Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
20 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Chapter 2 of the Alesina and Glaeser book presents data on redistributive programs in the US and Europe. (see for example Table 2.2 below). How big are the differences in redistributive programs in the US and Europe? What impact might these differences have on people’s lives? What are the potential negative impacts, if any, of such programs?
|
General gov't spending in EU= 45% of GDP US=30% of GDP
-Ams engage in more private provision of welfare (charity) -our programs are based on the belief of social mobility |
|
|
In Chapter 4, Alesina and Glaeser look at the impact of political institutions on the amount of redistribution in Europe and the US. In particular, they find that countries with electoral systems that are more ‘proportional’ (ie European proportional representation voting) tend to redistribute more than countries with more ‘majoritarian’ systems (ie American style winner take all voting). How do they explain the impact of voting systems on redistribution (see pp.81-87)? Does this make sense? Likewise, they argue that American federalism may also explain why we redistribute less wealth (see pp. 87-90). Explain why.
|
Marjoritarian systems characterized by geographically based electoral districts in which each district choses one rep. the elected gov't favors spending programs that can be geographically targeted
-proportional election systems favor spending on universal programs. am federal system has several incentives in place that reduce the scope for state deficits & redistributive policies -incentives for localities & states to spend w/o a budget constraints are limited -in US many public programs that have redistributive impacts are taken locally -redistributive flows from wealthy localities to poorer ones are avoided -competition between states, rates will be equally lower -states with good benefits will attract the worse sort of people |
|
|
In Chapter 6, Alesina and Glaeser look at the impact of ethnic heterogeneity and racism on the degree of redistribution in a country. Discuss the two tables below from Chapter 6 (one that compares across countries and one that compares across US states). What do they suggest about the relationship between race and redistribution?
|
The more racial fractionalization within a country the lower the amount of social welfare spending.
-many european countries, especially those that are small, are remarkable homogenous -people are less likely to support welfare within the US if they lve near welfare recipients of another race -at the state level, welfare payments are less generous in AM. states that have a higher proportion of minorities -whites are much more hostile to redistribution than blacks |
|
|
In Chapter 7 Alesina and Glaeser discuss the relationship between ‘ideology’ and prevalent beliefs in a society and the levels of redistribution. Clearly Americans tend to believe that people’s financial success (or poverty) is determined by individual effort and not by ‘luck’ or by ‘society’ (see Figures 7.1 and 7.2 on pp. 187-188). Why do you think Americans hold such different views on these issues than people in other countries? What impact does it have on support for social programs/progressive taxes etc?
|
socieview the poor as it's their own fault won't have many social rgrams because they don't see it was their responsibilities to help the poor.
-America as land of work-a-holic immigrants |
|
|
In his article, ‘Whither Social Europe?”, Jonas Pontusson argues that the Nordic countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark) have been able to combine a strong commitment to egalitarianism with economic growth. Discuss the tables below. What does the data suggest about the relationship between pursuit of greater equality and economic growth? What factors does Pontusson say help explain the success of the ‘Nordic model’?
|
Sluggish employment growth is typically associated w/ growing inequality of market income
-income differentials in countries with more equal distributions of income may be more productive -the distinctively compressed wage structures of the nordic countries can be attributed in part to the enduring strength of organized labor & the soladaristic approach to wage bargaining adopted by nordic unions. -policies to promote gender equality & in particular, to encourage women's employment during child rearing -have flexicurity |
|
|
In the film and book, TR Reid emphasizes that many elements of the health care systems in Europe (and Asia) are not really so foreign to the US… that we actually have elements of those systems here. What did he mean?
|
-employers-dismark
-Medicare-Beveridge (canadian -VA- (NHS) British Syst -in US states are supposed to regulate the insurance co -haven't been good in reg prices |
|
|
Which system – the Bismarck, the Beveridge or the National Insurance model – might be most applicable for health reform in the US? Explain why.
|
Ams won't accept Gov't run HC
|
|
|
In the US, insurance companies are ‘for profit’ businesses and they are allowed to deny coverage to people who have ‘preexisting conditions’. How do these factors influence American health care?
|
Loss- whenver the insurance company have to pay for anything
-quality of HC |
|
|
Critics of health reform in the US often argue that extending coverage to the entire population would lead to far higher health care spending. Yet, European countries provide universal coverage to their citizens while spending a much lower % of their GDP on health care than the US does. How could it be that guaranteeing universal coverage could actually reduce health care spending?
|
-Lowering admin. cost
-larger pool to receive $ from since everyone has to be insured -think of social security |
|
|
Should Congress just pass a law forbidding companies from denying coverage based on ‘pre-existing conditions’? If they did that, but did not reform other aspects of health care, what problems might result? Which aspects of our health care/health insurance system need to be addressed in a more comprehensive reform?
|
-only people with an illness are covered"moral hazard"
-universla coverage, gov't regulation of insurance co -more insurance company competition -insurance co spend a lot on advertising |
|
|
Why do people in the US generally not refer to the Veterans Administration health system or Medicare as ‘socialism’?
|
- we think its fair for these people because they have earned it
|
|
|
In the film and book, TR Reid describes how in 1994 the Swiss government overcame opposition from insurers and drug companies to establish a system of universal health coverage in which everyone was forced to buy insurance and insurance companies could not make a profit on the basic health insurance package (though they could profit on supplementary packages bought on top of the basic one). Why were the Swiss willing to make this change? Does the Swiss example hold any potential lesson for the US? Could you imagine a similar reform being introduced in the US? Why or why not?
|
Problems doesn't cover everyone expensive
-switz hc bill passed through a referendum -similar to what the us is -switz culturally diverse, but values its solidarity more healthy people -better productivity and economic growth |
|
|
Do economically advanced democracies have a moral obligation to assure that all their citizens have access to health care (ie ‘universal coverage’)? Why or why not? Aside from morality, are there other practical reasons that economically advanced democracies should in any case establish universal coverage?
|
-keep promiums down
-decrease in infant mortality& longevity -equal opp. to give people the right to live ( edu) |
|
|
Why has it proven so difficult to reform health care in the US? Why have so many leaders failed to achieve ‘universal coverage’? Do you think Obama’s reform effort will succeed? Why or why not?
|
-Am ideology individualism)
-structure of our voting system (minorities/poor) are highly underrepresented -free market;gov't hands off -if insurance co were non-profit less of an incentive to cut costs & deny coverage -more universal coverage |
|
|
What do Greens stand for besides protecting the environment?
|
pacifism, feminism, alternative lifestle/ post materialism
|
|
|
• Which parties in Europe seem to you most similar to the US Democrats? To the Republicans? Explain why.
|
Secular conservative
|
|
|
• The Republican Party in the US is a center right party, and many of its leaders emphasize Christian values. Yet, Republicans differ in significant ways from the ‘Christian Democrats’ in Europe, who are also center right parties that emphasize Christian values. Explain how they differ and why.
|
(capitalism protect ppl from econ. downturns
|
|
|
• Chapters 2, 3 and 4 of the Hill book pose some puzzles. Hill notes that the media often portrays European economies as inefficient, overly regulated, overly taxed and generally uncompetitive. He argues, however, that in fact they are highly competitive (see pages 33-37). Discuss the factors that he suggests help make Europe competitive. Be sure to touch on concepts such as ‘co-determination’ (p.54), patterns of labor management relations (p.59), flexicurity (p.60).
|
co-determination is a framework of supervisory boards where elected rep. on corporate boards of directors & work councils gave workers a great deal of input at the shop floor level
-permits relatively easy hiring & firing of workers in exhage for job training and retaining apprenticenships for new workers & generous financial & other workfare supports for those who lose their jobs |
|
|
• Hill uses the term ‘workfare support system’ and he quotes a British policy analyst saying, “Europe doesn’t so much have a ‘welfare society’ as much as it has a comprehensive system of institutions geared toward keeping everyone healthy and working.”(p. 75) What do Hill and the person he quotes mean when they talk about a workfare support system, or a system of institutions to keep everyone healthy and working? How does this idea compare to the American idea of ‘welfare programs’ or ‘social programs’?
|
by keeping their workers happy with co-determinations, flexicuirty & family values policies the workers want to keep working & are happy to do so.
-believe that their workers are replaceable expensive logic |
|
|
Hill discusses European ‘family’ policies on pp.75-80. In terms of supporting ‘family values’ how do these programs compare to policies typically advocated by politicians who claim to support ‘family values’ in the US?
|
parental leave, child care, kiddie stepends, sick leave health care, retirement & pensions, elderly care, edu, affordable housing
|
