Is the Welfare State the best way to solve social issues?

Résumé du document

All developed countries have adopted, at different levels and in different ways, the Welfare State as an instrument to solve social issues. Despite these differences, the logic of this instrument designed to tackle social problems is fairly the same everywhere. Nevertheless, this choice of a nation-wide instrument for solving social issues must be called into question, and the first question that should come is the following: Is the Welfare State a good thing? The fact that a large number of countries have adopted this method to deal with social issues does not mean that they were right in doing so. To establish whether the Welfare State is a good instrument or not, we must specify some fields that can help us to analyze that. This study will concentrate on three main aspects that often raise questions and comments, the economy, the social structure and ideology. Developing these different aspects will lead us to get an idea of the effects the Welfare State has on the society. In this study another question will be raised: Is the Welfare State the best way to solve social issues?

Extraits

[...] Is the Welfare State the best way to solve social issues? All developed countries have adopted, at different levels and in different ways, the Welfare State as an instrument to solve social issues. Despite these differences, the logic of this instrument designed to tackle social problems is fairly the same everywhere. Nevertheless, this choice of a nation-wide instrument for solving social issues must be called into question, and the first (maybe naïve) question that should come is the following: Is the Welfare State a good thing? [...]

[...] Economic changes and the development of the Welfare State in the second half of the 20th century brought “modernization” into developed countries' societies. The concept of “modernization” remains vague and it is difficult to assert what exactly it refers to. One school of though affirms that modern countries have reached a post-industrial and post-taylorist era, while the opposing one argues that the modernization is a continuation of the industrialization process and that the introduction of new technologies in the production process implemented what they call neo-taylorism. [...]

[...] Claus Offe highlights an important aspect of the Welfare State which is the process leading the State to submit individuals to itself. To benefit from some social services provided by the State, people have to prove that they need and/or deserve such benefits. Whoever receives any kind of provision from the State recognizes its power and accepts the “moral order” of the society, as he (or she) submits himself (or herself) to political and social standards the society and the State impose. [...]

[...] In such a process, the State tries to protect people in this unequal forces confrontation. A high level of de-commodification means that people are not as depending on the labour market as they used to because they benefit from State's transfers. The fact that people do not depend on the labour market as a main source of income anymore does not mean that they are autonomous. People that used to depend on the labour market can then depend on the State, and a new dependency process can develop. [...]

[...] The uncountable services they benefit from give them much more returns than what they are required to finance; these returns do not only take a financial form, but also more uncountable ones. For instance, making business in a democratic, peaceful and modern country is much easier than to make it in politically unstable States; this tends to prove that the environment (in which States have a large part of responsibility) is also an important element, among others, for companies. Saying that the Welfare State globally has positive effects on the economy does not mean that every kind of social policy has. [...]