Executive Summary
On many instances, the government has strived to tackle the issue of unemployment but ended up handling its symptoms. The changes that will be discussed in this report are founded on the facts that unemployment cannot be avoided by handling the symptoms alone. The welfare state has shaped the lifestyle of the less privileged in a manner that has enclosed generations after generations in a circle of dependency resulting from unemployment.
This failure has led to a waste of billions of money each year in meeting the social costs. The appropriate way to ensure a sustainable system is by resolving the root causes of unemployment such as educational failure, economic dependency, and corruption.
This report generates plausible recommendations aimed at changing the culture of dependency and unemployment that might have been nurtured by the benefits system. This report recommends the use of a well-developed benefits system to address the problems of the majority affected by unemployment or ageing. The welfare state should assist everyone to find work and ensure that work has desirable pay. The framework to be considered focuses at improving on earlier reforms by aiming at maximising work incentives while protecting the needy. Three normative theories of welfare will be used to expound on the issue of the benefits system. Communitarianism, Feminism, and neoliberalism theories will be discussed.
Introduction
Based on the normative theorists’ line of thought, the welfare state perception comes from the belief that human beings live in a state of dependence on fellow humans. This perception is in the sense that humanity is interdependent to an extent that there is a moral duty to mind about the wellbeing of others. This assertion holds regardless of whether that individual deserves this in one way or the other.
However, people are aware that this ethical demand is essentially at dispute with individual’s interest for authority and avidity. Based on these claims, people often seek to destruct such expectations with the belief that one has to prove that s/he deserves the benefits of the welfare state. When people choose to do things based on their selfish urges, the whole foundation of the welfare state begins to slip. This report explores the opportunities of a benefits system in the developed nations. The benefits system offers financial assistance for the unemployed population and seeking for employment. Besides, it offers additional financial support for low-income earners, for the retired or those with disabilities.
Consequently, the society with the help of the government and other agencies generates a welfare state that reflects the care for one another. Nonetheless, such care has been reduced to theory while being aware of the fact that a welfare society is hard to achieve. People and entities are compelled to act if as they care hence no one thinks about other people’s life.
The contemporary state of welfare
The current welfare system has failed to match the pace of the evolving needs of the society and economy. Previous efforts have made significant reforms but have failed to rationalise the entire landscape. Currently, two major problems persist. First, work incentives for most groups are discouraging. Individuals create the perception that working at certain groups does not pay. The second challenge is that the system is perceived to have evolved with favourable intentions, but the outcomes remain flawed.
Previous efforts by the government have worked to improve the welfare state but have failed largely to address the increasing rates of welfare dependency, poverty, and policies that can eliminate negative thinking. Besides, due to high dependency on the welfare system, the government continues to experience high costs of welfare support.
The current costs of state support are rising steadily. The costs of saving a rambling system are increasing, and there are no signs the situation can get better. For instance, spending on compensating the unemployed in Britain increased to 23 billion pounds in a period of 13 years ending in 2011 (Spicker 2014). The current system has failed to create desirable behavioural influence. The current benefits system does not consider the consequences of the behaviours it creates.
Due to poor incentives to work, many people opt not to work, which leads to poverty coupled with increasing the likelihood of being involved in criminal activities. The fact that people are rewarded for doing nothing brings the feeling that those who are working are being punished.
To put the measures into action, it is important to improve work incentives. Strategic approaches should be developed to focus on increasing the incentive to seek work and improve earnings once a person is employed. Striking a balance between these aspects will be critical to ensure that there is no over dependency on benefit systems. There should be set conditions to ensure that job seekers are motivated to work should an opportunity arise.
Individuals who are capable of working should be required to seek work as a condition for getting the benefit. Individuals who fail to work should be sanctioned through the reduction of benefits. However, benefits system should not be the only means employed by the government to help the poor. The unemployed need to require particular skills to enable them to acquire employment and progress in life. The training should be flexible and relevant to the labour market.
Communitarianism
Communitarianism is a social theory that focuses on the essence of the society in formulating the good. Communitarianism contrasts theories that emphasise on centrality or individualism. Long (2007, p. 249) posit that communitarians ‘focus on the ways that form, transmit and enforce the wellbeing of the society’. In other words, the system should be permissive and based on the well-being of the larger society. Two forms of communitarians have emerged, viz. academic and responsive.
According to Long (2007, p. 252), the academic communitarians ‘involve a group of political theorists aiming at identifying the social dimension of the individual’. On the other hand, Long (2007, p. 252) says that responsive communitarians involve ‘a group of academicians and policy-makers who emphasize that societies cannot be based on one normative principle and that both people rights and the common good are major sources of normativity’.
The academic communitarian philosophy originated from John Rawls’ observations. O’Brien and Penna (1998, p. 112) posit that in the book, A Theory of Justice, ‘Rawls generated a concept of justice founded on the inviolable rights of people, claiming that every individual possesses an inviolability grounded on fairness that even the welfare of society cannot overlook’. According to critics of this philosophy, the liberal portrayal of the individual shows an independent being who exercises her liberty by selecting among many choices presented to him/her.
The responsive communitarians emerged as a reaction to the increased individualization of the developed countries, particularly in the western societies. To counter this pattern, Amitai Etzioni led to the formation of the responsive communitarians pioneering for a balance between liberty and social order (Long 2007). This group claimed that people encountered responsibilities for their families, communities, and societies. Responsive communitarians suggest that respect of the social links is essential for the prosperity of people and of communities. This assertion led to their suggestion that states should ensure and facilitate the social attachments necessary to people’s well-being (Long 2007).
On the other hand, liberals argue that this concept is handled as if it demands the state to identify the good and then formulate laws that facilitate that good. Liberals perceive this idea as a grievous error. Liberals claim that people are different and may fundamentally fail to agree about what is good. Therefore, efforts by the state to undertake certain welfare undermine the freedom of those people who disagree.
At the practical level, the benefits system in the most developed countries is executed in a framework where social benefits are funded through taxes. Taxes are implemented based on standards varying from the principles governing the allocation of benefits. Therefore, the contribution does not dictate what the beneficiary should get. Ideally, to contribute and to benefit are not linked to each other. In principle, benefits system holds the communitarian rule of giving without expecting something in exchange.
However, largely, communitarianism has exacerbated the welfare problems in many ways. For instance, the dependency rate continues to increase since there are no proper incentives to encourage people to work. The few who are working have the responsibility to cater for the many people relying on the working class and the benefits system.
Addressing the welfare problems can take various forms. First, there needs to be a fair system that considers the plight of all citizens. In other words, everyone should have an obligation to strive and achieve solutions for oneself and the wellbeing of the larger society. Reforms should target initiating a balanced framework that creates a balance between those who pay for benefits and those who receive them. Individuals on out-of-work benefits should be motivated to work by imposing sanctions on those who can work but are not willing. Such sanctions should entail stopping benefits and increasing benefits for those entering the employment sector.
Essentially, the idea should focus on helping to redirect individuals away from the routes that facilitate dependency and poverty. This framework should also provide people living in poverty an escape formula.
Feminism
Feminist theory can be viewed as an outgrowth of the mainstream campaign to empower women globally (O’Brien & Penna 1998). The objectives of feminism are to project the significance of women, to demonstrate that historically women have been inferior to men and create gender equality in a patriarchal society. In the United States, feminism emerged as early as the 1830s during the abolitionist movement. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott pioneered the first feminist campaign in Seneca Falls, New York in 1848. The discussion sought to address the social, civil, and educational state of women. Some of the key authors of who spearheaded for feminism include Joan Brumberg, Patricia Hill, and Sandra Harding.
Brumberg sought to track female plight of self-consciousness in the Western societies where women are highly concerned about the changes that happen during the natural growth (Spicker 2014). She argued that in the Western society the obsession with the female body is exaggerated. For instance, she identifies the media as an agent of culture that propagates the belief that an ideal woman has to strive for good looks than on good works.
Hill emphasizes on women’s self-definition and self-valuation. Hall seeks to address the political knowledge and stereotypical images of women. Harding believes that all males benefit from ascribed status, and no one is ready to renounce gender privilege. Hill argues that knowledge was created from a man’s view and thus is biased. Hill encourages women to unite enter science to generate unbiased standpoints.
Women are viewed as paid workers within the Welfare State. Women serve in different capacities including hospital cleaners, nurses, home assistants, social workers or as unpaid caregivers within the families. In the absence of women, the statutory social services could not progress. Women are also viewed as the main beneficiaries of the welfare system either as direct consumers or as negotiators on behalf of their families (Lister 2010).
On the contrary, men and welfare state create a contrasting impression. Men are seen as well-paid professional occupying executive positions. They are viewed as the group that influences policymaking as elites and government officials. These differing impressions may be viewed as stereotypes, but they bring up various questions concerning the relationship between women and the Welfare State. Feminism is organized around a common belief in the social, political, and economic equality of both sexes.
The existence of a patriarchal driven society continues to project the picture of the women as dependent and submissive beings (Castles 2002). When women are discouraged to work on the system, they become dependent on the welfare system. This problem further leads to lone parenthood. This new arrangement of the family is not self-sustaining since it tends to be dependent on the welfare society. In most cases, feminism appears to lead to the nightmare of unproductive dependant underclass rather than bringing the benefits it claims to spearhead. Women’s embrace for radical feminism seems to cause the shortage of men willing to marry. This perception underrates the reasons why men marry.
Women use the government to lobby for more programs to offer security for fear of divorce. Besides, due to the benefits system, women find some sort of financial security and fail to retrain themselves to evade causing expensive social damage. On the other hand, if workers are highly taxed to compensate for welfare or divorces, then they cannot manage to support families.
These issues can be addressed through establishing women empowerment welfares that encourage them to be innovative rather than turning against men in the society. The problem of inequality between men and women cannot be eliminated by replacing men in their positions (Fitzpatrick 2005). A better model should entail involving women in educative programs to enable them to find access to working opportunities.
Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism is a concept that has gained much attention in the past five decades. Neoliberalism is an ideology that is based on the inexorable truths regarding the contemporary economics. Neoliberalism suggests a reaffirmation of the fundamental beliefs of the liberal political economy that served as the prominent political ideology during the 19th century, particularly in Britain and the United States (Hilgers 2013). According to neoliberalism authors such as Adam Smith, the claims of political economy were founded on intuition and perceptions, as opposed to critical analysis.
Fredrich von Hayek offers an analysis of neoliberalism system in his book, The Road to Serfdom, by arguing that government planning to include benefits system among other welfare programs would cause a dependent society (Taylor 2007). He further argues that eliminating individualism would demoralize entrepreneurship since monopoly power is viewed as a source of efficiency and hard work. The ideological standpoint of liberalism faded towards the start of the 20th Century following the increasing demands for social reform spearheaded by the emergence of the organized working class. The liberal structure continued to serve as the ideal, but it was realized that the power of the market needed to be complemented by the guiding role of the state.
The Keynesian welfare state model that was seen as more systematic replaced gradual social reform of the first quarter of the 20th Century (Hilgers 2013). This model was based on the organized application of fiscal policy as a means of redistribution and regulation to restore the insufficiencies of the market. Neoliberalism views competition as the giving meaning to human interactions in the market economy.
Neoliberalism views the society as consumers, whose free choices are best influenced by the trends of the open market. Efforts to restrict competition are regarded as hostile to liberty. The efforts to undertake collective bargaining are viewed as market barriers that prevent the formation of a natural system of profit makers and losers. The market forces ensure that everyone receives what is worth their efforts.
These claims by neoliberalism can be said to manifest the extent of moral decline brought by the mainstream competition (Hilgers 2013). This individualism creates a capitalist system where structural unemployment is blamed on individuals rather than the system. This state of affairs increases the rate of dependency on the welfare system since the society consists of a few rich people and majority poor relying on the benefits system. This theory helps in understanding the role of the state in the economy by arguing that the state should reduce its intervention to the economic policies and encourage personal freedom.
Neoliberals such as Hayek suggests that since the reduction of trade barriers such as tariffs and quotas, global trade has been possible and has widened opportunities for many people (Long 2007). This aspect suggests that the state should abandon the welfare system since it serves to benefit the interests of the lazy and less aggressive people at the expense of the industrious working class.
To address these problems, neoliberalism theory suggests that the state should introduce measures that reward work and personal responsibility. Benefits should only be given on conditionality such as an inability to work due to physical incapacitation. Such conditionality will eliminate the culture of dependence. Positive behaviours such buying a house or saving for retirement should be rewarded rather than being sanctioned through taxes.
Recommendations and conclusion
The illustrated suggestions for structural reform present an opportunity to reassess the elements in the current welfare system. Creating incentives for people to work as well as creating positive behaviours for those who work is a desirable towards reducing dependency on the welfare system. Benefits systems should be coupled with conditionality that encourages people to work and contribute to a well-coordinated welfare system.
The government should seek to support many people into work by introducing a work programme, which addresses the causes of dependency, poverty, and the lack of skills among other problems experienced in the contemporary society.
Reference List
Castles, F 2002, The future of the welfare state: crisis myths & crisis realities, Cambridge University Press, London.
Fitzpatrick, T 2005, New Theories of Welfare, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
Hilgers, M 2013, ‘Embodying neoliberalism: thoughts and responses to critics’, Social Anthropology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 75-89.
Lister, R 2010, Understanding Theories & Concepts in Social Policy, Policy Press, Bristol.
Long, A 2007, ‘Stoic communitarianism and normative citizenship’, SOY Journal, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 241-261.
O’Brien, M & Penna, S 1998, Theorising welfare, Sage, London.
Spicker, P 2014, Social Policy Theory & Practice, Policy Press, Bristol.
Taylor, G, 2007, Ideology and Welfare, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.