Good Welfare State Essay Example

Introduction

The World War II has essentially created a platform for the reforms in the political and socioeconomic affairs of the countries across the world with most of them making a clear insight of the requirement for policy shifts aiming at growth and sustainability. The simultaneous emergence of the globalisation of economy and rapid industrialisation prospects required the nations to induct wider and comprehensive socioeconomic visions for the handling the prospective changes. As a result of these strategic redefinition processes, the new and universally accepted theory of Welfare State emerged as the messiah for the deprived and undersized economies. The worldwide response to the Welfare State propaganda was generally promising but for a few nations whose socio-cultural norms challenged the ethical fitness of by calling the socioeconomic equality advocated by the new proposal unfair for fear of the mismanagement of their human capital. The context of Brazil is one of such example economies where the concept of Welfare State concept favourably matched its expected socioeconomic deliverance quality. This paper will critically examine the Brazilian context of the Welfare State reform model reflecting in the socioeconomic wellbeing of its population by identify the facts and figures associated with the successful outcome of the efforts made under the guidelines of this concept.

In response to the World War II, that made many people deprived and poor, the Liberal politician William Beveridge proposed a new concept called welfare state which according to him was a potential concept to address the five ‘giants on the road of reconstruction’ including poverty, disease, ignorance, squalor, and idleness (BBC, 2014). In the years following the World War II, the British Labour government took intense efforts to implement this concept in a broad sense.
The concept of welfare state can be simply referred to a specific socio-economic scenario in which the state plays a key role in the protection and enhancement of the economic as well as social uplift of its citizens (Lister & Pia, 2008, p.111). The principle of equal distribution of wealth and opportunity is fundamental to the idea of welfare state, and this concept makes the public responsible for those who are unable to enjoy the minimal provisions of a quality life. According to the sociologist T.H Marshall, a unique combination of democracy, welfare, and capitalism constitutes the concept of welfare state (cited Robinson et al, 2007, p.301). The welfare state is characterised with the flow of funds from the state to different public service sectors such as healthcare and education and to the individual beneficiaries. Under this concept, a state is funded through redistributionist taxation, which is a taxation approach where people with higher incomes are required to pay a larger income tax called progressive tax (Mordini & Tzovaras, 2012, p.4). Taxation and welfare provisions depend significantly on robust systems of personal identification; and undoubtedly, this taxation policy is really helpful to minimise the income gap between the rich and poor (ibid).

Lessons from Welfare State

The concept of welfare state has had a range of positive as well as negative effects. The most notable positive impact of welfare state is that taxes and transfers helped many countries that followed this concept to reduce poverty considerably and improve their citizens’ living standards. This concept can assure individuals a minimum quality of living even if they put themselves in a bad situation because of their own fault. Hence, people can comfortably lead a pressureless life at the cost of the state. Another positive effect identified is that welfare state is able to guarantee social security when there is a decline in market income as a result of issues such as unemployment, sickness, accident or old age (Eibel, et al. 2013, p.2). As this system reduces social disparities by offering citizens free access to basic services like healthcare and education, it plays a significant role in preventing social exclusion; and to a large extent, the idea of welfare state was effective to reduce gender inequality and to promote women empowerment (Ibid). Many scholars suggest that introduction of the welfare state system benefited many countries to implement a fair taxation policy. The welfare state ideology helped nations to curb the unwanted effects of the market economy on their people. Another fruitful effect of this concept is that it promoted strong labour movements which in turn contributed to better living and working conditions of the working class.
Although the principle of equality was fundamental to the idea of welfare state, this concept actually failed to prevent the growth of inequality. When this concept offered the whole population free access to schooling, healthcare, and a better standard of housing and thereby guaranteed a minimum security for all, it could not enhance the value of equality. As Glennerster (2008) of the Institute of Historical Research points out, opponents of the welfare state argued that permanent changes to the unequal structures of power and income could be achieved only if there is a public ownership of industry and the banks. According to the writer, economists identified that the concept of welfare state advantaged the middle class most when it paid relatively less attention to the social uplift of the poor class. To illustrate, the poorer manual class had free access to primary medical care, hospital care, and elementary education even before the World War II (Ibid). Hence, the extension of these benefits to the whole population really benefited the middle and higher income groups most when it contributed nearly nothing to the socio-economic development of the poor class. When trying to establish an expensive welfare state, countries were forced to raise huge additional funds that could have utilised for the betterment of the low income class (Ibid).
Similarly, another unintended benefit of welfare state is that it encourages people to ignore the basic moral principle that it is unfair to live at others’ expense; and this moral principle “distinguishes a barbaric social order from a civilised one” (Otteson, 2011). Since it is considered a general default moral principle in most of the human societies, the morality of able-bodied adults will be compromised if they prefer to live at the unwilling expense of others (Ibid). In other words, people certainly have no such rights. This is the reason why forced labour and slavery are wrong. Although forced labour and slavery may be inexpensive and efficient to improve productivity, these practices are morally wrong because one does not have the right over others’ time, talents, and treasure (Ibid). As everyone has the right to enjoy sovereignty over oneself, an individual should not be used for others’ purposes without his/her voluntary consent. When people are allowed to freely access healthcare and education under the welfare state approach, they actually live at the expense of others or the state directs persons’ efforts at the wellbeing of others. Evidently, this situation appears to be a negative effect of the welfare state.

Welfare State and Current Day Brazilian Development

While analysing the contemporary Brazilian development, it seems that the lessons of the post war welfare state were beneficial to the country’s overall socio-economic growth. As discussed already, the idea of welfare state failed to prevent the growth of inequality although it guaranteed a minimum social benefit for all. The Brazilian government clearly identified the concept’s failure in managing the equality of powers and incomes and made necessary arrangements to address this issue. The government’s operations that focused particularly on the lessons of the post war welfare state assisted the country to reduce inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, from 0.59 in 2001 to 0.53 in 2007 (Hailu & Soares, 2009). It is identified that improvements in education contributed greatly to a drop in the country’s poverty rate. Going back to early and mid 1990s, it seems that Brazilian workforce gained more equal access to education, and this situation helped country to build a skilled and quality workforce able to contribute notably to the country’s overall GDP (Ibid). In addition to demographic trends like decrease in family size and improvements in family dependency ration, better access to education greatly benefited the country to reduce its inequality rate. According to the International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (as cited in Hailu & Soares, 2009), the effect of better access to education on primary income distribution was estimated 0.2 on a Gini scale per year from 1995 onwards. In addition, the direct cash flows from the state to families and individuals played a notable role in improving the inequality status of Brazil because these cash flows or transfers were beneficial to improve secondary income distribution in the country (Ibid). To illustrate, “a rise in the minimum wage leads to an increase in various transfers, such as the lowest level of the contributory pension system, partially contributory rural pensions, and non-contributory income substitution for those who are unable to work and who live in poor families” (Hailu & Soares, 2009). Likewise, conditional cash transfers like Bolsa Familla, also devote notable amounts directly to the poorest families. These changes were capable of reducing the inequality in Brazil by another 0.2 Gini points per year (Ibid). Evidences suggest that lessons from the post war welfare state really assisted the Brazilian government to implement strategies that could improve the inequality status of the country. The most highlighting point is that such strategies considerably contributed to the income growth of the poor class. Statistical data indicate that the income growth of the bottom six deciles in Brazil has been apparent since 2001 whereas improvements in the income of the top four deciles became noticeable only after 2004; and the bottom six deciles that constituted only 18% of the income contributed to 40% of the total income growth during the period 2001-2007 (Hailu & Soares, 2009). Although the inequality rate of Brazil still seems to be high, noticeable progresses are being made toward reducing it. Various structural changes made by the Brazilian government to the distribution of income and power based on the lessons from the welfare state aided the country to manage the severe pressures of the recent global financial crisis effectively. In short, the rate of inequality in Brazil has improved to a position where the country can respond to external market opportunities and challenges efficiently without giving increased focus to the effects on the poor class.
Similarly, the current Brazilian development focuses on the moral philosophy that no one lives at the unwilling expense of others. This ethical principle is particularly emphasised because of the unintended effects of the post war welfare state on the fundamental societal norms. According to the Brazilian social security benefits policy, individuals who contribute to the Social Welfare Fund are only entitled to receive the payments of social security benefits under the provisions such as maternity, long-term sickness, temporary incapacity or accident, pensions, imprisonment, death, and low-income families (Anglo info, n.d.). Through this policy, the Brazilian government tries to ensure that an individual’s efforts would not be exploited for the wellbeing of other like that happened under the welfare state approach. To illustrate, the Brazilian maternity benefits policy states that women who contribute to the Social Welfare system are entitled to receive paid maternity leave for 120 days; this provision is also applicable to women who choose to adopt a baby (Anglo info, n.d.). In 2008, the number of paid days of maternity leave was extended from 120 to 180 although the extended 60 days have set to be optional for private companies; and, the long-term sickness benefit is offered to entrepreneurs, employers, and individual workers who are unable to work for more than 15 consecutive days due to illness or accident (Ibid). The beneficiaries may receive payments under the sickness benefits provision only if they have been contributing to the Social Welfare Fund for a minimum of one year. The sickness benefits payments may be up to 91 percent of the recipient’s salary (Ibid). Workers may receive disability benefits if they are no longer fit to work due to an accident or illness. To be eligible for receiving this benefit, an individual must have paid his/her contributions to the Social Welfare Fund for at least one year (an exception is provided in the event of an accident) (ibid). Men who retire at the age of 65 and women who retire at 60 are entitled to receive pension benefits given that they must have contributed to the Social Welfare Fund for a minimum period, depending on whether the occupation is considered arduous or not (Ibid). Hence, it is clear that different kinds of social benefits would be offered to people in Brazil only if they have met the minimum contribution criteria and term. This approach benefits the country to ensure that individuals’ earnings are not utilized to promote the wellbeing and socio-economic uplift of others. Simply, every Brazilian lives at his/her own expense.
However, the Brazilian government failed to notice the lessons of the post war welfare state when it comes to alleviating poverty. To explain, the concept of welfare state had benefited many nations to improve the poverty rate significantly and to reduce the gap between the poor and rich. Though the Brazil could not capitalize on this concept to improve its poverty status, and therefore Brazil is still known to be a country with high poverty rate in South America. Slums in Brazil’s metropolitan areas and below-par living standards of its people reflect the intensity of poverty in the country. A World Bank study (as described in Global giving UK (n.d.) revealed that nearly 20 million Brazilians earn only less $1 a day (Boston College). The issue of child poverty is also hitting the country very badly. According to UNICEF, approximately 42% of the Brazilian children live in poverty and about one eighth of the children live on the streets (Ibid). The increased poverty rate in Brazil can be attributed to the Brazilian government’s low and ineffective funding for poverty alleviation programs.

Conclusion

The immediate economic renaissance became the tough challenge before the nations across the world after the World War II. The fiscal policies of the nations designed various guiding principles and implemented them towards achieving the immediate resurgence of the lost wealth and with independent efforts. The subsequent emergence of the concept of Welfare State achieved remarkable popularity among the governments of global nations, and most of them progressed on the guiding principles of the new socioeconomic philosophy. Brazil has overcome most of the challenges and doubtful concerns about the adverse impact of the new concept on the human resource capital. However, there is a claim that the benefit of the new changes was limited to the working class as the government control on the policies continued to fail at delivering the desired effectiveness on the alleviation of poverty.

References

Anglo info. Social Security Benefits. Available at: http://brazil.angloinfo.com/money/social-security/entitlements-benefits/
BBC. The Welfare State. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/britain/welfarestaterev1.shtml
Boston College. Canter for Work and Family. Available at: http://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/centers/cwf/research/publications/pdf/BCCWF_EBS-Brazil.pdf
Eibel et al (2013) Welfare State at Risk: Rising Inequality in Europe. US: Springer Science & Business Media.
Global giving UK. Help Street Youth In Brazil Earn A Living. Available at: http://www.globalgiving.co.uk/projects/help-street-youth-in-brazil-earn-a-living/
Glennerster H (2008) Why did the post-war welfare state fail to prevent the growth of inequality? Institute of Historical Research. Available at: http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/glennersterh.html
Hailu D & Soares SD (2009) What Explains the Decline in Brazil’s Inequality? Available at: http://www.ipc-undp.org/pub/IPCOnePager89.pdf
Lister M & Pia E (2008) Citizenship in Contemporary Europe. Edinburgh University Press.
Mordini E & Tzovaras D (2012) Second Generation Biometrics: The Ethical, Legal and Social Context: The Ethical, Legal and Social Context. US: Springer Science & Business Media.
Otteson J (April 25, 2011) The Unintended Consequences Of The Welfare State. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/2011/04/25/welfare-labor-immoral.html
Robinson et al (Eds.) (2007) Global Health and Global Aging. US: John Wiley & Sons.