We’re making a tiny bit of progress in the battle against the welfare state. No, policy hasn’t changed yet, but at least there’s growing recognition that maybe, just maybe, it’s not a good idea to pay people not to work. Particularly when you trap them in lives of dependency and despair and undermine progress in the fight against poverty.
This chart shows that various handouts discourage low-income people from earning more money, and a recent blockbuster study from a couple of my colleagues at the Cato Institute revealed that welfare pays more than entry-level employment in dozens of states.
And a growing number of people are now aware that there’s been an explosion of food stamp dependency, so one hopes that all this knowledge eventually will translate into a new round of welfare reform.
Why am I optimistic? Well, because awareness already is leading to change in some very unexpected places. Even Scandinavian nations are realizing that there has to be a limit to incentive-killing and taxpayer-sapping redistribution.
Here are some excerpts from a remarkable Bloomberg report about developments in Denmark.
“We live in a world of global competition for jobs,” the 40-year-old minister said in an interview in Copenhagen. “For any finance minister wanting to be taken seriously, it’s something to deal with. That requires a modernization of the welfare state.” The AAA rated nation, whose economy contracted 0.2 percent in the first half, needs to contain welfare spending or risk losing the respect of investors, Corydon said. Danes, who like Swedes and Norwegians, are used to generous jobless pay as well as state-financed education and health care, need to learn that those privileges come at a cost, he said. …Denmark’s challenge now is to ensure its welfare habits don’t leave it unable to compete with populations that work harder at a lower cost, he said.
That’s a noteworthy passage, both because the Danish Finance Minister recognizes jurisdictional competition as a check on the welfare state (something confirmed by a study from German economists) and because Denmark is ruled by Social Democrats.
Yet even these leftists are grasping that it makes no sense to have a system that generates perverse incentives.
…out-of-work Danes in some cases earn even more than those in low-skilled jobs. An Aug. 27 report by the Economy Ministry showed that about 250,000 Danes have no economic incentive to give up their unemployment benefits and take a job. That compares with 2.64 million people in full- and part-time jobs, according to Statistics Danmark. …The Social Democrat-led coalition of Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, in office since 2011, has pushed through cuts including limiting unemployment benefits to two years from four years.
It’s hardly radical libertarianism to reduce unemployment benefits from four years to two years, but it is rather significant when even politicians realize that it’s not good – as illustrated by these powerful cartoons – to lure people into the wagon when nations need more people pulling the wagon.
The article even mentions “Lazy Robert,” a famous deadbeat who became the first Danish member of the Moocher Hall of Fame last April. No wonder Danes may be saying that enough is enough.
There’s even a bit of good news on the tax side of the fiscal ledger.
The government has responded to the economic slump by cutting the corporate tax rate, as well as some other taxes.
Sounds like Danish policy makers could give some lessons to their self-destructive American counterparts.
But you won’t be surprised to learn that there’s still plenty of bad policy in Denmark. The politicians can’t resist, for instance, the siren song of Keynesian economics.
It plans to spend 44 billion kroner ($7.8 billion) next year on building railroads, highways and hospitals. …Corydon,…said he wants to keep public investments close to a 30-year high to create jobs.
By the way, it’s a bit depressing that Denmark actually ranks higher than the United States in the most recent Economic Freedom of the World rankings.
Yes, their welfare state is too big, their tax system is a nightmare, and they are saddled with one of the world’s most expensive bureaucracies, but Denmark has ultra-free market policies in other areas.
But even those laissez-faire policies no longer are apparently enough to compensate for bad fiscal policy.
P.S. Denmark may have Lazy Robert, but the United Kingdom has Natailija, Tracey, Anjem, and Gina and Danny, so if there was a welfare Olympics, the U.K. would have a lot more medals.
P.P.S. Speaking of poverty, you may be surprised that bureaucrats at the OECD assert that America has more poverty than some very poor nations. But that’s only because the Paris-based bureaucracy is trying to advance Obama’s redistribution agenda by redefining poverty to mean differences in income rather than lack of income. Sort of makes you wonder why we’re subsidizing their statist agenda with our tax dollars.
[…] research from the Netherlands and the Nordic nationssuch as Denmark. And the same is true in Canada. And the United […]
[…] research from the Netherlands and the Nordic nationssuch as Denmark. And the same is true in Canada. And the United […]
[…] research from the Netherlands and the Nordic nations such as Denmark. And the same is true in Canada. And the United […]
[…] because the welfare state lures too many people into dependency. And when the oil money runs out, fixing that problem will be very […]
[…] Denmark is reducing welfare handouts. […]
[…] com muito menos redistribuição total (um objetivo que até mesmo algumas nações escandinavas estão tentando alcançar […]
[…] because the welfare state lures too many people into dependency. And when the oil money runs out, fixing that problem will be very […]
[…] A resposta simples (e correta) é desmontar o Estado de bem-estar social. Governos estaduais e locais deveriam ser encarregados de programas com controle de necessidade3, idealmente com muito menos redistribuição total (um objetivo que até mesmo algumas nações escandinavas estão tentando alcançar). […]
[…] The simple (and correct) answer is to dismantle the welfare state. State and local governments should be in charge of “means-tested” programs, ideally with much less overall redistribution (a goal even some Scandinavian nations are trying to achieve). […]
[…] The simple (and correct) answer is to dismantle the welfare state. State and local governments should be in charge of “means-tested” programs, ideally with much less overall redistribution (a goal even some Scandinavian nations are trying to achieve). […]
[…] The good news is that Nordic nations have begun to shift back toward market-oriented policies. Some of them have reduced the burden of government spending. All of them have lowered tax rates, particularly on business and investment income. And there have even been some welfare reforms. […]
[…] terrible, but the country actually is very free market in other areas. And the government is even taking some modest steps to reduce dependency, so policy makers realize there’s a […]
[…] Even Denmark is trying to cut back on the welfare state. Though that will be bad news for Lazy […]
[…] Even Denmark is trying to cut back on the welfare state. Though that will be bad news for Lazy […]
[…] The good news is that there are signs of progress, at least outside the United States. Denmark, for instance, has cut back on its welfare state. […]
[…] The good news is that there are signs of progress, at least outside the United States. Denmark, for instance, has cut back on its welfare state. […]
[…] so why not head in that direction. And these folks aren’t just pointing with approval to the Nordic nations. A writer for the New York Times actually thinks we should copy […]
[…] understand why I wrote that, “if there was a welfare Olympics, the U.K. would have a lot more […]
[…] same problem exists, by the way, in other nations such as Denmark and the the United […]
[…] what about the Finance Minister of Denmark’s left-wing government, who admitted that, “We live in a world of global competition for jobs… That requires a modernization of the […]
[…] what about the Finance Minister of Denmark’s left-wing government, who admitted that, “We live in a world of global competition for jobs… That requires a modernization of […]
It’s time to redefine the “safety-net”. Currently, we have five major programs that redistribute wealth: our progressive tax code, means-tested programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
Whatever we do must incorporate promises made under the latter three programs, however, that support can be reduced by any amounts provided under the new safety-net.
Obviously, a flat tax on consumption [a hybrid of the Flat Tax and the FairTax] would be the most efficient method of tax collection, but it needs to be made progressive, to be politically acceptable.
How to make it progressive? Resources available include: tax deductions [$1 trillion], means-testing programs [$800 billion] and a portion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid [$400 billion]. Cash payment to every citizen over 21 would create a highly progressive tax code, based on effective tax rates.
Those at the bottom would be incentivized to work, since they could never lose the safety-net by working and would keep everything they earn minus only the flat tax. The middle has been getting screwed, and their take-home pay would increase, however, they would need to save much of the addition for their retirement years. [Stimulating economic growth through long term investment.] Those in the higher income group would pay more in taxes, but at lower marginal tax rates, and significantly improved gross incomes.
The truly needy could apply to state and local governments or charities for additional support. [Blue states might provide more, supported by higher state taxes.] Legal immigrants and workers under 21 would receive tax rebates based on taxes paid.
A portion of the safety-net payments could be deposited directly into Medical and Retirement Savings Accounts.
For more on this see:
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
Whoever though Denmark and Sweden would be less statist than us? We have some catching up to do.
Correct me if I am wrong but there are two factors that (to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge) that have driven (and continue to drive) the European Welfare State. One of those is the US Taxpayer.
Post-WW2, Europe was in shambles, and people were looking to the state for stability. Politicians being politicians smelled votes for sale and *Voila* the building blocks of the Welfare State were put in place.
Thanks to the massive Soviet military in East Germany, the American government maintained a massive military presence in Europe, reducing the need for European nations to build and maintain their own conventional deterrent (some nations were more prepared than others; German Leopard I and II tanks equip many European nations’ armies).
This massive military presence could only be financed by the productivity and insularity of the US taxpayer (no US industries were attacked by the Axis Powers during WW2, so civilian conversion to peacetime production was relatively easy).
Additionally, the Bretton Woods agreement (US Dollars anchored to gold, other nations’ currencies anchored to the US Dollar) enabled an element of stability to persist for quite a while.
Only when the dollar was unhinged from gold did the problems we see today start to rear their ugly heads. Bill Clinton’s success as President had as a foundation the Federal Reserve’s dollar stability policy; the economy deteriorated as Bush and Obama have deviated from that policy. Only Marco Rubio has mentioned the notion of dollar stability as a meaningful governmental objective.
So, in conclusion, welfare can be manageable if the currency is stable; the US possesses all the needed ingredients (outside of currency stability) to produce general prosperity (I’d comment on taxation but that would take MUCH more time and effort!).
An argument can be made that Europe lacks the currency sovereignty to navigate current economic waters, but that is a different subject as well.
Dan,
Have you read or heard of the SNAP cards now also being held to be usable for transit as well?
I heard an anecdotal report there was a hearing on this in Illinois this past week. Don’t know if it was a special case to get more federal dollars to Rahm or if other regions are following suit.
Also the Nordics know welfare state sounds bad so the same concepts are being sold with the blissful PR term of Human Capital States.
When government bureaucrats have a mandate to intervene on subjective well-being there is nothing outside their domain of personal interference.