Max Tallberg<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In my previous blog texts, I have examined the relationship between the individual and society from many different perspectives. For example, I have discussed schools of thought that advocate for a minimal state. These include neoliberalism and libertarianism. As a counterbalance, I have also discussed views that emphasize equality among individuals and mutual interdependence. For example, Marx\u2019s thinking can be seen as emphasizing such a view. I have also highlighted the perspective that the human being is fundamentally a social being who cannot live alone. The task of society, in turn, is to answer the question of how we can live together in such a way that coexistence also improves the inner well-being of each individual<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In my following blog texts, I bring forward the welfare state as a model of how this coexistence of individuals can be organized at the societal level. The texts show that in this model, the well-being of individuals also reaches an optimal level. For this reason, it is clear that when striving for a more just and equal world, the welfare state model is one central solution<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The concept of the welfare state has been used to refer to a societal model in which the state authority of a given country plays a central role in protecting and strengthening the economic and social well-being of its individuals. The core principles of the welfare state include equality of opportunity, an equal distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those who are not able to build a valuable life for themselves or guarantee the minimum requirements associated with it. The policy of the welfare state thus centrally includes social security, unemployment insurance programs, and support for those who are unable to work. The social insurance associated with the welfare state functions in such a way that it guarantees support for the individual in situations where their income decreases or they lose it. At the same time, it is a response to the insecurity of wage earners and their families by guaranteeing security for all. The welfare state usually also takes responsibility for the basic education of its citizens and may also offer, for example, more affordable housing to them. The welfare state also publicly funds childcare, public transport, and legal aid, but also, among other things, public parks, libraries, museums, and sports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The welfare state also takes part in the functioning of the country\u2019s public economy. The functioning of the welfare state requires broad state intervention in the economy, for example in relation to the nationalization of industry, but also, among other things, in economic planning, the distribution of property rights, tax laws, fiscal policy, monetary policy, labor market policy, price policy, agricultural subsidies, financial regulation, and minimum wage. All of these have been or are still being implemented in welfare states. It is also essential to note that the welfare state shapes the economic and social outcomes that capitalist markets would otherwise create.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Most countries today practice some form of policy that relates to the concept of the welfare state. In this regard, however, criticism has also been presented that the welfare state encourages people toward inactivity, which at worst leads to individuals not wanting to accept work. In discussions related to the welfare state, it has also been pointed out that the state is only rarely the most efficient provider of services. At the same time, however, it is true that the state authority is the only actor that can take care of all its citizens without pursuing some other interest<\/strong>. It is also clear that it is not easy to govern a state in which a large part of the population struggles to obtain food, education, or care.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is appropriate to point out that among industrialized countries there is not a single country that does not include a developed welfare state model and related actors. At the same time, these measures require a large share of public expenditure. Welfare states, however, vary greatly among themselves\u2014which is why they are difficult to define at a general level\u2014and they also change over time. They are also complex and difficult to define. They can also be seen as problem-solving tools that minimize harm rather than as ideal social systems. It has been suggested that the strength of a country\u2019s welfare society is directly proportional to that country\u2019s labor movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It has also been pointed out that welfare states make the economy less efficient by defending equality, and that total economic output thus decreases and makes people poorer in the long run. However, there is no strong scientific evidence for this, and for example the case of Sweden shows that this is not inevitable in any way. Another, more serious problem, however, may be that people within the scope of social support come to see themselves as incapable of work and that they lack the will and mental resilience related to this, as well as social networks and support. The paradox of redistribution of income indicates that the larger the share of social policy directed at the poor, the more of them there are. This too can, however, be influenced by supporting the individual in acquiring capabilities and autonomy without making them unwilling to participate in the labor market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The welfare state is in any case a central and fundamental part of modern governance and absolutely essential in relation to the economic functioning and social well-being of capitalist societies. Some form of welfare state model is thus a vital part of a modern functioning state. The most problematic welfare states are also not those that are the largest, but those in which the mechanisms of the welfare state are poorly integrated into strong market economies. It can also be argued that rather than preventing an economically and socially vital society, the welfare state is a central part in guaranteeing that well-being. The ingenuity of the welfare state lies in making the capitalist market economy compatible with people and modern democracy through the collectivization of averages and risks. However, the welfare state is supported among the middle class only when its mechanisms and actors guarantee high-quality benefits and services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is important to keep the welfare state viable and to develop it above all so that we would not have to return to class societies. It is also essentially connected with democracy, as its values and needs give rise to the welfare state. The distribution of resources in society at the same time reflects how well-being is distributed. Poverty and wealth\u2014especially their extremes\u2014condense this. However, it is also essential to observe that well-being is a subjective experience and cannot be measured solely in money.<\/strong> Human relationships are particularly important in this regard. Money as a measure does not indicate what is important to people. It does, however, describe relatively accurately the position a person holds in the social hierarchy. Those who have more money also attain higher education, invest more in food and housing as well as in hobbies. They are also healthier and to some extent happier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consumption, however, is not truly important, but rather how a person\u2019s needs are connected to the community and its values. In addition, many people do not have very large material needs, but instead healthy food, comfortable clothes, and a proper home are sufficient. It is therefore clear that many people in today\u2019s world acquire products that they do not actually need to increase their well-being, but instead, for example, advertising or addiction drives them to consume. Consumption and money thus signify for many the ability to stand out from others and to build their own and their loved ones\u2019 well-being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The idea of the Finnish welfare state\u2014which is worth raising as one example\u2014is ultimately simple. It is based on the idea that everyone pays, but that everyone also receives, and that everyone should have a genuine opportunity for both, in fulfilling both their needs and their abilities. Full employment has been a central idea in the Nordic welfare state, along with the moral idea behind it that everyone contributes according to their abilities, but that everyone is provided for according to their needs. This idea can be seen as adapting the famous statement associated with Marx: \u201cfrom each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.\u201d Community\u2014 which could perhaps grow as a result of the above-mentioned policy\u2014is also central and desirable, as its absence leads to stress and increases violence. This has often been forgotten especially in modern Western countries, but at the same time it can be argued that by strengthening and developing the welfare state, community could also be strengthened. It can also be argued that in arrangements related to the prevention of poverty\u2014which is centrally connected to the functioning of the welfare state\u2014there is always a question of reciprocity, of the closeness and familiarity between people, and of the morality that arises in connection with these. In this context as well, it is observed that people\u2019s social relationships are central in explaining well-being<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sources:<\/strong> Max Tallberg In my previous blog texts, I have examined the relationship between the individual and society from many different perspectives. For example, I have discussed schools of thought that advocate for a minimal state. These include neoliberalism and libertarianism. As a counterbalance, I have also discussed views that emphasize equality among individuals and mutual […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5110"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5110"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5110\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5115,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5110\/revisions\/5115"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5110"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5110"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalvisions.fi\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5110"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Garland, David. The Welfare State: A Very Short Introduction.<\/em> Oxford University Press. UK 2016.
Hiilamo, Heikki. Uusi hyvinvointivaltio.<\/em> Into Kustannus 2011 Helsinki
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"