Question 1
Classical liberalism is a political philosophy that developed in the 19th century and integrated itself in government policies in the United States and Europe. It was a strong advocator for civil rights and political freedoms and encompassed the idea of a represented democracy. At the same time, it also separated church from state. It was during this period that the working class suffered from economically unjust poverty, found themselves without any political rights, had no options and/or powers to fight for better wages, and lacked any support from the state. Remnants of classical liberalism still run strong throughout Western civilisation today.
Classic liberalism was an ideology that wanted to give individual freedoms by taking …show more content…
Not only that, but by having a ‘welfare’ system, it would only reduce the workers’ incentive to look for employment and also reduce the rewards/pleasures that come from work. An extreme outlook on classic liberalism would be the notion of ‘survival of the fittest’, and any interference with ‘nature’ is only delaying the inevitable. Citing Thomas Malthus who reasoned against giving charity to the poor; “population increase will inevitably exceed food supply, so it is cruel to assist the starving: instead ‘nature should take its course’”. Analysing this statement, it would appear that classic liberalists would have championed on the platform that everyone has an equal chance or opportunity through their own individual efforts; if you failed you only had yourself to blame, and political interference would only increase reliance on the state which would take away individual …show more content…
This can also be interpreted as distribution of wealth. For example: social wages which are state provided amenities from social funds such as free/subsidised health care and education, consumer protection laws (protecting the individual from being unfairly treated from business), means-tested benefits, manipulation of interest rates and taxation, and even income support. The state may at times, provide some form of welfare collectively to assist the economy that will encourage spending and investing. An example of this would be a set of government policies which enable new buyers to the property market (subsidised/cheaper loans)
These policies provided under the Keynesian welfare state exist to create and promote equal opportunity and fairness. By recognising structural inequality, it can be achieved by properly distributing wealth through means of taxing those who earn a higher income or large businesses at a higher tax rate compared to those who are disadvantaged. But it has to be a balanced and fair system so it does not alienate or discriminate towards those who earn more. Otherwise, the state risks big businesses/multi-nationals to offshore profits to avoid paying taxes, and wealthy citizens deciding to take their money
Classical liberalism is a political philosophy that developed in the 19th century and integrated itself in government policies in the United States and Europe. It was a strong advocator for civil rights and political freedoms and encompassed the idea of a represented democracy. At the same time, it also separated church from state. It was during this period that the working class suffered from economically unjust poverty, found themselves without any political rights, had no options and/or powers to fight for better wages, and lacked any support from the state. Remnants of classical liberalism still run strong throughout Western civilisation today.
Classic liberalism was an ideology that wanted to give individual freedoms by taking …show more content…
Not only that, but by having a ‘welfare’ system, it would only reduce the workers’ incentive to look for employment and also reduce the rewards/pleasures that come from work. An extreme outlook on classic liberalism would be the notion of ‘survival of the fittest’, and any interference with ‘nature’ is only delaying the inevitable. Citing Thomas Malthus who reasoned against giving charity to the poor; “population increase will inevitably exceed food supply, so it is cruel to assist the starving: instead ‘nature should take its course’”. Analysing this statement, it would appear that classic liberalists would have championed on the platform that everyone has an equal chance or opportunity through their own individual efforts; if you failed you only had yourself to blame, and political interference would only increase reliance on the state which would take away individual …show more content…
This can also be interpreted as distribution of wealth. For example: social wages which are state provided amenities from social funds such as free/subsidised health care and education, consumer protection laws (protecting the individual from being unfairly treated from business), means-tested benefits, manipulation of interest rates and taxation, and even income support. The state may at times, provide some form of welfare collectively to assist the economy that will encourage spending and investing. An example of this would be a set of government policies which enable new buyers to the property market (subsidised/cheaper loans)
These policies provided under the Keynesian welfare state exist to create and promote equal opportunity and fairness. By recognising structural inequality, it can be achieved by properly distributing wealth through means of taxing those who earn a higher income or large businesses at a higher tax rate compared to those who are disadvantaged. But it has to be a balanced and fair system so it does not alienate or discriminate towards those who earn more. Otherwise, the state risks big businesses/multi-nationals to offshore profits to avoid paying taxes, and wealthy citizens deciding to take their money