The following paper is a result of the course „The American Political System“ given
by Prof. Slomp at the Faculty of Management of the University of Nijmegen, where
the author studies as an exchange student at the moment.
In the introduction of the course the students had to think about the most important
differences between the political systems of the United States and the European
countries. Among other major points the class came to the result that especially the
different ways and extents of providing social security and welfare for their citizens
can be regarded as one of the most important differences between the American
and European systems.
Moreover the different models of welfare state p layed an important role in the
discussions between European and American exchange students in the last months
and a lot of mutual prejudices dealing with the different kinds of welfare capitalism
had to be cleared up. For this reason the author chose the topic of social security
and welfare in Europe and the States for this assignment.
Today systems of social security and welfare are part of every modern democracy
in the world and most of the people in the „western countries“ – including the US -
count on the social services and provisions given by the state. Over the last 120
years and especially since World War II social and welfare policy has become one
of the major cores of modern democracies, without most of them the political
systems could be regarded as much more instable today. Nevertheless the
differences between the single systems and their historical, economical and social
backrounds are still strong, especially between America and Europe.
Accordingly to the questions given above, in the following paper the author wants to
- give a brief and critical overview of the american system of social security and
welfare (Chapter 2),
- describe challenges and perspectives of the american system on the basis of
two state issues (Chapter 3),
- give a short comparison of the general character of the american and european
systems of social security on the basis of the course literature, the modell of
Esping-Andersen and statistical data (Chapter 4) [...]
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Social Security and Welfare in the United States - a short and critical overview
- 3. Challenges and perspectives of the American system on the basis of two state issues
- 3.1 Utah: Consequences of the welfare reform 1996 – a university study
- 3.2 Oregon: Ballot on a universal health care system
- 4. Social Security and welfare in Europe and the United States a short comparison
- 5. Conclusion: Globalisation and the limitation of states' ability to determine economical and social policies - a coming challenge for the general type of welfare state
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This paper aims to provide a comparative analysis of social security and welfare systems in the United States and Europe. It explores the historical development, challenges, and perspectives of these systems, drawing comparisons between the American and European models. The paper also examines the impact of globalization on the ability of states to independently determine economic and social policies.
- Social security and welfare systems in the United States and Europe
- Historical development and evolution of welfare systems
- Challenges and perspectives of social security and welfare in the US
- Comparison of American and European welfare models
- Impact of globalization on state-level social policies
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- Chapter 2: This chapter provides a brief overview of the social security and welfare system in the United States. It discusses the historical development of the system, highlighting key programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The chapter also examines the financing and benefits of the American social security system, emphasizing the role of employer and employee contributions.
- Chapter 3: This chapter examines specific challenges and perspectives of the American welfare system through two case studies: Utah's welfare reform of 1996 and Oregon's ballot on a universal healthcare system. By analyzing these state-level initiatives, the chapter aims to illustrate the complexities and diverse approaches to social security and welfare in the US.
- Chapter 4: This chapter compares the general character of the American and European social security systems. It draws on course literature, the model of Esping-Andersen, and statistical data to provide a comparative analysis of the two systems. The chapter explores the key differences and similarities in terms of program design, financing, and benefits.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The paper focuses on the concepts of social security, welfare, comparative analysis, US welfare state, European welfare state, globalization, and the limitations of state autonomy in determining economic and social policies.
What are the main differences between US and European welfare systems?
The US system is generally more market-oriented and individualistic, while European systems tend to be more comprehensive, state-funded, and based on social solidarity.
What is the Esping-Andersen model of welfare states?
It categorizes welfare states into three types: Liberal (e.g., USA), Corporatist-Statist (e.g., Germany), and Social Democratic (e.g., Scandinavia), based on the degree of de-commodification.
How does globalization challenge the welfare state?
Globalization limits a state's ability to set high social standards due to international tax competition and the mobility of capital, forcing many systems to undergo reforms.
What were the consequences of the 1996 welfare reform in Utah?
The reform aimed to move people from welfare to work. Studies examine its impact on poverty levels, employment rates, and the long-term well-being of affected families.
What are Medicare and Medicaid in the US system?
Medicare is a federal health insurance program for people 65 or older, while Medicaid is a joint federal and state program that helps with medical costs for people with limited income.
