue would be to fix the finances; shift to a personal scheme where the money you save goes to you in old age, supplemented so that even if you live to 100 you still get some funds, and a social component to act as welfare net for those in need.
It doesn't take much.
First is that the workers today - and that includes me - will have to bite the bullet in the sense that our past contributions, having been spent, do not form part of our stock. (Of course this can be replenished partly by higher rates for a while, but still the burden fals on us). At the same time, special provisions will have to be made yearly for annuities to today's retirees, they have to bite the bullet too. This should probably come from a slight increase in corporate taxes for a set number of years.
As for social net, we should look at means testing and putting firm time limits on the provision of the benefits, to ensure that the funds don;t simply disappear. One cannot be on the dole for one's whole lifetime; the benefits are to help in time of need, a crutch, not a permanent feature.
Once the finances are settled, and legislation in place and enforced to make fund distribution more efficient, the welfare system can then look to education and health; but that's the part that, although critical, would cost less.
In conclusion, teh welfare state as it existed is past its golden age, but this just means that it needs to be modified for the 21st century and have a new golden age.
2006-12-28 15:56:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by ekonomix 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think we're moving into a kind of Titanic economy: the main ship is sinking, the more affluent have taken to the life boats waiting to be rescued by larger forces, while the poor are in the drink waiting for life circumstances to kill them off - poverty, ill-health, exclusion etc.
Why? Because capitalism never gives when it can take instead. We need a radical socialisation of European economic policy.
I often jokingly maintain that Nietzsche killed God and Margaret Thatcher killed society; remember her 'There's no such thing as society' remark. We are now living in a world which is negotiated almost entirely by economic values; spiritual and moral values are being erased not to mention basic civic and social ones.
The world is in crisis and it's time to choose a new masters if needs be; for liberators will be masters too, make no mistake about it.
The collapse of the USSR and East bloc rather than liberating capitalism from an ideological struggle has re-immersed it in its own narrow orthodoxy and pitted it against every remaining 'other', in the global economy, most notable Islam - a willing adversary, by all accounts - and China, a 'Big Brother' style Orwellian economy built on worker slavery.
Perhaps Europe is the only hope but it too is being overly influenced by capitalistic forces not to mention it's Achilles heel - Britain.
2006-12-27 02:11:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Pope Sixtus the Seventh 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Presuming are British. You need to start by discussing if there ever was a golden age of welfare state. look up Beveridge report, post war consensus,application of Keynesian economics, failure of Breton woods, OPEC crisis, new right 1979-1997, New Labour, look at relative spending, means tested residual benefit systems, look at European contrasts (especially Sweden) Look at sectional interests(gender, youth, race, disability)
When you have read all that up you should just about have it ready to write up
let me know if you need any book titles.
2006-12-28 18:58:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by bletherskyte 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
With this new Congress? (Same as the old Congress...)
We ain't seen nothing yet. Reagan nailed the Soviet Union, but economic totalitarianism is extremely healthy, thriving, and growing.
Once Queen Pelosi attains power, you'll see an even greater distribution of wealth from those who work to those who don't.
2006-12-27 00:02:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Boomer Wisdom 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Heck no, there are more people on Welfare now than ever before.
2006-12-27 01:34:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It has passed, due to the influences of the govt. of the USA.
2006-12-26 23:59:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes ! It flew by so quickly that I never saw it coming, let alone, " Pass By " !!!!
2006-12-28 19:27:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sierra One 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
homework again tsk must have a word with your parents!!!
2006-12-27 00:01:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Andrew1968 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
If only!
2006-12-27 02:09:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by KevinStud99 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
no
2006-12-26 23:58:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 7
·
1⤊
0⤋