First World Consumerist Role in Third World Sweatshops

First World Consumerist Role in Third World Sweatshops First World consumerism plays a role in the persistence of Third World sweatshops, yet there are conflicting thoughts on how the issue of sweatshops should be addressed. This paper examines sweatshops and perspectives surrounding the potential rectification of the issue, on what end this correction should be addressed, the consumerism aspect or in the sweatshops themselves. The Clean Clothes Campaigns (CCC, a movement to improve sweatshop conditions) processes and outcomes, private monitoring, and the roles and structures within sweatshops will support my argument proving that for sweatshops to be improved or removed, action must be taken within the Third World countries themselves. My topic of Third World sweatshops and First World consumerism is relative to globalization and just in time production because they create a large demand for the inexpensive and fast labour that sweatshops offer. There has been a recent clean clothes movement in which consumers have begun to boycott stor es that sell apparel produced in sweatshops. This method of protesting sweatshops is not beneficial and the alleviation of sweatshops in Third World countries requires the cooperation of the workers and an intervening power. Jill Esbenshades Monitoring Sweatshops addresses the roles of both workers and consumers within the global apparel industry. Esbenshade covers a broad range of aspects which influence sweatshops such as private monitoring of sweat shops, and interests of manufacturers, contractors, and workers. Private monitoring as a system is not successful in its attempts to improve sweatshop conditions because it does not prioritize the needs of workers, instead it prioritizes the needs of the manufacturers (Esbenshade 2004:89). Cheap and fast labour benefits manufacturers because it is an inexpensive way of supplying the just in time production system, putting fair treatment of workers in the back of their minds. Within sweatshops the interests of manufacturers and workers conflict, and those of the manufacturers prevail. Monitors have little training and are not trustworthy investigators as they have a history of being swayed by manufacturers to postpone assessments as it becomes close to crunc h time. They clean up sweatshops but only to the extent that prices do not have to be raised. Monitors do not institute changes or upgrades that will cost high prices or that will set back the factory in production time. The cooperation of monitoring firms is beneficial to the manufacturers because they pay the monitors wages (Esbenshade 2004: 97-98). As explained in Esbenshades Monitoring Sweatshops, the monitoring system is one with many holes, Who is paying the [monitoring firms] wages? The manufacturer is, and they ask them to turn their head when it is crunch time and they need to get production out (Esbenshade 2004:98). There are global movements to end sweatshops existing currently such as trade unions and NGOs, informal economy, the CCCs method of urgent appeals, and consumers roles in fair trade products and clean clothes. The CCCs use of urgent appeals and its manner of intervention is only beneficial for a handful of the sweatshops it enters, more often than not it results in factory closures, leaving people unemployed (Sluiter 2009: 185). Urgent appeals do have benefits, they are a good way to start a dialogue with companies, because they are about specific cases; companies cannot hide behind general answers but they are seldom cost-effective and also often end in factory closures (Sluiter 2009: 185). Many Third World populations are reliant on sweatshops because they provide mass employment and keep the economy afloat. As hard as First World populations may fight for the removal of sweatshops in the Third World, they are greatly needed because the jobs that they provide prevent laborers from starving, working as prostitutes, and begging on the streets (Rothstein 2005: 41). The informal economy that has developed has made the intervention of an outside force necessary. Steady jobs have been replaced by informal means of employment, giving workers the short end of the stick and no leg to stand on if their employment is being terminated (Sluiter 2009: 187). In the globalized sweatshop industry the workers are at the mercy of the manufacturers which proves that the CCCs methods are not useful because whether the sweatshop exists or not, manufactures will develop a new industry that is inexpensive and still exploits workers. The laws relating to working conditions and employment security must be altered and more strongly enforced rather than removing factory employment in the Third World all together. When an apparel company requires production, it offers a price to the manufacturers and then prices are cut and conditions are altered until the product is able to be produced for the price offered. Seeing as the main cost being paid by the manufacturers is wages, the goal can be reached by cutting labour costs (Esbenshade 2008:456). Working in an informal economy is usually the only option for workers in sweatshops. No employment contracts are composed so workers can earn below the legal minimum wage, are not paid on time, are expected to work beyond regular hours, and do not receive benefits of any kind (Sluiter 2009: 188). If a contract is written, it often exploits the worker and do not make exception for pregnancy or illness, and if a worker were to get sick their employment would be threatened as it would be seen as a violation of the contract. Gender based discrimination often occurs because a female employee is seen as a risky hire for several reasons. Gender-based discrimination is a tool for labour-market flexibility Sluiter explains, the long hours and low pay make it difficult for women to keep their family fed (Sluiter 2009:191). If any action should be taken to correct the use of sweatshops and the treatment of workers it should be to remove sweatshops from Third World countries and instate new businesses and a new way of involvement in the global market. Merely improving sweatshop conditions could be extremely detrimental to the over all economy of the country, but removing the businesses entirely without instituting a solution, could be as equally destructive. First World activists fight for wage increases in sweatshops, through the CCC for example, but victories on the Western front may turn into defeats when wage raises have been won in factories that subsequently shut down (Sluiter 2009: 184). Rothstein argues that First World intervention in sweatshops is not as beneficial as it is though to be, by stating, If Western activists succeed in forcing firms to raise wages, limit hours, or reject children as laborers production would cease and be replaced in the global marketplace by those not bound by Weste rn standards (Rothstein 2005:41). Although I do not agree that these sweatshops are a necessity in Third World countries, implementing improvements is the wrong way to go about correcting the abuses. Through corrections production will be reduced, yet if sweatshops are removed and a new system is brought about, a less corrupt means of production could grow and there could be a possibility of self sustainability. While mass boycotting of corporate giants that supply sweatshop produced apparel may be a powerful means of motivating manufacturers to pull production out of Third World countries, the outcome would be harmful because little would be left for them to participate in the global economy. It is a known fact that if the price of a commodity rises, the demand for it will fall. Therefore, if wages in sweatshops were increased, product prices would rise, consumption would diminish, and manufacturers would move elsewhere in search of cheap labour. Thus leaving a population unemployed and unable to participate in the growing globalization of the economic market. A large problem to do with instituting improvements to sweatshop conditions is that every change in the industry could have ripple effects on important aspects of the global trade economy as well as the economy and well being that effects workers in the Third World. For example, if children were to be banned from working in sweatshops families would not have enough money would become impoverished (Rothestein 2005:41). The seemingly improved conditions would spark many contradictions. Richard Rothstein argues in his piece Defending Sweatshops: Too Much Logic, Too Little Evidence that First World activists are ignorant of the perspectives and needs of Third World habitants. Sweatshop employment ensures the highest wage earnings in many underdeveloped and developing countries. Rothstein recalls a story of an Indonesian woman, Tratiwoon, who sells items found in the garbage for a dollar a day with her three year old son (Rothstein 2005: 41). Tratiwoon dreams of the day that her son is older and can get a job at the nearest sweatshop, because to these people a sweatshop represents a leap in living standards (Rothstein 2005: 41). Rothstein also argues that Americans get on their high horses about child labour but do not understand the context in which it is used and needed in the Third World (Rothstein 2005: 41). Child Labour Hawks remove children from sweatshop employment without comprehending the repercussions. Saving a young person from child labour may result in i mpoverishing an entire family or subjecting them to homelessness or starvation. Perhaps First World activism aiming to end sweatshops its fueled by guilt, woman and children are working at slave wages for our benefit- and this makes us feel unclean' (Rothestein 2005: 42). In reality, while First World consumers do experience benefit from sweatshop production, Third World laborers are dependent on sweatshop employment to maintain their quality of life. Sweatshops in underdeveloped countries are not looked upon negatively, jobs in these factories are admired and desired. The Neoliberal theories of privatization and deregulation have enforced the proliferation of the sweatshop and garment industry in the Third World. This occurs through a combination of weakening enforcement of labour laws and creating a dependency on export oriented employment as privatization limits job availability (Esbenshade 2008: 457). Workers needs are being overlooked in order for countries to do business, countries are literally competing for apparel contracts based on who has the more docile and lower paid workforce (Esbenshade 2008: 457). Employers minimize workers needs because manufacturers locate with non-unionized businesses and unorganized plans. In the time of globalization labour has been divided among class, gender, race, and nations, the growing diversity makes it difficult for workers to feel comfortable and identify with their co-workers (Esbenshade 2008: 458). Keeping workers isolated increases production and attachment, Workers are not brought together in ever-larger worksites where their common experience unites them. Instead they are separated into thousands of small shops isolated from one another by distance and anonymity, and often by borders and language as well (Esbenshade 2008: 458). It is unclear to sweatshop labourers who their enemy is, there are many exploiters both large and small and workers cannot rely on their bosses to protect them from this exploitation, as their bosses are at the mercy of far away corporations (Esbenshade 2008: 458). Esbenshades Going Up Against the Global Economy: New Developments in the Anti-Sweatshops Movement discusses United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS), a student run anti-sweatshop campaign that directs schools to do businesses with corporations that treat their employees with respect. USAS went through several phases of initiating their cause in universities, firstly forcing schools to begin only using businesses that disclose their name and location, secondly activists requested that universities adopt independent monitoring codes by joining the WRC (Workers Rights Consortium) (Esbenshade 2008: 459). The third phase is currently underway, students are pressuring universities to join the Designated Supplier Program which requires that manufacturers have special licenses to use factory facilities (Esbenshade 2008: 459). The aim of the USAS is to hold the manufacturers responsible for the conditions of their workers, and factories where workers rights are not being respected may be revealed (Esbenshade 2008: 459). The USAS is better than other anti-s weatshop organizations, rather than fighting for higher wages and better working conditions it selects only the better manufacturers to do business with. This may motivate manufactures of low standard factories to correct their ways in order to be hired by universities. Neoliberal policies have destabilized government protection of workers in developing countries, mainly introduced by the mandates put forward by the Inernational Monitary Fund and the World Bank (Esbenshade 2008:457). Governments that have become in debt have increased amounts of sweatshops and have weakened labour laws in order to expand their export commodities (Esbenshade 2008: 457). The work environment in sweatshops has become unstructured by means of enforcing labour laws, and while monitoring is taking place it is privatized, creating a relaxed relationship between the manufacturers (who pay the monitors wages) and the monitors. Monitoring is untrustworthy because working conditions are in the hands of the private sector who police themselves (Frank 2008: 35). T. A. Frank expresses his experiences as a private monitor in Confessions of a Sweatshop Inspector proving that inspections were not thorough or trustworthy the auditors who followed me found pregnant employees hiding on the roof and Burmese import workers earning criminally low wages. Whoops. (Frank 2008: 35). If a monitor can miss things such as these, it can be believed that the privatized monitoring sector is untrustworthy and not accomplishing what it claims to be its goal. Winston describes how the well-being of sweatshop employees is in the back of the manufacturers minds. After finding all sorts of violations in a Chinese sweatshop, the owner went on to explain that the exploitation of workers is necessary to fulfill consumer and economic demand. She stated, But really, its all about profit. If I paid my workers more money, Id have to raise the price to my buyers, the people who are sending you here to inspect my factory. Do you think they would accept that? (Winston 2005: 1124-1128). The current system of private monitoring is corrupted, and the CCCs use of urgent appeals are less than productive. It is clear that merely aiming to improve conditions have ripple effects on many other aspects of the globalized economy, and that raising wages or banning child labour in sweatshops would be detrimental to the country at stake. Currently, an organization that is moving in the right direction with its aim toward correcting sweatshops is the USAS, who only uses licensed manufacturers who recognize workers rights. The USASs methods may motivate manufacturers to clean up their factories to receive business deals from First World universities. Undoubtably the use of sweatshops needs to be corrected, and the method of going about this is to alleviate countries of sweatshops and introduce a new means of economic involvement and a new enforcement plan.

The Tragedy and Despair of Shakespeares Macbeth Essay -- GCSE Coursew

The Tragedy and Despair of Macbeth  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Macbeth is one of the best known of Shakespeare's plays. It is commonly classed, along with Hamlet, Othello, and King Lear, among Shakespeare's four great tragedies. After reading Macbeth, several significant aspects of the play come to mind: the central characters (Lady Macbeth and her husband) and their development, the treatment of gender issues, the nature and conflict of good and evil, the final triumph of the forces of goodness and life, and the troubling implications of that triumph. One way to approach the play's leading characters is to see how they fit Aristotle's ideas about tragedy. The problem with this approach is that they don't fit Aristotle's ideas very well. Aristotle wrote that a tragic character should be more good than evil and that the character's fall should be the result of a mistake or misstep (the probable meaning of Aristotle's term hamartia) rather than moral depravity. Lady Macbeth and her husband, by contrast, are more evil than good, and they deliberately commit or arrange several horribly depraved acts: among others, the murder of King Duncan, the murder of Macbeth's friend Banquo, and the murder of Macduff's wife and children. Their motives are purely selfish: they want power and all the personal benefits it will bring. It doesn't look as if Aristotle's ideas work very well at all in Macbeth. But despite the fact that the play doesn't fit the ideal Aristotelian mold (and Shakespeare probably had no intention that it should, anyway), looking at the play in this way sheds some light on it. We're required to ask, "Is Macbeth purely evil? Is his wife?" The more closely I've looked at the play, the more I've become convinced that its power comes f... ...tues we commonly associate with women and children -- or with Christ -- have not been given adequate attention. Macbeth shows us characters who have succumbed to despair: Lady Macbeth, who comes to believe that "What's done cannot be undone" (5.1.68), and Macbeth, who argues that, since "I am in blood/ Stepp'd in so far," repentance is pointless: "should I wade no more,/ Returning were as tedious as go o'er" (3.4.135-37). The play shows these characters defeated, but not redeemed. Works Cited Cooke, Patricia. "Macbeth: Origin of Despair." Online posting. 20 Nov. 1996. SHAKSPER: The Global Electronic Shakespeare Conference. 5 March 2001 <http://www.shaksper.net/archives/1996/0937.html>. Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 7th ed. New York: Longman, 1999.

Wallace Stevens Harmonium and the Visual Arts :: Literature Art Papers

Wallace Stevens' Harmonium and the Visual Arts By the time Wallace Stevens moved to New York City in 1900 he had completed three years as a special student at Harvard, and had published a few poems in the Harvard Monthly and the Advocate (a literary journal at Harvard of which he was president). He continued to pursue a literary life in New York, but after an attempt at journalism and at the urging of his father (L59), he enrolled in New York Law School in the fall of 1901. In 1904 he passed the bar and eventually acquired a position in the insurance field after attempting to hang out his own shingle (Stevens, H., 77-8). He married Elsie Viola Moll (a woman also from Reading) in 1909 and in 1916 they moved to Hartford. Stevens was by this time working for the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co., the insurance company he was to stay with for the rest of his career, becoming vice-president in 1934. Before leaving for Hartford, though, he caught the literary bug again (L 187) and by 1914 Stevens was submitting poetry again for publi cation and communicating with the editor of Poetry, Harriet Monroe (L 192). The thirteen years separating any serious poetic output on the part of Stevens might easily be accounted for by his early career in law and his desire to make a secure place for himself there. Above all a practical man, Stevens may have simply put a sustained effort at poetry aside for a time in order to avoid poverty, as he said he did for eight years after publishing Harmonium in 1923 (L 364). Perhaps he was "stewing" during this time, having a few life experiences and just generally maturing. Also, his courtship and marriage, which might also have been delayed for economic reasons, had taken place during this interval. Any or all of these variables could have worked to delay his poetic achievement. The turning point came, I believe, once Stevens came into close contact with modern artists and their works. Although there is no sustained discussion of visual art or influences in Stevens' letters, I will argue that the writing of Harmonium is in a sense bracketed by Stevens' exposure to Walter Arsenberg and his salon. It is my contention that Stevens wrote Harmonium while steeped in modern art and it's theoretical underpinnings and that the poems contained in his first book of poetry reflect certain modern visual sources.

Shakespeare’s Othello

Iago’s character is manipulative and treacherous as can be read in the famous quote, â€Å"Iago is most honest† (Shakespeare II. iii. 7). He is fond of implanting malice in even the most mundane, casual encounters. For instance, Iago plans to make a mountain out of the molehill that Cassio was able to briefly, hold hands with Desdemona while on board the ship. Iago is also chauvinistic for the most part of the play and appears to have a dislike for women in general as revealed by his frequent barrages of insults towards Emilia and Desdemona. Iago’s general detest for women may come from the fact that he suspects Othello of having an affair with his wife. His thoughts are revealed in the play and there is constant revelation that he wants his revenge â€Å"wife for wife†. This reveals a concealed lust for Desdemona born out of his baseless jealousy. Iago continues his pursuit to ruin the relationship of Othello and Desdemona, as is witnessed in Iago’s speeches to Othello,Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see: She has deceived her father, and may thee†¦Ã¢â‚¬â€œMy life upon her faith! Honest Iago† (Shakespeare I, iii 333-5). He also has a plan to lure Cassio into performing actions that would dishonor him and possibly cause Othello to rethink his promotion of Cassio, as Iago states of himself in this matter, â€Å"Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago: In following him, I follow but myself†¦ But I will wear my heart upon my sleeve For daws to peck at: I am not what I am† (Shakespeare I, I 63-71). Iago succeeds in this endeavor by subtly causing a commotion which causes Cassio to lose his composure and accidentally stab Montano, the governor. This costs Cassio his position as lieutenant. While alone with Othello, Iago implies the possibility that Desdemona is having an affair with Cassio. Iago manages to persuade Othello to doubt Desdemona’s loyalty and love for him. He tells Othello to closely examine his wife’s actions when she is with Cassio. These are just among the many webs of lies and deceit that he manages weave in his attempts to settle scores with Othello and Cassio. Othello’s first gift to Desdemona was a handkerchief. This supposedly trivial object later becomes the piece of evidence that Iago uses to destroy Othello’s marriage. One evening, as Desdemona and Emilia inform Othello that dinner is ready, Othello complains of a headache. Desdemona promptly offers her handkerchief to bind his head to relieve the pain. Othello comments that the handkerchief is too small and pushes it away. Desdemona unknowingly loses grip of the handkerchief as she and Othello walk out of the room. Emilia picks up the handkerchief, remembering that Iago had asked her a number of times to steal it, she is delighted at the prospect of surprising her husband. At the same time as Iago was to plant Desdemona’s handkerchief in Cassio’s room, Othello who discovers his plot is infuriated and exclaims that he’d rather witness deception first hand than assume infidelity without conclusive evidence. At this point, Iago, ever the manipulator, manages to get his way again by fabricating another story that Cassio once called out Desdemona’s name in his sleep and that Cassio acted as if he were kissing Desdemona. Iago reinforced his claim by claiming to have seen Cassio wipe his beard with the handkerchief. This enrages Othello and he vows to seek revenge on Cassio and Desdemona for the alleged infidelity. Once again, Iago succeeds and even manages to get promoted to lieutenant. In the play, Desdemona’s handkerchief is the symbol of faithfulness and later in the play the symbol of truth. All the speculations around Desdemona’s alleged relationship with Cassio has created a lot of trouble for Othello and Desdemona. Othello has become very unhappy and has begun mistreating Desdemona. One evening after dinner, Othello goes on a walk with Lodovico and sends Desdemona to bed. As Desdemona gets ready, she and Emilia contemplate on how different her life would be like if she had not met Othello. Desdemona sings the â€Å"Willow† song, a song that she learned from her mother’s maid who sang the same song when the man she love left her. The â€Å"Willow† song is the symbol of acceptance of her fate that the man whom she loved had left her. Before telling Emilia about the story behind the â€Å" Willow† song, she had remarked on the attractiveness of Lodovico. She also This suggests that after the bad things that have happened between Desdemona and her husband, committing adultery had somehow entered her mind. She saw adultery as an option to distract her from the pain that her husband is neglecting and mistreating her. Iago has persuaded Roderigo to go after Cassio with the web of lies that he had weaved about Cassio and Desdemona’s alleged affair. Iago had once again managed to convince Roderigo with his lies to the point that Roderigo longed to kill Cassio. Roderigo stabbed Cassio in a brothel. When Othello hears Cassio’s cries of murder, Othello thinks that it is Iago who stabbed Cassio. Othello is still unaware of Iago’s deception and he believed that Iago stabbed Cassio to carry out his revenge. This tragedy wrongly convinces Othello of the validity of Desdemona’s alleged unfaithfulness. He returns to the bedroom to kill her. Othello returns to the bedroom where Desdemona is sleeping soundly. He leans to give her one last kiss before he kills her. Desdemona awakens from the kiss and is frightened when Othello tells her to prepare to be killed. Othello tells her that he had discovered her affair with Cassio who had just been killed by Iago. Before she could explain her side of the story, she breaks down in tears to weep for Cassio. This angers Othello all the more and begins to smother his wife. Emilia rushes to inform Othello that Cassio has killed Roderigo. When Othello admits that he has killed his wife and that Emilia keep silent about it. Emilia, afraid and confused calls for help. Montano, Graziano and Iago arrive at the scene. Little by little, Emilia uncovers her husband’s deceitfulness. Iago sensing the impending exposure of his evil deeds makes an attempt to silence Emilia with his sword. Iago succeeds at stabbing his wife. Othello disbelievingly realizes his terrible mistake of not trusting his wife and killing her out of blind rage. Realizing that his life is now worthless without Desdemona, he takes his own life. Othello and Desdemona are the unfortunate victims of Iago’s irrational jealousy and treachery. Even Iago’s wife Emilia was not spared of the tragedy. Before Iago becomes conscious of the gravity of his actions, lives have been lost, too much harm has been done to the point that it is beyond repair.

Social security policy

Social security policy is a major, convoluted issue in all societies. Millions of people are heavily reliant on social security as a means of support to achieve a basic standard of living. There is thought to be three main welfare regimes, in western society. These regimes are corporate-conservative, socio-economic and liberal. This essay aims to give a brief description of these regimes in action, in relation to the USA, France and Sweden, respectively. Then, go on to compare the regimes, in relation to social security. It will take in to account unemployment, pensions and family policy. Social security is basically the procedure of benefits and transfers in the form of financial assistance as income maintenance which is funded by taxation and/or insurance contributions. (Baldock et al, 1999) There have been three principle types of welfare regime. These are corporatist-conservative, socio-democratic and liberal. The corporate-conservative regime is usually based on individual's contributions, therefore very work-orientated. The socio-democratic regime is usually based on universal values. The liberal regime is usually residualist. This means that the welfare is seen more as a bag-up, only to provide for those who would not manage at all without it. (Esping-Anderson, 1990) France is an example of the corporatist-conservative regime in action. Social security is hinged on solidarity. In this context, it means mutual responsibility, shared risks and common action. It was first brought in to place by the introduction of a regime general for social and health security. This was then expanded. In the 1970's additional measures were introduced to include all ‘excluded' people. The most significant measure was introduced in 1988. This was called the Revenu Minimum d'Insertion. It amalgamated a rudimentary benefit with a personal contract for social inclusion. The French regime is somewhat expensive. The control of expenditure has become the focus of social policy. Pensions play a very prominent part as they are very costly. (www2. rgu. ac. uk/public policy/introduction/wstate. htm) The French regime basically advocates the rights are in accordance status and class. Support comes mostly through private insurance, which is supported by the state. It aims to fortify civil society while limiting the market. (Esping-Anderson, 1990) Sweden is an example of the socio-democratic regime in action. This Swedish model is often judged as the exemplary form of welfare state. One of the integral components is the sense of organised co-operation. (www2. rgu. ac. uk/public policy/introduction/wstate. htm) The socio-democratic regime advocates equality and universalism of high standards. This is through the state. The state is the main way of support; there are high levels of benefits. It aims to amalgamate welfare and work and promote full employment. (Esping-Anderson, 1990) The United States of America is an example of the liberal regime in action. The liberal regime advocates residualism, laissez-faire, individualism and a severe stand on poverty. These are all dominant subjects in USA debates on welfare, yet the USA does not have a unified welfare system. The predominant measures of federal provision came in the 1930's from the Roosevelt administration. (www2. rgu. ac. uk/public policy/introduction/wstate. htm) it was called ‘the new deal'. It was instigated to be a safe-guard against market failures, which was desperately needed after the mass unemployment of the depression years. The main principle behind it was that the state should provide more than just support; it should actually protect the individual. (Miller, 2003) The liberal regime basically has a strong work ethic. Support comes through means-tested assistance. It aims to strengthen the market. (Esping-Anderson, 1990) Unemployment is a very contentious issue. The three countries all have differing ways of dealing with it. France has a twofold system of providing unemployment benefits. One of them is an unemployment insurance scheme. This scheme is when individuals are part of a national collective agreement, which is mediated by the state. This system is financed by contributions. The unemployed are allowed to receive benefits if they are a member of this scheme and it was not their own fault that they lost their job. The provision and duration of these benefits also depends on how long the individual has been part of the scheme. Its payment has two forms. These are either the basic benefits or post-entitlement benefit. (www. eurofound. ie/under. tm) The other system of unemployment benefit is a guarantee supplementary scheme. It is funded by the state and was set up in 1984. its aim is to provide unemployment benefits for widowed or divorced women, young people and other disadvantaged groups, who have not been in the job-market long enough to make substantial contribution. It also helps those who have had been in unemployment for a very long time and are no longe r eligible for the insurance scheme. Its payment comes in two forms, either a work programme allowance or a guaranteed supplementary benefit. (www. urofound. ie/under. htm) This rigid system is in stark comparison to Sweden. Their unemployment insurance benefit (UIB) has been thought to be one of the most generous in the world. It is controlled by the trade unions, finance by the state and administered by 40 voluntary societies. The level of contribution varies as it depends on the likelihood of unemployment. UIB encompasses about 3/4 of unemployed people, the rest rely on social assistance. In the 1990's UIB came under intense pressure because of an increase in unemployment and concern to limit social expenditure. This resulted in that by the late 1990's there was a decreased eligibility and the proportion of previous income received was slashed from 90% to 80%. There is now a far greater pressure on unemployed individuals to join in AMS schemes (Government training schemes) to indicate their availability to work. Involvement in AMS schemes permits the re-establishment of eligibility to UIB. This can be seen as a huge incentive! There is a three year benefit duration limit. Despite this limit, it is still safe to say that it is more generous and less disciplined than that of France. (Cochrane et al, 2001) In comparison to France and Sweden, welfare for unemployment is very complicated. The administration of social assistance is controlled by state or local government agencies, on a decentralised basis, even though funding does come from federal Government. However, USA welfare on employment is mainly through unemployment insurance (UI). Unemployment insurance varies significantly depending on state and local government. However, there are some principles which are relevant to most states. (www. tiss. zdu. uni) Unemployment insurance is not aimed at being long term support for the unemployed. It is designed to be a bridge till they obtain a new job. Unemployment insurance operates under very strict condition for limited periods of time. The number of covered people is relatively low. This is due to the fact that a lot of people are not eligible foe unemployment insurance. (www. law. cornell. edu/topics) Unemployment insurance is not available to the self-employed, domestic servants, farm workers, Government employees and those who have only been briefly employed. (www. buzzle. com) To actually receive unemployment benefits from the state is incredibly complex. The actual law on benefits and who is eligible to welfare schemes is very convoluted. In extreme cases, where vulnerable individuals do not even meet the criteria for schemes of federal support or assistance, may be entitled to state and local or purely state relief. This is called general assistance. (www. law. cornell. edu/topics) It has been found that the population age profile of western societies is changing. We are now living in an increasingly ageing population. The age structure of the population comes from past birth rates, increasing mortality rates, increased longevity and migration trends. This inevitably means an increase in the amount of people who will be eligible for a pension. (Baldock et al, 1999) Therefore, welfare regimes have to account for it. France has a pay-as-you-go system. (www. news. bbc. co. uk) The pay-as-you-go system is basically that the pensions that are being paid out today are being funded by taxing the employed of today. This is in stark contrast to private pension scheme (those favoured in the USA) as these are based on paying pensions out of the contributions an individual made during their entire working life. (Baldock et al, 1999) It is believed that this is going to be unsustainable. This is due to the increasing longevity and the declining birth rates. This means that in the future there will be far fewer workers to pay for the multiplying amount of pensioners. (www. news. bbc. co. uk) This is now worrying the French Government. They are now beginning to take steps to remedy the situation. One example of this can be seen by looking at a bill approved by the French Government, in May of last year. They approved a bill that meant that the amount of time that all Government employees must work in order to get a full pension increases from 37 years and 6 months to 41 years and 9 months. www. telegraph. co. uk) In comparison to Sweden, the French system leaves a lot to be desired. In Sweden, there are two mandatory statutory pension schemes. These are a basic flat-rate payment and a contributory earnings-related scheme (ATP). Both schemes are funded on a pay-as-you-go system. They are paid out of contributions from the current workforce. Every citizen and long-term r esident are entitles to the basic flat-rate pension. To get the ATP pension, they have to have a thirty year history of contribution. However, there is a supplement that can be obtained with the basic pension if an individual has no ATP or a very low level of ATP. For most of the people in Sweden, the two statutory pension schemes, replace or provide around 65% of pre-retirement gross salary. However, these pensions are liable for taxation. Also, 90% of employees in Sweden top-up the statutory schemes by covering themselves with extra occupational pension schemes. These cover various groups of employees and provide up to an extra 10% on replacement income. The extra occupational pension schemes encompass four main schemes and they work on a collective agreement. They cover people employed by local and central government as well as blue-collar workers and white-collar workers. In Sweden, in 1992, only 6. 3% of elderly households were defined as being poor after taxes, this is in stark comparison to the USA as in 1996; just over 20% of elderly households were poor. These are phenomenally different statistics. (Cochrane et al, 2001) There are two public pension schemes in the USA. They are the public flat-rate pension and the public earning related pension. The public pension scheme encompasses both the means-tested, basic-rate pension (Supplementary security income, or SSI) and the earnings related pension (Old-age, survivor and disability insurance, or OASDI). The flat-rate basic pension is financed by general federal Government revenues. However, some states give an additional small state-government supplement. All SSI pensions are subject to income and asset testing. The earnings related pensions (OASDI) are financed through contributions. It is broken down as follows: employee provides 6. 2% of earnings and the employers provide 6. 2% of payroll whereas the self-employed provide 24. % of earnings. The minimum eligibility requirement for OASDI pensions is ten years of contributions. This is also a pay-as-you-go system. However, occupational, private pension schemes are highly recommended. (www. reformmonitor. org) Family policy plays a very significant part in social security. In France, family allowance is assigned to all families with at least two children, under the age of 18, regardless of income. However, there are numerous supplementary means-tested benefits available. There is the family supplement, which is for families with three children, over the age of three. There is also the single parent allowance, adoption allowance, the parental education allowance, the special education allowance for children with disabilities and also the annual school allowance for children between the ages of 6 and 18. There is also the housing allowance; this is calculated by the expense of rent and the families' situation. Additionally, there are also birth payments, maternity benefits and parental leave benefits. These include a means-tested young child allowance; it is available from the fourth month of gestation until the child is three years old. Also, included is a maternity benefit that increases by the amount of children plus if the mother is insured there are even more benefits. There are also paternity leave benefits, where the mother or the father can be on leave up until the child's 3rd birthday. Since 1998, there have been means-tested allowances to decrease the cost of childcare for children under 3 years old. The childcare can be in the home (child minder) or at a registered facility. There are also allowances in childcare for 3 to 6 year olds. (www. reformmonitor. org) Like France, Sweden has a universal child allowance. This is for children under the age of 16 years. This goes up to 20 years, if they are in full-time education. Families, with more that 3 children are entitled to a large family supplement. There is also a family allowance for handicapped children who attend a public school. They also, like France, have a housing benefit. This benefit is also dependant on the expense of rent and the size of family. There are also birth payments, maternity benefits and parental leave benefits but the do not seem as good as France is. There is a paid parental leave for 450 days, which is divided up between the parents. Also, the mother gets special allowances because of reduced work ability. In Sweden, they can also claim a sick child benefit. This is available for a maximum of 60 days, per year, per sick child under the age of 12 years. There is a positive infrastructure of support services to help working parents meet their childcare obligations. It also includes the support of single parents. Since July 2001, childcare expenses were lowered for families with children in subsidised childcare facilities. With this reform came a guaranteed 3 hours a day for childcare for unemployed people. This was so that they could actively seek employment. (www. reformmonitor. org) The USA is completely different from France and Sweden. In the USA, under the temporary assistance for needy families programme (TANF), benefit payments differ widely across states. The TANF programme is to support poor families with low incomes and dependant children. It is often reduced or even stopped after a family has received benefits regularly for 6 to 24 months. This is supposed to help reduce dependence on the state. The main family assistance, which is practically available in most states, is provided through federal income tax. Families with 1 or more children are provided with an ample amount off of income tax and people who earn a very low wage plus have children are given refundable income tax benefits. Unlike both France and Sweden, there are very few employees, who are given paid parental leave, when a child is born or is sick. However, since 1995, unpaid leave for both child birth and child illness has been mandatory. There are 5 states, which do provide income replacements, subject to certain conditions, for up to 52 weeks. Federal employees do benefit from 24 hours of paid leave a year, for child related activities. Some employers, in the USA, do offer subsidised childcare facilities for their staff. However, the majority of employers do not. Federal childcare funding was provided so that states could be flexible in designing inclusive, integrated childcare facilitates, to make it easier for unemployed or single parents to get back to work. (www. reformmonitor. org) To conclude, there are some major differences between each of the welfare regimes. The biggest differences come from looking at unemployment differences and family policy. The USA is probably the most diverse plus the have all had very different consequences. However, there are similarities between some of the aspects. This comes from pensions. All regimes are based on the pay-as-you-go regime, to a certain extent. However, they all have differing success. All in all, it would be hard to say for definite that any one of them would be superior but Sweden would be a definite contender. However, it is safe to say that welfare regimes in the future could benefit from utilising the most successful parts for the present regimes and learning for the unsuccessful parts. Social Security Policy New Labour promised to halve child poverty by 2010 and to eradicate it by 2020, (Walker, 1999). Social security is not merely about poverty relief, as the relief of poverty requires more than just social security reform, it is important to address the position of social security policy at present to see whether Labour can live up to this rather ambitious target it has set. The term ‘Social Security' is used to refer to the range of policies which aim to transfer cash resources between individuals and families. It is concerned with policies which govern the redistribution of resources within society. After coming to power in 1997 the Labour government reviewed the key principles of social security policy. They developed the ‘Welfare to Work' strategy, as they want people of working age to look for employment within the labour market and avoid dependence on the state. The maintenance of a high and stable level of employment was one of the fundamental assumptions of the Beveridge report, and an objective to which all governments were positively committed after 1944 (Lowe, 1993). Hills (1997) argues that since Beveridge, the objectives of social security have never been set out in a way allowing measurement of whether benefit levels are adequate to meet their aims. The original aim of the National Insurance system as introduced following the recommendations of the Beveridge report in 1948 was to set up a system of subsistence level flat-rate social insurance benefits which were intended to cover all the main causes of inability to earn, such as old age, sickness, unemployment, widowhood and orphanhood. It also included virtually the whole body of the populations, whether employed, self- employed or non- employed, as far as possible in the same terms (Sleeman, 1979). Changes in the welfare system have been needed for a variety of reasons, society has changed, and policies need to change to keep in tune with this, these changes include changing families, working women, an ageing society and rising expectations (Giddens, 1998; Hills, 1997). In the UK, the earliest form of social security was the Poor Law which was based around discretionary payments related to individuals' assessment of need, and this continued to play a part in the delivery of many means- tested benefits until the last two decades of the twentieth century (Alcock, 2003). The Elizabethan Poor Law (1598) distinguished between the deserving and undeserving, this is something which is still reflected in Social Security policy; Hewitt and Powell (2002) point out how the use of contracts can be taken back to the deserving and undeserving poor, only now the terms being used are responsible and irresponsible; and this is reflected in the ‘Security for those who cannot' (DSS 1998)- which means no security for those who can but do not. Another similarity between the poor law and the modern welfare state is that Parishes excluded the traveling poor from its boundaries; this is still evident today with the treatment of travelers and the single homeless. This argument is supported by Hills and Gardiner (1997). Within Social Security, Employment policy occupies a crucial position in the post- war reconstruction, and without which the welfare state could not exist. Full employment would both finance the development of the welfare state, and government welfare policy would help to maintain economic growth. Barr (1993) has outlined three social aims of state intervention in income distribution; the relief of poverty in order to protect a minimum income standard was the first. The second is the protection of accustomed living standards to ensure that none has to face an unexpected and unacceptably large drop in their standard of living and the third is, smoothing out income over the life cycle. However, as pointed out by Glennerster and Hills these three interact, the balance between them and the responsibility of the state can differ over time and between countries. The aims of Social Security policy are not merely to be measured in income terms. Social and political participation may be seen as important civic virtues by a broad spectrum of political opinion. Social Security maintains a standard of living that supports inclusiveness (Townsend 1979), the consequences of failure in this respect is ‘social exclusion'. The miseries of unemployment in a work- ethic society are well- documented by Sinfield, (1981). To these are added the harassment and insecurity of dependence on means tested welfare (Bradshaw and Deacon,1983) and the despair of living at a standard of living which steadily falls behind that of the working class in work. (Taylor- Gooby, 1985). Glennerster (1999) has criticized the critics, arguing that paid work brings dignity and respect. Social welfare imposes controls on society, social security regulations distinguish those who do and do not deserve support. As pointed out by Taylor- Gooby (1985) regulations which ensure that a household head is usually responsible for the living standards of family members defined as dependents encourage a certain household pattern. Social Security is traditionally divided into a contributory and a non- contributory sector, the former covers benefits such as sickness benefits, unemployment benefits, retirement pension, widows' benefit- those regarded as the important benefits. In the latter most benefits are allocated to those who can prove that they do through a mean test. Eligibility for social security has two elements, the first being the formal rules and regulations governing provision of benefits and secondly the perceptions of eligibility held by claimants and potential claimants. The contributory principle, whereby National Insurance benefits are linked to earnings established under rules of eligibility which disproportionately excludes those in intermittent or low paid work, those with a higher risk of unemployment as well as recent migrants. The establishment of such policy on the basis of a White, Male norm thereby formally excluded many of those in minority ethnic group from social citizenship rights to such benefits (Amin and Oppenheim, 1992). Post war welfare reforms and immigration legislation have continued to institutionalize racially exclusionary rules which determine eligibility to welfare benefits these include residence tests, rules on ‘recourse to public funds' and sponsorship conditions. This is well documented in the case of asylum seekers in Britain. Compared with some of the other developed industrial countries, Britain has been relatively successful in establishing a general and comprehensive welfare floor. (Sleeman, 1979) As argued by Hills (1997) benefits for those without work may ameliorate their immediate position but they do not solve the problem. A prime aim of social security policy should be for claimants, where possible to find independent sources of income. While the overall level of employment depends on wider economic factors, the social security structure may discourage employment under some circumstances. Under the Conservatives, due to rising unemployment and the recession in the early 1990's changes were made to social security policy with regards to the unemployed. Not only did the costs of paying unemployed people's mortgages reduced, but Income support (IS) payments for mortgages were withdrawn for the first nine months of unemployment. In 1996 Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) was created when contributory unemployment benefit and means- tested Income support were merged. With JSA for the first six months of unemployment there would be a contributory basis and after that it would be means- tested. It was decided that those under the age of 25 would receive a lower rate of benefit and that contract would be introduced between claimants and the benefits agency to formalise job searches and training criteria, as well as establishing availability for work. With regards to means tested benefits, we have all heard politicians expressing their concerns about benefit ‘dependency'. According to Glennerster and Hills (1998) unemployment benefit has been the largest single source of growth in means- tested populations, followed by lone parenthood. A major theme of policy has been to sustain a gap between income and benefits and in work to ensure incentives to work in the face of increasing levels of unemployment, decreasing relative levels of wages for the unskilled, and increased part- time and temporary working, Benefit policy has been changed to both decrease relative value of benefits for the unemployed and to increase use of means testing. This leads to two problems for ensuring incentives to work: one is to ensure that benefit rates are not close to or greater than in- work income and to ensure that those who are working on the margins of benefit entitlement are able to improve their incomes through work. The side- effect of means testing is that benefit is reduced as income rises alongside the incidence of tax and social security contributions on increased earnings. As benefits have fallen relative to incomes over time, the incentives to work, therefore, in general have been improved (Glennerster and Hills, 1998). The main theme of social security policy is ‘work for those who can; security for those who cannot'. Which consist of a rights and responsibilities discourse. Those who cannot work have a right to security. However, for those who can work, the right to benefit is more conditional. The basic philosophy is that work is the best route out of poverty. ‘Making work pay' includes a national minimum wage, tax reform such as Working families tax credits and nursery credits, which increase the return from low paid work and reduce the poverty trap. The government aims to achieve full employment, instead of paying people in poverty more benefit, New labour will redistribute opportunities and take a preventative approach, giving people the skills to escape poverty. Within Social Security policy is employment centred social policy which is based around the ‘New Deal' programmes; which target different groups. For example for young unemployed people there are four choices; education; a subsidized private sector job; a voluntary sector job or an environmental task force; the opportunity for sitting at home on benefits is not an option, as benefits will be reduced. For lone parents there are no penalties for not taking up employment, although they do have to attend work- focused interviews, in order to make them aware of the opportunities available to them. With regards to pensioners; pensions are uprated by prices rather than earning, the poorest pensioners do have a means- tested minimum pension guarantee that ties in with the increase in earnings. This represents a move from Universalism to selectivity. This also means that gradually pensioners will carry on falling behind workers (Powell and Hewitt, 2002). This in itself demonstrates the lack of respect for the elderly, and the fuels the argument that once someone passes working age, they are no longer deemed an integral part of society, and are pushed out of mainstream society. This essay aims to look at the provisions in place for younger people, of working age, for whom the government are trying to move into the labour market. What New Labour is trying to aim for is an active, preventative and intelligent rather than passive welfare state that encourages people to realize their potential rather than being chained to passive dependency (Powell and Hewitt, 2002). The bulk of National Insurance expenditure is on pensions, whereas for sickness and unemployment contributory benefits do still apply. JSA covers unemployment, for the first six months there is non- means tested support for hose who meet the NI contribution conditions and is linked to an agreement by claimants to take steps to secure a return to the labor market. Jobseekers allowance is no longer an Insurance benefit for the unemployed, after six months claimants remain on the benefit, and are subject to the same job search criteria, but their benefit moves onto a means- tested basis, which means any other resources (income from a partner) will reduce one's overall entitlement. In practical terms, means- tested JSA is Income support, given another title, as Income support has for some time been payable to unemployed claimants not covered by National Insurance benefits. It is still available for those out of work, who are not required to seek work under JSA rules, such as lone parents and people with disabilities and Carers. ‘Income support is a minimum income scheme for British citizens' (Alcock, 2003), payable only to those who are out of full- time employment (16 hours a week) and is reduced if there are any earning or any capital above à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½3000 in total. Housing costs are not covered, but claimants who pay rent can apply to their local council for housing benefit and council tax benefit, in some cases interest payments on mortgage debts are covered. For children of parents who are in receipt of Income Support or means- tested JSA free school meals are available. A major feature of social security protection was once sickness, but in the 1980's , under the Tories support for short term sickness (up to six months) was shifted to employment, employers were expected to pay workers a minimum level, whilst they were off sick. After six months, claimants with chronic illness or disability move to Incapacity benefit (NI protection) if they meet the contribution conditions with a medical test, which requires they are incapable of ‘all work'. For those who do not satisfy the contribution condition, they are paid Income Support which is means- tested, as long as they can satisfy the conditions for Incapacity Benefit. For those in low wage employment means- tested support is also available through tax credits, payable through employers, administered by the Inland Revenue. Alcock (2003) argues that there has been a significant shift in the operation of means – tested benefits under the Labour government since 1997. Family Credit was replaced by Working Families Tax Credit, made available to a wider range of low- income families. Not only does this act as a supplement to the wages of low income workers with dependent children, it also aims to make low paid work seem more attractive, to encourage labour market participation as part of the governments commitment to promote employment. The most important of the Universal benefits is child benefit which is paid to all parent or guardians to help them with the cost or rearing children. Critics would argue that, like all Universal services, Child benefit is a waste of public resources by paying benefit to wealthy parents, who do not need this money like poorer parents do. The benefit of Universal benefits is that there is no stigma attached to being in receipt of it. Jones and Novak (1999) argue that the whole benefits system operates to control and discipline citizens rather than support and protect them. There are a number of different theories and ideologies of welfare, the main traditional theories are the Classical Liberal theory; Marxist theories and Fabian theories. Classical liberal theories are based around ideas that see freedom as absence of coercion rather than protection from misfortune and hardship. Within classical liberal thinking there are two contrasting views on the state. Traditional or negative liberal defend the individual liberty while challenging what they perceive as the arbitrary misuse of power. Negative liberals say the role of the state should be minimal. On the other hand there are positive liberals who say that the state can adopt a more constructive role in dealing with social problems. Both positive and negative liberal thinking have been influential on the modern British Conservative party. It is important to make the distinction that not all classical liberals are opposed to the welfare state. Classical liberal theory points out that unwarranted state intervention will only amplify social and economic problems since the market system will be less efficient and economic growth will slow. It is also believed that individual freedom is of paramount importance and any attempt by the state to provide fiscal help to the poor compromises that individual freedom, this is said to be done in two ways; the first is by asking those who earn wages to pay extra taxes to support the poor and secondly, by creating the conditions under which poor individuals and the state will have a relationship of dependency. Classical liberals regard the causes of poverty to be personal, rather than structural; poverty is traced to personal feelings rather than to failings of the political or economic systems. They go on to say that individual rights must be preserved at all times, and go as far to say that people have the ‘right' to be poor. Barnett (1986) stated that the welfare state was necessary for a short time, following the problems created by the Second World War; that those who supported it did not take a long term view of the countries economic needs. The welfare state is no longer beneficial. A recurring objection to the welfare state is the belief that services provide benefit to those who do not need it; such as child benefit, which is a universal benefit and it paid to everyone, regardless of earning, some would see this as a waste. Sidney and Beatrice Webb were influential figures in Fabianism, they believed that collective welfare through the state was not only essential, but an inevitable development within British capitalist society. An early example of the influence of Fabian thinking was with regards to the Poor Laws, whereby in 1905 the Royal Commission was set up to review the old Victorian support system. The significance of this was the governments' recognition that it had to implement major changes to the welfare state. Fabianism is a variant of British Socialism. The ‘New Left' is a term used to describe a broad range of differing approaches to social structure and social policy from a Marxist perspective. In general many agreed that the achievement of the welfare state in Britain was neither as desirable nor as successful as had been assumed. Marxists argued that the welfare state had not been successful in solving the social problems or the poor and of the broader working class, in practice the welfare state supported capitalism, as opposed to challenging it (Ginsburg, 1979) The New Left has been criticized for its theoretical assumptions of the assumed desirability of state welfare services, arguing that for many of the working class social security was seen as being oppressive and stigmatizing. Hayek (1944) argues that despite the overwhelming influence of Fabianism within social policy, right wing critics of state welfare had always argued against the interference of state provision with the workings of a capitalist market economy. This neo-liberal thinking was referred to by Fabians and the new left as the ‘New Right; as it was interested in returning to the classic liberal values of a laissez- faire state, which advocated for self- protecting families and communities. The main argument of the new right was that state intervention to provide welfare services, and the gradual expansion of these which Fabianism sought, merely drove up the cost of public expenditure to a point at which it began to interfere with the effective operation of a market economy (Bacon and Eltis, 1976). They claimed that this was a point that had already been reached in the 1970's , where the high levels of taxation needed for welfare services managed to reduce profits, crippled investment and driven capital overseas (Alcock, 2003). Like the New Left, the New Right also challenged the desirability of state welfare in practice, arguing that free welfare services only encouraged dependency and provided no incentive for individuals and families to protect themselves through savings and insurance (Boyson, 1971). Hayek (1982) argued that state intervention involved unwanted interference with the freedom of individuals to organize their own lives. Neo- liberal thinking is opposed to extensive state intervention to provide public services; effectively they are opposed to the ‘welfare state'. They argue that it is undesirable on ideological, political and economic grounds; that is undesirable in theory and impossible in practice. Their ideological objections to it revolve around their concern about dependency culture; by providing welfare through the state, individuals are discouraged from providing these for themselves and their families, which could in turn trap them into relying on others for support. Murray (2002) makes the point that in social security if everyone is going to be provided with a basic standard of living, this makes it an attractive option for individuals to choose this, rather than seeking paid employment. Which applies to means- tested benefits, whereby entitlement is related to an individuals' income level, this means any increase in income means a loss in benefit. Economically speaking, the welfare state is undesirable because it interferes with the free working of the market, leading to failures in markets developing properly. Although neo- liberals argue that the welfare state is not practical, most recent neo- liberal theorists agree that a safety net should be in place, as it may still be needed. Neo- liberalism, therefore still remains within the mixed economy of welfare, which is found in all modern welfare capitalist countries (Alcock, 2003). Marxist theories are based around the idea of Marx (1970) whose claim was that capitalism is an inherently oppressive economic structure in which the working class are exploited by the capitalist class through the labour market. It is argued by Marxists that Socialism or Communism is the logical and desirable alternative to the failures of both capitalist markets and the welfare state. However, they do not provide any explanation as to how this is to be achieved, except that it needs to be done revolutionarily, rather than gradually and involves the overthrowing of the existing democratic governments. This ideology has never attracted much attention in Britain, making its political potential limited here. Marxists believe that the welfare state uses taxes paid by everyone to provide services and to foster the illusion that the state is altruistic and redistributiove, whereas in actual fact the stae is preserving and reinforcing certain norms and structural relationships. Ginsburg (1979) argued that institutions of welfare operated within British society to control and suppress people as well as to provide for them; arguing that the social security system in practice stigmatized claimants and forced them into low waged employment. This criticism of the British welfare state comes from a Marxist perspective. The strength of the Marxist critique of the welfare within Capitalism is its ability to demonstrate the contradictory nature of social policy as providing social control and social protection at the same time. In 1998, New labour developed a ‘third way', Blair argued that both the right wing pro- market approaches and the old left's support from state monopolistic services should be rejected in favour of a new (third way) which would be located between the state and the market. The new labour government was not interested in whether services were best provided by the state (the old, Fabian, left) or by the market (the right) instead it was looking to find the most effective way to meet social needs; which was a practical judgement based on empirical evidence of effectiveness. Hills (1997) has pointed out that some benefits, such as child benefit, state pension and unemployment benefit for some, go to people unaffected by means- testing, and argues that further means- testing would allow spending to be better targeted. Some have argued that elimination of universal benefits would free up sizeable sums of money, which could then be spent on those that need it the most, which would mean for New Labour that they could go a little further to achieve its targeted with regards to child poverty. Eliminating Universal benefits would mean a substantial reduction in the overall cost of welfare spending, meaning the government could put more money into other areas such as the National Health Service. Social Security is the largest element of public expenditure, greater than both health and education, and accounts for 11 per cent of gross domestic product (Alcock, 2003). Social Security is an important aspect of our society, through state intervention individuals are provided with a basic standard of living, and kept out of absolute poverty. An interesting Marxist theory of the purpose of the welfare state states that the state maintains a ‘reserve army of labour' , through which a certain portion of society are kept out of work , but may be asked to join the labour force when needed. By providing these people with benefits (the unemployed, disabled and lone parents) the welfare state is serving capitalism by maintaining these groups who can be called upon at short notice. Marxists would argue that welfare constitutes social control and ‘polices' the state. They claim that the unemployed and other members of the reserve army of labour are treated harshly, to remind others of the consequences of not working. Lowe(1999) points out that the history of postwar social security was riddled with contradictions. The promise of the Beveridge report was to realize the new ideal of social security, through a simplified system of state relief without resort to the unpopular means- test, aroused immense popular enthusiasm and lay at the heart of the new values and perspectives upon which the new welfare state was initially built. Yet within ten years the social security system was no longer popular. The means test did not wither away and the system started to become so complex that it became self defeating. Social Security has both positive and negative connotations, in practice it can be seen as a benefit and by others a cost (Alcock, 2003).

Children education Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Children education - Essay Example In terms of the findings by Bottini & Grossman (2005) all factors have implications to my teaching. Students in the traditional classroom were expected to sit and listen to the teacher and then work independently with little if any time allowed for interaction; whereas students in the center-based classroom (centers focused on science, art, mathematics, reading, writing and computers) were able to explore and experiment to create their own learning and knowledge with the teacher guiding and helping them. The inclusion of subjects such as art, music and physical education were provided within specific allotted times in the traditional class but in the center-based classroom such subjects were provided at random and more often, thus creating a more conducive environment for learning. The teacher within the traditional classroom wasted a lot of time reprimanding students on their bad behavior – bad behavior caused by having to sit for long periods of time with no interaction with peers or teacher, and the fact that some students finished a task more quickly than others and so had time to waste while those taking longer became agitated and disturbed.

Canadian Aboriginal Community Assessment and Diagnosis Essay

Canadian Aboriginal Community Assessment and Diagnosis - Essay Example Statistically, Aboriginal or First Nations peoples regardless of their location face similar pre-dispositions for certain diseases, such as type II diabetes. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic disorder of carbohydrate, protein, and fat metabolism caused by a discrepancy between the amount of insulin required by the body and the amount of insulin available (Sommers, 2011). The disease leads to inappropriate glucose utilization within the body which causes a variety of related diseases, thus modifying the mortality rates. Type II DM is often called ‘adult onset’ diabetes and is related to obesity, poor diet, and other factors. Diabetes is a life-long disease that can be treated with diet, exercise, supportive medications and close management of blood glucose levels, and also treated for its effects on other body organs and systems.Aboriginal communities in Canada commonly believe that diabetes prevention is ineffective in Aboriginal populations because it fails to offer d iabetes prevention strategies specific to their needs (Ghosh & Gomes, 2011, pg. 246). The Alberta Diabetes Surveillance System (ADSS) has reported that in status Aboriginals the diabetes incidence and prevalence rates are twice the incidence rates compared to the general population. Accordingly, the use of hospital and emergency department services is 2 to 3 times higher for the Status Aboriginal population as compared to the general population.The Type 2 diabetes is about 3 to 5 times higher among First Nations people.