Social Democratic Welfare Policies: A Case Study

Today Denmark is one of the most prosperous countries in the world. Unemployment rates are low. Denmark also has low inflation and a surplus on both balance of payments and public expenditure. The World Economic Forum’s 2008 competitiveness index ranks Denmark in its Top Three world-wide. And the World Transparency Index ranks it as the world champion in non-corruption. Furthermore it should be noted that other international comparisons nominate the Danes as the happiest people in the world! Denmark’s success is so impressive.

Changes within the welfare system as a result of policy shifts and by new thinking, more generally in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), have had many methods, but the one that seemed most important, was that welfare recipients were required to do much more to justify their income support payments than before. The foundation of this new idea is that income support programs should allow individuals to maximise their participation in work. Due to the general shift in welfare administration, the number of activity test requirements an individual in Australia must meet in order to receive unemployment benefits, has expanded significantly since the early 1990s. This complex, overly bureaucratic process means that disadvantaged individuals cannot access the income support payments they require.

Following the welfare reforms that were introduced by the New Labour Government in 1997, the coalition Government has developed, extended and continued welfare-to-work programmes (Deacon and Patrick, 2012). The Government’s ‘rehabilitation revolution’ saw policies designed to reduce reoffending, and as a consequence resettlement initiatives emerged with welfare-to-work programmes (Ministry of Justice, 2010). Since the implementation of the ‘Work Programme’ in 2011, welfare provision has seen a high influx of ex-offenders and Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangement (MAPPA) participants referred to programmes (Gov.UK, 2016). The main provider in Wales has delivered learning and development provision to approximately 24,000 ex-offenders (Working Links, 2013). The ultimate aim of the provider is to ensure participants secure sustainable employment. Accordingly, front-line staff have undergone specialist training to deal with ‘risk’ and mentor clients with complex and multiple needs. However, there is a dearth of research focusing on this contemporary phenomena. Considering the pivotal role employment schemes play in rehabilitating offenders, it is of paramount importance to determine whether or not the Governments confidence in employability schemes is justified.

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.

All throughout history welfare services have been available to the general public. While these benefits have changed over time, the basic intentions of the welfare system has stayed the same. The welfare system provides benefits and monetary assistance to those who qualify. Different acts over the past two hundred years have been amended in order to try to help the poor, and while not all have been practical and successful, many programs have indeed done an outstanding job in aiding those in need. But, just like with all good things, there is a negative side. Even with all the reforms to try perfect the welfare system there are still some holes in it. Not only is the welfare system easy to manipulate, according to usgovernmentspending.com, eleven percent of the federal budget is spent on welfare, leaving tax payers livid. (usgovspending.com) It 's obvious there is a need for a welfare system in the United States, but with the abuse the welfare system has endured a major change needs to be seen in order to ensure the welfare system be used as efficiently as possible.

What would happen if the government made changes to the welfare system? There are approximately 110,489,000 of Americans on welfare. Many people benefit from what the system has to offer: food stamps, housing, health insurance, day care, and unemployment. Taxpayers often argue that the individuals who benefit from the system, abuse the system; however, this is not entirely true. Many of the people who receive benefits really and truly need the help. Even though some people believe welfare should be reformed, welfare should not be reformed because 40% of single mothers are poor, some elderly people do not have a support system, and college students can not afford to take extra loans.

This paper is a group assignment that looks at the different viewpoints for this topic which is Was the welfare reform the right approach to poverty and my view is yes it was because something needed to be done. In addition, policy analyst “Charles Murray wrote a book called

The welfare system is run by the government that runs different programs that was originally intended to help the unemployed or underemployed (Welfare Info, n.d.). It went from just helping those two groups and branched significantly into helping low income families, disabled, and single parent families be able to live the best life possible. Some of the programs include "Medicaid, Food Stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Head Start, Work Study, and Medicare" (Welfare Info, n.d.). Another very commonly known one is Social Security which is mainly for seniors when they retire.

In 2015 Denmark had a population of 5,699,000 within their Scandinavia geographic region ("Countries Denmark," 2015). The Danish have a culture of high living standards and well-being. It is a developed country that’s population is ranked above average in life expectancy (OECD Publishing, 2016). The average life expectancy for males is seventy – two. The women are expected to live until eighty- two years old ("Countries Denmark," 2015).

The US welfare system started back in the 1930’s when the great depression was going on. In 2012 more than 30 percent of households headed by an immigrant. The people who are mainly on welfare are the people who are sick and disabled and have little income, a big family or who come from out of the country. The government provides each state with their own welfare programs called temporary assistance for needy families (TANF). There are many different types of welfare programs in the US like, heath care, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance. All of these types of welfare are controlled by the government and the state in some kind of way.

1. Identify the social welfare policy issue and its relevance for social work practice. Describe the major components of this policy and the issues surrounding it.

To measure societal acceptance towards immigrants, attitudinal data can be utilized to better understand the effects of immigration on both societies. One way to measure the general political reaction of each country towards the influx of immigrants. Though such data is constrained by temporal boundaries, a blanket understanding can be gleamed from surveys taken in nations during different periods. Further, in both countries, support for the importance of mainstream right-wing strategies has exacerbated the politicization of the immigrant issue. A survey asking identical questions in the two countries was conducted by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in 2000. The Swedes tend to be more positive than the Danes, but the differences are not dramatic. However, similarly to Denmark, societal attention to the issue increased in the 1980s, not least due to a considerable growth in the number of refugees from the Middle East. In both nations, there are clear trends that reveal a significant rise in negative attitudes towards immigrants; but, the levels of said societal and political attention towards immigrants and the policies enacted which affect immigrants differ greatly in Sweden and Denmark.

In today’s modern society, the United States faces many public policy issues, whether those issues include social welfare, immigration or even environmental issues. Congress receives numerous issues on public polices every day, but they cannot handle and solve every issues that comes across their daily agenda, nor can they satisfy every person in this country. Congress prioritizes on those issues that are more important and relevant to find a probable solution too. A growing issue we see that in today’s society are issues in the social welfare system. Social Welfare has so many issues within some of those issues include the food stamps, and even in the healthcare system. The matters in social welfare requires every individuals help to resolve, not just congress. The second major public policy issue we face in American today are within the Public Assistance Programs. Those programs include the SNAP, SSI, and even the TANF program.

From the colonialization of America to the present, social welfare has evolved tremendously. American values during each era helped determine how the poor were to be treated. Values such as Puritan work ethic, felt that if you were not working then you were immoral. Two other values that were prominent in American’s history are individualism and capitalism. Individualism is the belief that one can succeed without the help of others while the capitalistic view felt that a free market system would help create jobs. The Judeo-Christian value comes up in our history as well and says that those who are deemed worthy morally deserve the help of others. These values shaped perspectives on social welfare. One perspective called the problem centered approach feels that it is the individual’s actions are to blame for their poverty. The other perspective is the conflict approach where it is believed that things out of our control cause poverty. This could be an economic downturn or policies that affect individuals financially.

The institutional approach to social welfare is proactive. It addresses needs and problems that may arise before the need is seen/developed in individuals. Examples of this include social security, public education, and tax exemptions for the number of children in a household (Segal, Gerdes, Steiner, p.40). The institutional approach tends to be broader and less detailed in terms of resources, money, and the size of the population in need.