Suchergebnisse

The welfare state in the UK & elsewhere is currently caught up in a number of crises. The slowing of economic growth has reduced the resources available for its support & has consequently exposed it to theoretical challenges. In particular, it has been criticized as seeking to fulfill needs that are in fact illimitable. In addition, market & liberation theorists have suggested that the welfare state is hostile to individual autonomy & responsibility, & serves the interests of welfare professionals more than those of the poor. It appears, however, that fundamental changes in policy are less likely than incremental readjustments. The issues raised by this crisis concern the basic nature of the relation of society to state, & of both to the individual. W. H. Stoddard

Abstract
In his libertarian manifesto, For a New Liberty, Murray Rothbard [15] points to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as an excellent model for what a private welfare program would look like in a free society. In analyzing this same organization, we can see that nearly 50 years later Rothbard's analysis is truer than ever. Unlike the public welfare programs in the U.S., the LDS church has successfully helped lift countless individuals out of poverty and off the welfare rolls by increasing their level of productivity – a point that Henry Hazlitt [7] made in his book, The Conquest of Poverty. Public welfare, on the other hand, has continuously failed to increase the standard of living or even lift those it ostensibly seeks to help out of poverty; on the contrary, it is a system that prevents economic independence. The analysis in the present paper seeks to revive, amplify and bring up to date Rothbard's observation and provide further insight on key factors that other private organizations can take from the Church's model. Ultimately, it reveals that the successful journey out of poverty is not a public but rather a private endeavor.

Feminists' engagement with contemporary US welfare reform is investigated. Although the Personal Responsibility Act is interpreted as an aggressive affront to women's rights, it is asserted that US feminists offer little resistance to the welfare reform policy. Rather than advocate women's choice to work either inside or outside the home, feminists are delineated as only supporting wage-earning employment for women. It is contended that feminists' attention to welfare reform emphasizes female recipients' personal deficiencies rather than problems with the welfare system. Moreover, emphasis on female recipients' decision making supports the dominant position that individuals who require financial support are morally deficient. Even though the termination of welfare is viewed as a positive objective, it is stated that poor women's input in ending welfare is needed. Therefore, women's domestic caregiving should be recognized as a legitimate form of work, & women's participation in the labor market must be rendered a more meaningful experience. 8 References. J. W. Parker

'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.