A Comparative Analysis of the Welfare States of Germany, Sweden, and the United States

Résumé du document

A welfare-state is a state in which organized power is used to provide social services to a society that cannot provide these things for itself through market-based transactions. Studying the welfare-states of Germany, Sweden and the United States will provide us a valuable perspective in understanding how the state's role in a capitalist democracy affects the security, safety and overall well-being of all its citizens. The following paper seeks to examine how the welfare-states in these three nations have evolved and how the differences in their structures have impacted the socio-economic makeup of each modern society. One must acknowledge that the welfare-states of Germany, Sweden and the United States are embodied in the ideologies of three distinct welfare regimes namely the conservative regime, the social-democratic regime and the liberal regime. The ideals of these three welfare-states differ fundamentally and it is essential to our analysis to understand how and why they have historically emerged.

Extraits

[...] In fact, the greater inequality in the U.S. does not stem from the top quintile being particularly wealthy relative to the median, but more so from the bottom quintile being particularly poor. The paradox of such high levels of poverty existing in the richest nation in the world lend substantial weight to the argument that such social stratification is a direct result of a liberal, labor commodifying welfare-state. Stratification is highest in the U.S., where the middle- and upper-classes rely on private market assistance, and it is lowest in Sweden, where generous, universalistic policies offer all citizens an alternative to market-based survival. [...]

[...] Domhoff notes, “because they [the upper-class] are unable to overcome the subtle effects of their socialization on their bearing and manner, there is often tension between them and their working-class allies, who become suspicious of their motives and envious of their backgrounds. In turn, the upper-class radicals become weary of being mistrusted and grow impatient with the hesitancy of the constituency they are trying to lead” (Domhoff, 40). This further demonstrates the repression of class politics and class coalition building that exists in the United States. The combined effects of slavery and the U.S. Constitution's bias towards the capitalist class have been profound on the shaping of the American welfare-state. [...]

[...] Thus, the social-democratic model emphasizes the importance of the state's role in providing a universal level of program benefits to all citizens in order to combat the consequences of market failures, i.e. the existence of poverty, and to unite all classes under one umbrella of social welfare. The Commodification of Labor When examining the causes of welfare-states, it is fundamental to acknowledge how labor has become commodified throughout history and how this has led to the need for government assistance in supporting individuals' means of subsistence. [...]

[...] Minimal, short-term benefits are offered to the poor and unemployed, meager benefits are offered to the elderly, and virtually no benefits whatsoever are offered to the sick. The result is a society whose middle- and upper- classes are forced to turn to the private sector for welfare provisions, while the lower-class is stigmatized as indolent and becomes economically stratified due to their lack of private benefit opportunities. Thus, the liberal welfare-state fully encourages the commodification of labor, since this maximizes the incentive to work while maintaining a level of poverty that borders on the brink of political viability. [...]

[...] provides its workers with two-thirds of their average weekly earnings while Germany and Sweden revert back to their unlimited sickness benefit structure. It should also be noted that, as of 1991, only 44% of the U.S. population was covered by government health insurance, whereas 92% of the German and 100% of the Swedish population were covered (Hacker). Thus, it is only in the United States that the population is truly left to take care of themselves through market-based coverage. One is eligible for pension insurance in Germany after 45 years of contributions, in Sweden it has gone from 20 years to 30 years in the period from 1974 to 2000, and in the U.S. [...]