Suchergebnisse

Discusses the fate of the welfare state in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The unbridled neoliberalism practiced by the FRG has meant industrial reconstruction geared toward the vested interests of major capital owners, resulting in mass umemployment, dismantling of the welfare state, undermining of national wage agreements, higher taxes, & lowering of safety standards. It is argued that the West German welfare state had begun to crack long before unification as structural changes led to massive long-term unemployment, higher taxes on wages, & lower taxes on business. The backlash against neoliberalism has been sporadic due to worker fears of unemployment, & the collaboration of the media in furthering the elite's goals. M. Greenberg

Suggests that it would be more appropriate to think in terms of a 'development crisis' rather than in terms of a questioning of the system as a whole: the essential services the welfare state renders must not be lost sight of, despite their defects and present problems. Two main aspects of this developmental crisis have come to the fore: a financial crisis, and a crisis in terms of effeciency/effectiveness. (JLN)

'CRISIS? WHAT CRISIS?', THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER was reported to have replied to a question concerning the alleged crisis in sterling. In the case of the welfare state it might seem that the appropriate response would be 'Which crisis? ' since there are several on the menu - fiscal crisis, legitimacy crisis, crisis of ungovernability . Left, Right and Centre have become convinced that there is a crisis. This is after a period of history which had seen an unprecedented rise in the standard of living of the vast majority of the population living in what are normally regarded as welfare states.

Suggestions for welfare reform are offered & the welfare debate, from the early 1960s to the present, is reviewed, showing that the Left was largely silenced in the debate by its own loss of confidence in the idea of the welfare state. It is argued that the two most pressing problems in contemporary welfare programs -- inadequate benefits & the demeaning treatment of beneficiaries -- will not be solved by decentralization, universalization, or community participation. Federal income maintenance programs are advocated because they are more equitable & less susceptible to local business pressures & the politics of resentment that is encouraged by regressive state tax policies. It is concluded that welfare reform should begin with the restoration of benefits in the means-tested & unemployment programs that bear directly on labor power & class inequalitites. W. Howard

Examines the far-reaching & often disastrous impacts of the 1996 replacement of the federal Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) program & the JOBS (Job Opportunities & Basic Skills) program with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant, which gives federal funds to states to administer their own programs of limited benefits & stringent workfare requirements. This change may force millions of people into the desperate poverty that results from minimum-wage, no-benefit jobs, & will likely displace some higher-paid workers. Corporations see federal disinvolvement in welfare operations as an opportunity to reap the financial benefits of privatization proposals. Such attitudes have created the necessary conditions for the development of oppositional grassroots & legislative efforts, & popular resistance in the form of coalitions of workfare mothers, union members, feminists, low-income women, single parents, senior citizens, & minority groups & community organizations dedicated to obtaining health care, housing, child care, & education for those who need it. B. Wolfe

THE WELFARE STATE IS OFTEN ACCUSED OF BEING COUNTERPRODUCTIVE: AS THE SCOPE OF PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY EXPANDS, PRIVATE MORALITY ATROPHIES. THIS ESSAY SURVEYS PSYCHOLOGICAL FINDINGS FOR EVIDENCE, WHICH TURNS OUT TO BE BROADLY CONSISTENT WITH EITHER OF TWO MODELS OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT, EACH BEARING DISTINCT POLICY IMPLICATIONS. THE MODEL OF "MORALLY KEEPING IN PRACTICE" THAT IS IMPLICIT IN THE TERM "MORAL ATROPHY" SUGGESTS THE NEED FOR FREQUENT OPPORTUNITIES TO EXERCISE MORAL SKILLS, WHICH WOULD SEEM INCONSISTENT WITH THE WELFARE STATE. ALTERNATIVELY, THE MODEL OF MORAL CHARACTER-BUILDING FAVORED BY BOTH PHILOSOPHERS AND ORDINARY DISCOURSE WOULD REQUIRE ONLY OCCASIONAL REMINDERS OF ONE'S MORAL PRINCIPLES. ON THIS MODEL, BENEVOLENCE COULD USEFULLY SUPPLEMENT THE WELFARE STATE.