What’s an Economy For?

2020 ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Maxine Eichner
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Proper Place ◽  
Public Programs ◽  
The Public ◽  
Prekindergarten Programs ◽  
Economic Goal

This chapter describes how US policymakers would regulate the economy if they became serious about supporting the American Dream. Legislators would stop making an ever-higher GDP the ultimate economic goal and instead focus on ensuring that every American gets the resources they need to thrive. Since thriving Americans require healthy families, this would require ensuring that families, too, receive the resources they need to thrive. To serve these goals, markets must be put in their proper place in the larger economy, alongside both families and government. When it comes to ensuring that families get the resources they need, the state has five critical functions to fill. These are: (1) partnering with parents to provide the conditions young children need at home; (2) investing in excellent daycare and prekindergarten programs; (3) regulating the economy to reduce economic inequality and insecurity; (4) constructing a strong social safety net; and (5) regulating the workplace to allow workers to reconcile work with family. The chapter closes by describing the public programs that would support each of these five functions.

Is economic inequality a universal evil?

2019 ◽  
pp. 91-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rostislav I. Kapeliushnikov
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
The State ◽  
Fair Play ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
The Public ◽  
Discursive Power ◽  
A Current

Using published estimates of inequality for two countries (Russia and USA) the paper demonstrates that inequality measuring still remains in the state of “statistical cacophony”. Under this condition, it seems at least untimely to pass categorical normative judgments and offer radical political advice for governments. Moreover, the mere practice to draw normative conclusions from quantitative data is ethically invalid since ordinary people (non-intellectuals) tend to evaluate wealth and incomes as admissible or inadmissible not on the basis of their size but basing on whether they were obtained under observance or violations of the rules of “fair play”. The paper concludes that a current large-scale ideological campaign of “struggle against inequality” has been unleashed by left-wing intellectuals in order to strengthen even more their discursive power over the public.

Tax Reform Discourse

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony C. Infanti
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Tax Reform ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Public Expenditures ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Private Benefit ◽  
The Public ◽  
Basic Purpose ◽  
The Common ◽  
Development Literature

32 Virginia Tax Review 205 (2012)Our tax system is supposed to serve the public good by fairly raising the revenue that we need to fund public expenditures -- for example, the common defense, social safety net programs such as Social Security and Medicare, etc. But the tax reform debate has shifted away from discussing how best to distribute the burden of these common expenditures and instead has come to focus on how tax reform can be used to spur economic growth. Especially in times of economic crisis, these two goals -- equitably funding public expenditures and spurring economic growth -- sound equally important and somehow compatible. After all, shouldn't a rising tide of economic growth lift all boats and make contributing to the common weal easier for everyone? The problem, however, lies in the studies and reports indicating that recent cycles of economic growth have not been akin to a rising tide lifting all boats. Rather, economic growth has redounded largely to the benefit of a very few at the very top of the income scale. Or to continue with the tidal metaphor, the rising tide has lifted the yachts of the wealthy and privileged while swamping the rest of us. In that light, using tax reform as a vehicle to spur economic growth looks less like an endeavor of public benefit for all and more like one of private benefit with the purpose of entrenching the privilege of a relative few. In this article, I call into question the idea that tax reform should be used to stimulate economic growth. Instead, drawing primarily upon the development literature and the work of the economist and philosopher Amartya Sen, I advocate a turn toward a people-centered approach to tax reform. I argue that tax reform debates should focus not on encouraging economic growth but, in keeping with the tax system's basic purpose, on advancing human development for all -- and particularly for the disadvantaged among us.

The Nature and Functions of the State

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Taggart
Keyword(s):  
Safety Net ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Utilities ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Budget Deficits ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Sector Reforms ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Developed World ◽  
The Impact

For much of last century it was taken for granted in many countries that it was the duty of the State to care for its citizens ‘from cradle to grave’: to provide education, pensions, medical services, and public utilities, and to hold out a safety net for the less fortunate so that they had food, shelter, and the other necessaries of life. Since the late 1970s, however, these functions of the State have been put in question by the worldwide march towards privatization. The privatization movement was said to be a response to budget deficits and mounting public debt, perceived inefficiencies in government operations, and a loss of faith in the ability of governments in the developed world to meet the expectations of their citizenry of an ever-increasing standard of living. This article discusses the influence of economic theory on the privatization movement; the impact of changes in the economy (namely, the privatization movement) on law, particularly legal scholarship; the meaning of privatization; the public/private law divide; and privatization in the UK; corporatization and public sector reforms; deregulation; and contracting out.

How the State and Labor Saved Charitable Fundraising: Community Chests, Payroll Deduction, and the Public–Private Welfare State, 1920–1950

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Morris
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The United States ◽  
Voluntary Sector ◽  
The State ◽  
World War ◽  
The Public

Payroll taxes and payroll deductions became ubiquitous in the United States by the mid-1940s, crucial to the financing of the emerging “mixed” welfare state as well as World War II. While scholars have firmly established the importance of elements of the warfare/welfare state such as Social Security, employer-based pensions and health insurance, and the mass income tax, voluntary sector institutions have garnered less attention. The history of payroll deduction demonstrates how this “infrastructural power” also advantaged institutions outside of the state, notably, charitable fundraising organizations commonly known as Community Chests (the forerunners of the United Way). Chests began to look toward the payroll deduction in the 1920s as an efficient and effective way of extracting donations from workers of modest means—though these were often fiercely resisted by an empowered labor movement in the 1930s. But it took the state's vast expansion of deductions during World War II, and the patriotic impulse of donating to war-related charities, to convince industrial unions and employers to support this method of donation. Like the income tax, this change in charitable giving remained in place after the war and became a vital element of financing this part of the public–private social safety net—a crucial boost to the voluntary sector from the state.

scholarly journals Diaspora Policies, Consular Services and Social Protection for Serbian Citizens Abroad

2020 ◽  
pp. 319-333
Author(s):  
Tamara Popic
Keyword(s):  
Social Protection ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Economic Resource ◽  
Cultural Engagement ◽  
Key Features ◽  
Pension Benefits

AbstractThis chapter shows that Serbia’s diaspora policies have given priority to economic, but also cultural engagement of Serbian nationals residing abroad. Following a discussion on the key features of the diaspora, the infrastructure of the state to deal with nationals abroad and its key engagement policies, it focuses on five social protection dimensions and shows that Serbia’s policies are limited to health and pension benefits, and this only under special conditions. Overall, the chapter puts forward the claim that the very limited social protection benefits granted to diaspora can be explained by the elites’ perception of diaspora as mainly an economic resource, and as a supplement to the country’s social-safety net.

scholarly journals How to communicate large-scale social challenges: The problem of the disappearing American corporation

2018 ◽  
Vol 116 (16) ◽  
pp. 7698-7702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald F. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Corporations ◽  
American Corporation ◽  
American Economy ◽  
Better Than

Social science has distinct advantages and challenges when it comes to communicating its findings to the public. Its topics are often highly accessible to the general public, yet its findings may be counterintuitive and politically contentious. Conveying recent changes in the organization of the American economy provides an illustration of the difficulties and opportunities for engaging the public. The declining number of public corporations in the United States is associated with a shrinking middle class, lower opportunities for upward mobility, and a fraying social safety net, with important implications for individuals and public policy. Attempting to convey this set of findings to a broad public has demonstrated that some strategies and communication channels work better than others, and that some online media are particularly effective.

How the Trump Administration’s Pandemic Health Care Response Failed Racial Health Equity: Case Studies of Structural Racism and a Call for Equity Mindfulness in Federal Health Policymaking

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Rosenbaum ◽  
Morgan Handley ◽  
Rebecca Morris ◽  
Maria Casoni
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Equity ◽  
Health Care Policy ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Structural Racism ◽  
Public Programs ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Care Safety Net ◽  
Health Care Equity ◽  
Safety Net Providers

Abstract Context: The racial health equity implications of the Trump administration’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We focus on four key health care policy decisions made by the administration in response to the public health emergency: rejecting a special Marketplace enrollment period; failing to use its full powers to enhance state Medicaid emergency options; refusing to suspend the public charge rule; and failing to target provider relief funds to providers serving the uninsured. Findings: In each case, the administration’s policy choices intensified, rather than mitigated, structural racism and racial health inequality. Its choices had a disproportionate adverse impact on minority populations and patients who are more likely to depend on public programs, be poor, experience pandemic-related job loss, lack insurance, rely on health care safety net providers, and be exposed to public charge sanctions. Conclusions: Ending structural racism in health care and promoting racial health care equity demands an equity-mindful approach to the pursuit of policies that enhance—rather than undermine—health care accessibility and effectiveness and resources for the poorest communities and the providers that serve them.

The Gospel of Reform: The Social Gospel and Health Care Reform Attitudes

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 364-395
Author(s):  
Eric L. McDaniel ◽  
Kenneth M. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Health Care Reform ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Social Gospel ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social

AbstractMost research on the social gospel, a religious interpretation that obliges people to care for the less fortunate and correct social inequalities, has focused on elite rhetoric. However, it is not clear the extent to which members of the public also adhere to this socioreligious philosophy. The moralistic tone of the 2010 health care reform debate has led many to argue that there is a revival of the social gospel. To what extent has this debate gained traction among citizens writ large? Which individuals will be most likely to be influenced by elite discourse that draws social gospel? Using two unique surveys and an experiment, we demonstrate that Social Gospel adherents have distinctive political attitudes. Specifically, they are more attentive to social policy issues and are more supportive of expanding the social safety net. Second, we demonstrate that elite rhetoric that draws from the Social Gospel tradition can influence policy preferences.

scholarly journals The State of the Social Safety Net in the Post-Welfare Reform Era

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne P. Bitler ◽  
Hilary W. Hoynes
Keyword(s):  
Welfare Reform ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Social
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document