The Free-Market Family

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Social Contract ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Work And Family ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Family Ties

This book critiques the expectation embodied in American public policy today that families will privately provide the resources and circumstances they and their members need through the market and without the help of government. This expectation, it argues, is eroding the well-being of American families across the economic spectrum. Free-market family policy, it asserts, is undermining the promise of the American Dream, which envisions a social order that helps all people reach their full potential and that supports the opportunity for all to lead rich, fulfilling lives. Without thriving families, children can’t reach their full promise; nor can most adults live happy lives without strong family ties. Despite this, under free-market family policy, market forces are decimating the well-being of families. Part I demonstrates how the rising economic inequality and insecurity of the past several decades are making it increasingly difficult for family members to reconcile work and family, are destabilizing marriages and cohabiting relationships among poor and working-class adults, and are making it impossible for families at all income levels to secure for their children the circumstances they need to flourish. Part II shows that, for much of our nation’s history, government’s responsibility to buffer families from market forces was considered a key part of the social contract. It is only in recent decades that free-market family policy has supplanted this social contract. Part III considers how the United States can construct an economy that supports families and truly enables them to thrive.

America’s Free-Market Family Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-42
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Leave ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Market Policy ◽  
Child Benefits ◽  
The Government

This chapter contrasts two models of the role that government can play with respect to families. Free-market family policy, which the United States has adopted, is premised on the view that all government needs to do to support sound families is to support strong markets, which will in turn benefit families. In contrast, pro-family policy, which other countries have adopted, is based on the idea that families do better when the government actively supports them. Pro-family policy considers markets an important tool for distributing the resources that families need, but it regulates them to reduce economic inequality and insecurity and institutes programs like paid family leave, paid vacation, universal childcare, and child benefits. Of the two types of policies, free-market policy leaves families more vulnerable to market forces. That creates devastating problems for families when economic inequality and insecurity increase, as they have in the United States.

Insulating Families from Market Forces—The Rise of the Welfare State

2020 ◽  
pp. 159-175
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Free Market Economy ◽  
Separate Spheres ◽  
The Government ◽  
The New Deal

This chapter shows that the constant in America’s relationship with markets hasn’t been the acceptance of a free-market economy, but rather the belief that the economy should serve the interests of families. The nineteenth-century rise of the market economy in the United States, it demonstrates, was accompanied by the rise of a set of beliefs that historians call the “ideology of separate spheres.” This ideology sold Americans on the market economy by claiming that it would help families thrive. By the end of the nineteenth century, though, it became clear that the market was failing to deliver on this promise for working-class families. Reformers then called for the government to step in to use regulation to support the promise that the market would protect families. The New Deal arose out of that view of the government’s role. For much of the twentieth century, the government’s responsibility to safeguard the well-being of families against harmful market forces was a fundamental part of our nation’s social contract.

The First Phase of the Empire State’s “Triple Transition”: Banks’ Influence on the Market, Democracy, and Federalism in New York, 1776–1838

1997 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 521-558
Author(s):  
Robert E. Wright
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Party Politics ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Bank Account ◽  
Access To Credit ◽  
Market Democracy

The story usually goes something like this: Colonial Americans lived in a world very different from that of the generation that fought the Civil War. Locals wielded the tools of government most of the time; rarely did distant officials attempt control, and when they did they were usually roundly rebuffed. Politicians “stood” for positions of honor rather than “running” for lucrative posts. A man’s surname was a crucial determinant of his socioeconomic well-being. Artisans and yeomen deferred to gentlemen. Barter predominated as little “cash” circulated. Custom and family, not market forces, dictated the allocation of credit. Change of all types occurred slowly. By Martin Van Buren’s presidency some threescore years later, America was a very different place. Though still evolving, the United States exuded modernity, at least in its general outlines. Politicians and bureaucrats in state capitals, and even Washington, increasingly affected Americans’ everyday lives. Party politics and patronage took on increased importance as plutocrats plied for patronage posts. A man’s bank account meant more than his lineage. Gentlemen feared the artisans and yeomen they once easily ruled. Cash was abundant, and the market determined most access to credit. Societal conditions changed apace. Generally speaking, over these decades America is described as becoming less “aristocratic” and “mercantile,” or even “feudal,” and more “democratic” and “capitalist.”

The Death of the Welfare State and the Rise of Free-Market Family Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 176-192
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Welfare Reform ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Free Market ◽  
The United States ◽  
Basic Function ◽  
False Belief ◽  
Government Support ◽  
The Government ◽  
Families With Children ◽  
Government Benefits

This chapter shows how, in the last decades of the twentieth century, the United States abandoned its view that insulating families from harm by market forces was a basic function of government. This shift began in the early 1970s. At that time, it had looked like the government would move further toward protecting families by enacting two proposed pieces of legislation: a guaranteed income plan for families with children and universal daycare. Both plans ultimately failed, however. Their failure was partly a product of happenstance, but two other forces were also at work. The first of these was the growing—but false—belief that government support for families weakened them, whereas markets made them strong. The second was the rising racist—and equally false—belief that the majority of government benefits were going to undeserving African Americans. These forces coalesced in the passage of welfare reform in 1996 and gave rise to the free-market family policy we have today.

How We Fail Our Children Part I—The Caretaking Young Children Need

2020 ◽  
pp. 92-118
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Early Childhood Development ◽  
Free Market ◽  
The United States ◽  
Work Hours ◽  
Childhood Development ◽  
High Quality

A question for any thriving society is how to ensure that children have the things they need to do their best. Two different approaches, pro-family policy and free-market family policy, claim to satisfy children’s needs well. Countries with pro-family policy go out of their way to make it easy for parents to spend time with their children when kids most need it, as well as to provide them high-quality caretaking while parents work, and generous material support. In contrast, under free-market family policy, the United States expects parents to negotiate these conditions on their own, privately arranging for time off from work, reasonable work hours, caregiving while they work, and enough cash to support their kids. This chapter uses recent research on early childhood development to construct a list of the caretaking conditions that help young children thrive. It then considers the extent to which children receive these conditions under free-market family policy versus pro-family policy. Ultimately, it turns out that by far the biggest casualties of free-market family policy are our children.

What Went Wrong with the American Dream?

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-18
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Academic Achievement ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
American Dream ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Ties ◽  
American Children ◽  
Deaths Of Despair

This chapter considers a number of indicators relating to the well-being of American children and adults in order to examine the extent to which the American Dream is fulfilling its promise. For children, it considers levels of happiness, academic achievement, mental health, and economic mobility. For adults, it considers happiness, mental health, and life expectancy (including the rise of “deaths of despair”). All these indicators show that the United States is failing radically with respect to both children’s and adults’ well-being. These results are not surprising, the last section of the chapter shows, when we take into account the health of the nation’s families. Neither adults nor children can thrive without sound family ties. Yet indicators show that American families are in bad shape, and in considerably worse shape than families in other countries.

Impact of Policy on the Family: Can the Family Be Strengthened by Legislation?

1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stella R. Quah
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Family

AbstractThe present interest on the family in Singapore is shared by other countries. There is continuous discussion on the effects of legislation on the family both in Europe and in the United States. The concern is primarily with family well-being and with the search for effective strategies to attain it. This search leads to the question: can the family be strengthened by legislation? The aim of this paper is to suggest a qualified answer to this question based on our own and other nations' experiences. The discussion will be divided into three parts. The first part is a brief review of what is meant by family and family policy. The second part deals with the situation of family and policy in Singapore and discusses some direct and indirect policies affecting the family. The third and final part draws some lessons for the 1980s.

How a Comparative Study of Childhood Became a Story of Global Crisis

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
Barbara Bennett Woodhouse
Keyword(s):  
Free Market ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Environmental Crisis ◽  
Adult Health ◽  
Childhood Experiences ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Mass Migration ◽  
Adverse Childhood

Chapter one provides a chronological account of the evolution of the project. It began in 2008 as a study comparing Italy’s social welfare approach and with the United States’ free market approach, to explore how social polices affect the ecology of childhood in rich nations. It rapidly became the story of an environmental crisis on a global scale. When the great recession struck both countries, the vulnerability of both systems was revealed. Even as politicians seeking to stabilize markets slashed at existing safety nets, neuroscientific research was documenting the lifelong effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) on brain development, adult health and well-being. The strains of recession fuelled a populist backlash and nationalistic political leaders in both countries gained control by inflaming anti-immigrant and white nationalist sentiments. The discontents of globalization, including market economics, technological revolution, rising inequality, mass migration, and climate change, were clearly calling into question dominant assumptions about prosperity through limitless growth. The book evolved to document these changes over a ten-year period. Chapter one closes by explaining the rationale for starting at the micro level; examining the small worlds of children provides a foundation for understanding how global forces are affecting the intimate ecologies of childhood.

Toward Thriving Families

2020 ◽  
pp. 213-226
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
Parental Leave ◽  
Free Market ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Policies ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
Employment Rates ◽  
Paid Parental Leave ◽  
The Many

This chapter addresses three concerns that might arise when considering whether to adopt pro-family policies. First, it assesses whether adopting pro-family programs will make our economy less competitive. In answer, it demonstrates that countries that have adopted pro-family policies have experienced as much or more growth in GDP per hour worked in the last decades as the United States has. Furthermore, the employment rates in countries that have adopted pro-family policy are actually higher than our own. Second, the chapter considers whether the costs of pro-family programs, including paid parental leave, child benefits, and universal daycare and prekindergarten, would be prohibitively high. It demonstrates that the additional costs of pro-family programs could be readily absorbed either simply by shifting existing total social welfare spending to spend more on children publicly without paying a penny more overall or by raising taxes in a manner that placed no added burden on middle- and low-income families. Third and finally, the chapter considers whether pro-family policy would stifle Americans’ freedom. Free-market proponents who equate unregulated capitalism with freedom, this section shows, overlook the many ways that market pressures are increasingly constraining Americans’ lives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document