Social Democratic Capitalism

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lane Kenworthy
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Public Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Human Flourishing ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Democratic Capitalism ◽  
High Employment ◽  
Labor Market Regulations ◽  
The U.S

What configuration of institutions and policies is most conducive to human flourishing? The historical and comparative evidence suggests that the answer is social democratic capitalism — a democratic political system, a capitalist economy, good elementary and secondary schooling, a big welfare state, pro-employment public services, and moderate regulation of product and labor markets. Lane Kenworthy shows that this system improves living standards for the least well-off, enhances economic security, and boosts equality of opportunity. And it does so without sacrificing other things we want in a good society, from liberty to economic growth to health and happiness. Its chief practitioners have been the Nordic nations. The Nordics have gone farther than other rich democratic countries in coupling a big welfare state with public services that promote high employment and modest product- and labor-market regulations. Many believe this system isn’t transferable beyond Scandinavia, but Kenworthy shows that social democratic capitalism and its successes can be replicated in other affluent nations, including the United States. Today, the U.S. lags behind other countries in economic security, opportunity, and shared prosperity. If the U.S. expanded existing social programs and added some additional ones, many Americans would have better lives. Kenworthy argues that, despite formidable political obstacles, the U.S. is likely to move toward social democratic capitalism in coming decades. As a country gets richer, he explains, it becomes more willing to spend more in order to safeguard against risk and enhance fairness. He lays out a detailed policy agenda that could alleviate many of America’s problems.

Social Democratic Capitalism and the Good Society

2019 ◽  
pp. 19-71
Author(s):  
Lane Kenworthy
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Labor Markets ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Good Society ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Democratic Capitalism ◽  
The Many ◽  
K 12

Abstract: To this point in history, the most successful societies have been those that feature capitalism, a democratic political system, good elementary and secondary (K–12) schooling, a big welfare state, public services that are conducive to employment, and moderate regulation of product and labor markets. I call this set of policies and institutions “social democratic capitalism.” Social democratic capitalism improves living standards for the least well-off, enhances economic security, and very likely boosts equality of opportunity. It does so without sacrificing the many other things we want in a good society, from liberty to economic growth to health to happiness and much more.

scholarly journals Which Way Forward for Economic Security: Basic Income or Public Services?

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Malleson ◽  
David Calnitsky
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Social Stigma ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Basic Income ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
The Rich

Abstract Economic insecurity is an endemic problem across the rich countries of the Global North. What is the solution? This paper compares and contrasts two major proposals: the conventional welfare state package of public services and regulations versus a basic income. By comparing and contrasting these systems in three different contexts – a “nightwatchman” context, a neoliberal context, and a social democratic context – and carefully modeling the monetary equivalence between them, we are able to provide a more precise and compelling comparison of the two systems than has yet been accomplished. We evaluate the two systems on the basis of economic security as well as a number of other important criteria, including the economic well-being of oppressed groups, power, carbon emissions, the gender division of labor, free time, social stigma, and transformative potential. We find that without a welfare state background, services and regulations are generally preferable for most vulnerable groups. However, as the welfare state develops, into a neoliberal or a social democratic context, basic income becomes a generally superior option.

scholarly journals Is Being Employed Always Better for Mental Wellbeing Than Being Unemployed? Exploring the Role of Gender and Welfare State Regimes during the Economic Crisis

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (23) ◽  
pp. 4799
Author(s):  
Imma Cortès-Franch ◽  
Vanessa Puig-Barrachina ◽  
Hernán Vargas-Leguás ◽  
M. Marta Arcas ◽  
Lucía Artazcoz
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
European Social Survey ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Labor Market Regulations ◽  
The Unemployed

The growth of poor jobs related to economic crisis adds to its increase since the mid-1970s as a result of new forms of flexible employment. In Europe, there is no clear evidence on whether working in a poor-quality job is better for mental wellbeing than being unemployed. The objectives of this study were to compare mental wellbeing between the unemployed and those working in jobs with different quality levels and to examine gender and welfare state differences in Europe. We selected 8324 men and 7496 women from the European Social Survey, 2010. Hierarchical multiple logistic regression models were fitted, separated by sex and country group. No significant differences in mental wellbeing were shown between unemployed-non-active, unemployed-active, and those working in low-quality jobs in either sex. Only men from Conservative countries in low-quality jobs had better mental wellbeing than unemployed (non-active) men. Only having a good-quality job reduced the likelihood of poor mental wellbeing compared with being unemployed (non-active) among men in all countries (except Social-Democratic) and among women in Eastern and Southern European countries. No differences were observed among men or women in Social-Democratic countries, while strong gender differences were found in Conservative and Liberal countries. Our study indicates the need to take job quality into account, in addition to creating jobs during economic crises. The main mechanisms to explain the strong gender and welfare state differences identified could be social protection for unemployed, labor market regulations, and family models.

Notes from the Editors, April 2019

2019 ◽  
pp. c2-62
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Social Reform ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Important Goal ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Reform Program ◽  
Socialist Movement ◽  
The U.S

buy this issue In the midst of the U.S.-directed coup attempt against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in January–February, Donald Trump delivered a number of verbal attacks on socialism in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua. The immediate object was to justify U.S. attempts to overthrow the Bolivarian Republic. The less immediate, but hardly less important, goal was to tarnish the growing social democratic (self-styled democratic socialist) movement in the United States, associated with figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In order to safeguard their ambitious social-reform program, the new coterie of Democratic Party socialists have thus sought to separate themselves from Venezuela and other Latin American socialist states, presumably abandoning these countries to their fates at the hands of U.S. imperialism. This raises the historic question of social imperialism—a policy of social reform at home and imperial hegemony abroad.

A Cross-National Perspective on the American Welfare State

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Lynch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Eligibility Criterion ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
Social Goods ◽  
The U.S ◽  
The Welfare State

The welfare system in the United States is not simply “small,”“residualist,” or “laggard.” It is true that protection against standard social risks is generally less comprehensive and less generous in the United States than in other rich democracies, but there are other important differences as well: The U. S. welfare state is unusual in its extensive reliance on private markets to produce public social goods; its geographic variability; its insistence on deservingness as an eligibility criterion; and its orientation toward benefits for the elderly rather than children and working-age adults. Nevertheless, the U.S. welfare state is not sui generis. The actors involved in the construction of the U.S. welfare state, the institutions created in response to social problems, and the contemporary pressures confronting the welfare state all have parallels in other countries. The markets that provide so many social goods in the United States are the products of state action and state regulation, and hence should really be thought of as part of the welfare “state.” Even recent expansions to the welfare state in the United States have, with the partial exception of health-care reform, reinforced old patterns of elderly oriented spending and benefits for worthy (working) adults. In order for the U.S. welfare state to adjust successfully to ensure against new social risks, it must focus more on underdeveloped program areas like health care, child care, early childhood education, and vocational training.

scholarly journals Comparing Swedish Foundations: A Carefully Negotiated Space of Existence

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (13) ◽  
pp. 1889-1918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filip Wijkström ◽  
Stefan Einarsson
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Religious Communities ◽  
Striking Difference ◽  
Democratic Regime ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
The Social ◽  
Limited Support ◽  
Important Form ◽  
The U.S

Foundations and philanthropy currently play a very limited role in the Swedish welfare. The same is true in fields like Culture and Recreation or International Activities. Only in the case of funding of research do Swedish foundations exhibit a role possible to define in terms of substitution rather than weak complementarity in relation to government. Despite marginal positions for philanthropy, Sweden displays a wealthy as well as growing foundation population, which seems like a paradox, at least in comparison to the situation in Germany and the United States where foundations traditionally play a more visible and pronounced role in society. A striking difference between the Swedish foundations and their U.S. or German counterparts is their weak bonds to religious communities or causes. Instead, we can identify in our new data set a growing segment of the Swedish foundation world that is affiliated with other parts of civil society. The same is true for the category of independent foundations, which points toward the U.S. model. We find in the article some limited support for a “philanthropic turn” in Sweden, but overall the foundation world is still deeply embedded in the social contract and strong Social-Democratic regime of the 20th century. In comparison to neighboring Scandinavian or Nordic countries, both similarities and differences are identified where, for example, the Norwegian case display a much larger segment of operating foundations, closely affiliated with government, while in Denmark, on the other hand, the corporate-owning foundation seems to be a much more important form than in Sweden.

The Americanization of the European Left

2002 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milton J. Esman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Working Class ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
American Exceptionalism ◽  
Labour Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Socialist Society ◽  
Social Democratic

In The Debate That Continues To Rage Over The Question Of American exceptionalism, two facts are historically well established that have distinguished the United States from European countries: the United States failed to develop and to institutionalize an electorally viable social democratic or labour party that represents the interests of its unionized working class and aspires to achieve a socialist society; and the United States has lagged behind its European counterparts in building the institutions of a comprehensive welfare state.

scholarly journals Employment and income support policies during the early phases of COVID-19: Lessons from the U.S., Denmark, and Taiwan

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-108
Author(s):  
Chiao-yu Yang ◽  
Katharine Briar-Lawson ◽  
Jildyz Urbaeva
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Part Time ◽  
State Regime ◽  
Human Costs ◽  
Early Phases ◽  
The U.S

As COVID-19 spread across the world in 2020, health and economic activities have been impacted, and unemployment has risen across many countries. The consequences have been particularly harmful to vulnerable populations such as women, racial minorities, or part-time workers. While many governments enacted employment and income support policies as a response to this economic and health crisis, there has been a lack of comparative and evaluative reviews of how policies have addressed unemployment and inequality during the pandemic. In this study, we draw on Esping-Andersen’s (1990) frame of a liberal versus social-democratic welfare state to contextualize some employment and income support polices during the early phases of COVID-19 from the U.S., Denmark, and Taiwan, aiming to enhance the understanding of such policies. We found that the U.S., being more aligned with a liberal welfare state regime, relied on more market mechanisms to address labor and employment issues. Denmark and Taiwan, being more aligned with a social-democratic welfare state, enacted more interventions in and redistributions outside of the market to address employment problems. The human costs of unemployment and unemployment and labor market hysteresis are addressed in light of these two different approaches and outcomes.

The U.S. Welfare State Is Minimal

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
Mark Robert Rank ◽  
Lawrence M. Eppard ◽  
Heather E. Bullock
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Safety Net ◽  
Welfare Benefits ◽  
The Social ◽  
Welfare Expenditures ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 13 examines the size of the social safety net in the United States. Compared with European and other OECD countries, the United States has a fairly small safety net. The amount spent is approximately 2 percent of our GDP. In particular, programs aimed at protecting children from poverty are minimal. These programs have also been reduced over time, especially since the 1996 welfare reform changes. Challenging the myth of the bloated welfare state requires tackling multiple intersecting misperceptions, including erroneous portrayals of U.S. welfare expenditures as exorbitant and low-income programs as driving up the national debt. It will also require shattering myths that legitimize keeping welfare benefits low.

scholarly journals Do Hiring Practices Penalize Women and Benefit Men for Having Children? Experimental Evidence from Germany

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Hipp
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hiring Practices ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Women's Wages ◽  
Experimental Findings ◽  
Job Recruitment ◽  
Labour Market Discrimination ◽  
Liberal Market Economy

Abstract Although observational studies from many countries have consistently shown that motherhood negatively affects women’s wages, experimental findings on its effect on the likelihood of being hired are less conclusive. Motherhood penalties in hiring have been reported in the United States, the prototypical liberal market economy, but not in Sweden, the prototypical social-democratic welfare state. Based on a field experiment in Germany, this study examines the effects of parenthood on hiring processes in the prototypical conservative welfare state. My findings indicate that job recruitment processes indeed penalize women but not men for having children. In addition to providing theoretical explanations for why motherhood penalties in hiring are particularly likely to occur in the German context, this study also highlights several methodological and practical issues that should be considered when conducting correspondence studies to examine labour market discrimination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document