1. In relation to welfare provision, why do you think that Brittan argued that there is “systematic upward bias to expectations” . How are VIAGRA, Higher Education and neonatal care examples of this?
In 1960s, the adverse effects of too much government expansion and spending in social services are felt in the form of declining in economic performance and rising standards of living. Upward bias was believed to aggravate these adverse effects instead of solving income inequality and poverty. The government afforded to provide social services despite financial bottleneck primarily because of expected returns of “good deeds” and its effect in the next election for every candidate. Politicians are viewed as opportunistic being in such a way that they used public money to obtain the sympathy of the voters. However, as they do this, the scope of welfare provision took over the capability of private sector to compete, stimulate consumption and wages and provide competitive services in which government services often lack. Neonatal care, which is very crucial as it involves child patient, should receive the most advance technologies for fast recovery and unquestioned due diligence in the part of medical practitioners. This should not be undermined due to political ideologies and future benefits of some individuals.
2. Describe what you understand by the concept of “Squaring the Welfare Circle”?
It can mean how the government funds welfare provisions. To be able to fit the circle into the square, the latter should have a larger surface area than the former. Unless the government will opt to collect higher taxes or obtain external debt, the square should be self-supporting. The government can adopt income-based model in which the circle is adjusted to the square. By doing this, it can reduce the need for dependency in other sources except on its own resources. However, due to the political structure of UK government in 1960s, the circle had come to the point of circling the square. This of course is an unlikely situation. In simple terms, the public is consuming more than it can chew. This can either result to swallowing the whole food or leave the uneaten ones until they expire. The question here is that is the public satisfied with the available food being supplied by the government? How about with inferior quality or other negative effects of post-consumption? In effect, the circle should be within the square not only for the sake macro-factors but more importantly for the sake of the freedom of micro-factors.
3. Provide one or two examples of how the concept applies to your experience of welfare and taxation. For example as a student, a parent, a patient, someone is working in the public sector etc.
Public services are oftentimes cheaper than private ones. This is the subsidy being applied by the government as a way to offset the tax being paid by the citizens. For a student enrolled in public schools, not only monetary subsidies are being held, but more significantly, their right to express their views in terms of new or modified school policies like tuition fees. They are under the extension of the government’s subsidy in its welfare provision. However, in times of recession, this can lead to students overpopulating public schools for the purpose of exploiting minimal fees or expressing their disgrace to the present government. Would the circle still be beyond the square dimensions if the outcome is both monetary and non-monetary jeopardy for the government? In the same manner, a patient may face the same implications of circle beyond the square scenario. The cheap hospital services provided by NHA program will drive private ones from operations, probably due to price discrimination of the former. In effect, the patient is left with minimal choices of public hospitals that are oftentimes having sub-optimal level of service. No body wants their health to be simply judged by savings particularly when most of the population can afford a more service-oriented approach to health. Thus, another review for government to pump-prime the economy and not become the economy.
4. Summarize either the left wing or the right wing critique of the welfare state that emerged during 1970s?
The left wing blame the fall of manufacturing industry due to excessive public spending. This is associated with earlier prediction that a rise in public expenditure leads to economic problems. Further, it is dubbed as discouragement for private investments and fall of profits with simultaneously increasing wages and taxes. There is also minimal control on the mobility of workers to transfer to service sector, thus, weakening the production capability of the country. On the other hand, the right wing critique combined the shortfall of welfare state in both political and economic lenses. In effect, it does not only address the increasing bargaining power of labor unions but more importantly the over reliance of the public to the government.
5. Why do you think politicians consider it important to attempt to Square the Welfare Circle and create an affordable welfare state?
Politicians are responsible for the general welfare of the public particularly in the areas of security, education, health, housing and other public infrastructures. However, private decisions should not be curtailed by the government since people have their own value judgments that are not parallel to those what the government prioritizes. Thus, squaring the circle is necessary to weight the benefits and costs of public expansion or contraction. It will not only create affordable welfare estate, but more importantly, those which directly satisfies the need of the people. If the economy is in boom, it is unlikely to demand public service due to price rather private service due to quality.
6. What do you think are the implications of this debate for youth & community work?
The debate affects youth because they are the future leaders of the country. It will stimulate their decision-making capabilities due to present experience. It will also provide them enough inputs on how to address public needs with an specific amount of budget in order to prevent adverse effects of welfare provision against the private sector. For the community workers, this will aid the scope of their public service participation. This can be the third sector that serves as the bridge of public and private agencies. They can be the best tool to limit government intervention due to strong private investments or otherwise. Being in the middle, they can serve as expansionary risk hedgers.
0 comments:
Post a Comment