Introduction
As a scholar in political science, Jacob hacker has significantly made ideological contributions in social, economic and health concerns of United States. The professor from Yale explained how the shift in social welfare policies has affected both private health cover structure and public pension plan. Hacker spent a greater part of his life in research works studying how pension and healthcare are affected by social and economic policies. He used qualitative method in his research studies that provided him an outstanding knowledge for drafting books and articles containing credited policy arguments.
Divergence in Social Welfare Policies
Hacker was concerned about America’s economic policies for social plan. He complained that USA social plans were not extensively integrated in American economic policies. This came as a surprise since many other similar economies overwhelmingly incorporated social agendas in their economic policies. He never understood why US (capitalist state) does not provide adequate health cover to its subjects especially at a time when citizens desperately needed these social policies. Hacker was concerned about US social programs and stressed that public policies to protect social plans were missing yet by history US citizens exceedingly depended on this programs. In summary, he suggested that governmental public policies will never be recognized without adequate inclusion of social privileges (health subsidies, pensions).
Effects on Health Insurance System
The effects of above mentioned neglects by the government are being impacted on the common individual causing a shift in their well-being and living standard. Insurance systems and public pension programs are some of the worst hit sectors of the economy that influence citizens’ well-being. In extension to this, the shift by public policies poses a threat to individuals’ economic status, which is further stressed by inadequate pension and health cover. Hacker noted that, the impacts are not only felt in offices but also by families at home. The undisputed negative impact comes in handy with the reduced government subsidies in health and pension cover. A policy that is too unfortunate to citizens, yet structured by persons who are expected to support them. The impacts begin with a massive reduction of health care and income securities followed by reduced pensions. Consequently, citizens will have to spend more on health to fill in the gaps that were neglected by government public policies. Additionally, the economy will experience hiking health insurance premiums forcing citizens to dig deeper into their pockets for sustenance of health cover. This may be, unfortunate, on low-income earners as they may not be able to afford expensive insurance premiums. As a result, insurance companies may experience a substantial decrease customer consequently registering loses or decreased revenues. On the other hand, health condition of the less fortunate citizens will extensively deteriorate since they cannot afford healthcare cost.
Effects on Public Pension Program
The effects of twisted government policies were also registered in the public pension scheme. Same as in insurance cover, persons to bare the consequences of the policy are the US citizens. Hacker explained how individuals will experience a reduction in their payable retirement pension. An effect resulting from reduced governmental subsidies on pension schemes that directly impact on economic stability of the US citizens. As a matter of fact, this will not only affect aging persons but will also impact on office employees. Furthermore, when analyzing the effects critically, the impacts extend to even persons at home i.e. dependant of persons under pension. The aged will deteriorate economically while on the other hand, future income security of employees’ will be at great risk since it cannot be guaranteed.
Absurdity in Social Policies
In his book, Hacker finds it senseless; the way government handles policies on social programs. He never understood why the US social programs were inadequately integrated in national public policies yet other similar economies invested more on social programs. In fact, to him it was exceptionally weird to implement such policies when US economy faced serious problems. Hacker never understood why the government spent less on social programs yet it was the exact moment when its citizen needed reliable health cover and pension programs.
Under social assessment, there is a clear distinction between pension and healthcare with different provisions for each. Unfortunately, this was not considered in public policies by the fact that provision on pension was relatively higher as compared to healthcare provisions. This seemed senseless to hacker since he never understood why the government spent less in healthcare even after the establishment of Medicaid and treatment for old age. Additionally, it proved absurd to hacker that most finances of the healthcare system were used to manage its administration instead of providing medical services to citizens. Furthermore, it is much more meaningless for healthcare system to spend more on administrative cost especially under limited financial support.
“Privatization of Risk”
Hacker as a scholar gave a vivid explanation on “privatization of risk”. He explained how the state diverted its burden to the public especially at the point when the public was economically troubled. This is seen when the government reduces expenditure on medical and pension cover via its economic policies. Such an act by the government, unfortunately, shifts the burden from to the public who in full effect bares the consequences. Since the policies were to subsidize health and pension programs, withdrawal by the government implies that families and institution will inherit the burden to cover the gap left by the government.
A reduction in health subsidies implies that the public will have to dig deeper into their pockets so as to maintain their health. This will be by the fact that insurance premiums will be inflated as a result of government’s withdrawal. Furthermore, the burden may be unbearable to the less fortunate since they may unable to afford the expensive medical cost or medical insurance premiums. A shift by the government on pension programs means that the public will have to bare the load, an effect that compromises their economic stability. This will significantly affect the aging persons since they may not be able to, adequately, provide for their families or even themselves. Additionally, the shift will also be diverted to institutions such as companies or organization that provide employment to the public. Companies will have to adjust to the situation by either shifting the burden to public or bare part of the impact caused by the government’s withdrawal.
Conclusion
It is essential to understand the importance of social programs and how it impacts on different economical aspects. This is seen by hacker’s advocacy on adequate integration of social programs on public expenditures as a way of improving a country social strength. It is imperative to note that neglecting expenditure on social programs negatively impact on not only individuals but also the overall economy thus should be given adequate consideration. This is by the fact that the government burden will be shifted to the public and institution (persons who are not responsible for government acts).