Pros And Cons Of Neoliberal Welfare Reform

The other part of item 2B talks about the New Right’s view on social policy. The new right argue that social policies interfere with the family too much, they stop it from being self-reliant. As they argue that the nuclear family is the natural family, supported by the idea of the biological gender division of labour, if the roles of this family type are carried out accordingly, then the family is able to be self-reliant and not need the government to support it. This idea was mainly highlighted by Murray who created to proposals about social policy. The first one is the ‘dependency culture’. This is the idea that social policies are making people assume the state will provide for them, in forms such as providing houses for pregnant teenagers or assuming that the state will look after children. Therefore,

The social welfare in the UK is very different in practice for example benefits and services are delivered at minimum level as the coverage it widespread and can be too costly or even extensive. The social protection in which the welfare state provided is irregular and unpredictable and the services are rationed very tightly. As the services have been contracted out to self-reliant providers the control over the quality and reliability of social protection had been even more difficult to maintain. (Spicker2014)

The welfare state makes capitalism and democracy possible by allowing a partial free market since regulations are put into place. By doing this, it aims to mobilize the working class. For instance, labor market policies protect the working class through “passive measures such as unemployment insurance that help soften the blows to individuals caused by market dislocations, [and] active measures such as worker training”(Schulze-Cleven, pg.80). Through these measures the working class is still being helped, but at the expense of others, through taxation. For example, unemployment insurance “is administered by states according to federal and state guidelines, and it is financed through a complex mix of federal and state payroll taxes”(Schulze-Cleven, pg.82). Through taxation the state gains power, but the population benefits from it.

In America today, just over ten million people are on unemployment insurance, one hundred and ten million people are on welfare, and the total government spending annually is around one hundred and thirty billion dollars (Welfare Statistics). The welfare state is a political system based on the proposition that the government has the individual responsibility to ensure that the minimum standard of living is met for all citizens. Specifically, in the matters of health care, public education, employment, and social security, the welfare state assumes all responsibility. According to John Rawls, “In a just society the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests. The only thing that permits us to acquiesce in an erroneous theory is the lack of a better one; analogously, an injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice“(Rawls). In the 1840s, Otto Von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of Germany, was the father of the modern welfare state. He built the program to win over the support of the working middle class in Germany and ultimately reduce the outflow of immigrants to the U.S., where welfare did not exist (Welfare State). In the United States, not all companies provided workers with benefits, thus the workers appealed to the government, giving rise to the first form of welfare capitalism.

In conclusion the Welfare State was created on the principle that the state accepted a responsibility to protect and promote the welfare of all citizens. It must be noted that the system was designed to provide a national minimum, not reduce inequalities. I have looked in detail at all aspects to combat the “five giants “and the popular support when the Beveridge report was introduced. I have also looked at flaws in the system, however the cornerstone of the Beveridgian welfare system, was left almost untouched until the 1980’s.

And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then to look after our neighbour'. (http://www.skyminds.net/politics/inequalities-in-great-britain-in-the-19th-and-20th-centuries/the-thatcher-years-the-individual-and-society/)Thatcher believed the only way to reduce poverty was through elimination of the dependency culture. One of her attempts to achieve this was to 'roll back ' the welfare state through a series of welfare reforms, by raising the criteria for eligibility of government benefits. (Giddens, 2006) However, during Thatcher's reign as Prime Minister, child poverty was massively increased, where by when she stood down as Prime minister in 1990, one in three children were said to be living in households with less than half the average income. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/04/99/thatcher_anniversary/334316.stm)The individualistic theory of poverty is still influential and accepted by some people in modern British society and many people portray those who live off government handouts as lazy and scroungers. However, only a few sociologists' of modern Britain still accept the individualistic theories of poverty. Sociologists are now more inclined to see poverty as the result of characteristics of a social group such as a family or a community rather than that of the individual.

In this essay I will analyse the issue of social welfare, referencing Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic and Foucault’s analysis of power structures and the welfare state. The support systems in place to ensure that the poorest and most vulnerable members of society are able to survive have been the subject of increasing scrutinisation and hostility as we have entered the 21st Century. This hostility to social welfare can be seen in the intense backlash against the Affordable Care Act in America, and the current ethos permeating Australian culture that it is better to work in demeaning or unsafe conditions that to be an unproductive member of society.

Neo-liberalism has had the greatest impact on public policy in New Zealand over the past 20 years. An example of this ideology in policy making in New Zealand history would be The National party in the 1990’s. National significantly reduced the state’s role in the labour market, and introduced markets in public housing and education. A more recent example is the current National government and their benefits policy. In 2008 National focussed on getting beneficiaries into employment. National’s leader John Key announced that they were committing to a benefit policy that would act as a safety net, but encourage beneficiaries to go out and source other forms of income (Key, 2008). This is a neo-liberal idea in the sense of having minimal state intervention. The plan to put in place a tax system that encourages people to work hard and not rely on the welfare state, and the continuing of shrinking the size of government sees that the future intentions of the current National party is going to carry on down a neo-liberal road (Key, 2008).

United States Government Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt thought of this system as an aid for low-income families whose men were off to war, or injured while at war. The welfare system proved to be beneficial early on by giving families temporary aid, just enough to help them accommodate their family’s needs. Fast forward almost 90 years, and it has become apparent that this one once helpful system, has become flawed. Welfare itself and the ideologies it stands on, contains decent fundamentals; furthermore, this system of aid needs only to be reformed to better meet the needs of today’s society.

This essay will discuss the key points of the ‘Beveridge report’ (1942), and evaluate the significance of the report on the welfare state. In November 1942, William Beveridge presented a report called, ‘Social Insurance and Allied Services’ to parliament. This was a summary of principles to improve upon the existing welfare benefits system, to benefit working people and the population. The document proposed a new system to be operated by one governing agency, called Social Security. This would be put in place by the state after World War 2 had ended. Overall Beveridge created the most revolutionary document in our history. Beveridge has played a significant role in evolving the Welfare State over the decades. (Robinson, 2003).

In light of the reading on “welfare liberalism” it is important to note that there are differences between contemporary liberalism and welfare liberalism that address specific ways the government should be driven towards. Rawls and Dewey being this section by providing the following, “One of the first to make the case for welfare liberalism was T.H. Green, a professor of philosophy at Oxfoard University. The heart of liberalism, Green said, has always been the desire to remove obstacles that block the free growth and development of individuals.” (Liberalism Reading) This also refers to that of its past meaning which referred to the limited intervention of government in the lives of others. He adds, “In the past that meant limiting the powers

The aim of this essay is to discuss and compare the British Welfare system with Germany and Sweden’s welfare systems. A welfare system is the structure of welfare provisions and services that provide a specific social need, but it is not only provided or organised solely by the government (Blakemore, 2001). It is a view that is rooted in individual exchanges between five organisations (State/Government, Market/Private Sector, Family/Kin networks, Local Communities and Civil Society). It reflects the history and cultures of different countries around the world (Haralambos, 2012). It is these providers that assume principal

This essay will consider whether the welfare state has eliminated poverty. It will examine what poverty is and how the definition varies from societies. The essay will look at the aims of the welfare state from conception and how it has changed to present times. The welfare state being analysed is the welfare state in the United Kingdom. It will discuss the nature of the social democratic welfare state and liberal criticisms of the problems this type of state brings. The recent changes to the welfare state will be reviewed and what the consequences of the changes may be. It will then look at recent statistics to determine whether the welfare state has eradicated poverty.

Nevertheless, it was not until her second and third term in office Margret Thatcher (1925-2013) engineered economic reforms as mentioned in the previous paragraph, with the sale of significant industries created, wealth in some but abject poverty in others, some opponents claim this constructs more of a ‘Two Nation Conservatism’ the rich and the poor. This brand of ‘New Right’ Conservatism continued with John Major 1990-1997 years, yet again this kind of political approach continued to dominate policy, interest rates fell and so did inflation. Still, employment continued to increase and remained dramatically high, again the agenda of employment did not seem to be a priority, although unemployment has a direct impact of individual’s

That provision system was and still is dependent on economic development and further social benefits are income-related. One can say that the modern English welfare state, as it exists now a days, had its hour of birth after the Second World war in the background of comprehensive amendments. Citizens became entitled to certain rights due to the set up of the National insurance, which covered for benefits in case of health, unemployment and disability (BBC) financed out of taxation. Summing up, the English welfare state consists of three main elements namely the guarantee of