WI The US Social Welfare System Was The Norm In Europe?

This topic would have to be moved to the pre 1900 forum, because it was then that the foundations of social welfare were laid in Europe, in Germany mandatory social insurance (health, accident and pension insurance) was introduced in between 1883 and 1889 by Bismarck as a means to fight the rise of social democracy.

In fact the origins of lay even much further in the past.
As for the netherlands its origins lay in charity that slowly became institutional and then taken over by government. So result of a long time development.
What bismarck did was mere finalisation of an already underway development.
To get all this to change you do need a pod in early 1800s in my opinion.
 

iddt3

Donor
First off, until recently, there wasn't any strong pressure for it. Post War the American economy was booming, while the European economies were struggling. The Europeans needed to buy off the lower classes lest they suffer revolution, and they could afford to because they cut defense spending massively, and were subsidized by the Americans (the Marshall plan got their economies back together, and NATO let them let the Americans bear a major share of Europe's defense).
In addition, Americans tend to be far less trusting of their government then Europeans, in addition to being a far larger and less homogenous population then the European nation states. What works for tiny Denmark, does not extend to the varied American states. There are already programs in America for the poor for health and welfare, they just aren't universal. Senior citizens and the poor Have Medicare and Medicaid, so instead of covering everyone, the government only covers the most vulnerable sections of society (which ends up being rather cheaper). Most importantly, until recently, there was simply more upward mobility and prosperity in the American economy compared to the European economies, thus alleviating much of the pressure.
 
The Europeans needed to buy off the lower classes lest they suffer revolution, and they could afford to because they cut defense spending massively, and were subsidized by the Americans (the Marshall plan got their economies back together, and NATO let them let the Americans bear a major share of Europe's defense).

While I agree with you on the suggestion that European social welfare was partially a backlash on the rise of Fascism of 1930's and partially an attempt to counter any attempts of Communist subterfuge I wouldn't agree on idea that Europe cut defense spending massively. Barring Finland and Austria the NATO and neutral European countries spent on defense more heavily than upon any other time of peace during the Cold War.
 

Hendryk

Banned
they could afford to because they cut defense spending massively, and were subsidized by the Americans (the Marshall plan got their economies back together, and NATO let them let the Americans bear a major share of Europe's defense).
That's not it. France could afford its welfare state even as it fought wars in Indochina and then in Algeria. And developed an independent nuclear program. And left the NATO integrated command.
 

iddt3

Donor
That's such an interesting remark, but I don't know that it's supportable.
If you look at the structure of Government, the US is still far more decentralized then most European governments, a great deal more power rests in the individual states.
 

Faeelin

Banned
That's not it. France could afford its welfare state even as it fought wars in Indochina and then in Algeria. And developed an independent nuclear program. And left the NATO integrated command.

What percentage of the French GDP went towards the military in this period?
 

iddt3

Donor
I know currently that the US is effectively subsidizing the European states via defense, they spend what, 2.5-1.4% of their GDP on it, while the US spends 4.7%. If the US wasn't guaranteeing Europe via NATO I doubt they could get away with that little, especially not if they wanted to have any power projection capacities.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
If you look at the structure of Government, the US is still far more decentralized then most European governments, a great deal more power rests in the individual states.

Depends on how one looks at things. Yes, the USA is more decentralized than France, but i bet California is more centralized than France.
 

Hendryk

Banned
In addition, Americans tend to be far less trusting of their government then Europeans, in addition to being a far larger and less homogenous population then the European nation states. What works for tiny Denmark, does not extend to the varied American states. There are already programs in America for the poor for health and welfare, they just aren't universal. Senior citizens and the poor Have Medicare and Medicaid, so instead of covering everyone, the government only covers the most vulnerable sections of society (which ends up being rather cheaper). Most importantly, until recently, there was simply more upward mobility and prosperity in the American economy compared to the European economies, thus alleviating much of the pressure.
Frankly, this reads more like a list of GOP talking points than a reasoned argument, especially the bit about Americans being less trusting of their government. There was no noticeable difference between your average American and your average Frenchman's attitude towards their respective governments in the decades following WW2. This "distrust" thing is a retroactive projection of a recent trend.

Keep in mind that post-WW2 French people had memories of their government being a pro-Nazi collaborationist dictatorship. The idea that government could turn against its own people was not an abstract thought to them, it was something they'd been through. And that did not, at any moment, get in the way of the implementation of a welfare state, because people are smart enough to realize that a welfare state and an oppressive government are two entirely unrelated things.

What percentage of the French GDP went towards the military in this period?
Sorry, I've looked around but can't find the figures. I'll have to get back to you on that.
 
If you look at the structure of Government, the US is still far more decentralized then most European governments, a great deal more power rests in the individual states.

Whereas in Copenhagen, fish are more expensive than danishes.
 

iddt3

Donor
Frankly, this reads more like a list of GOP talking points than a reasoned argument, especially the bit about Americans being less trusting of their government. There was no noticeable difference between your average American and your average Frenchman's attitude towards their respective governments in the decades following WW2. This "distrust" thing is a retroactive projection of a recent trend.

Keep in mind that post-WW2 French people had memories of their government being a pro-Nazi collaborationist dictatorship. The idea that government could turn against its own people was not an abstract thought to them, it was something they'd been through. And that did not, at any moment, get in the way of the implementation of a welfare state, because people are smart enough to realize that a welfare state and an oppressive government are two entirely unrelated things.


Sorry, I've looked around but can't find the figures. I'll have to get back to you on that.
immidate post war was the high point of American trust in government, historically this was not the case, as can be seen in the structure of the respective countries.
 

Hendryk

Banned
immidate post war was the high point of American trust in government, historically this was not the case, as can be seen in the structure of the respective countries.
If you trust your government with atom bombs, you can trust it with aspirin tablets.
 

iddt3

Donor
If you trust your government with atom bombs, you can trust it with aspirin tablets.
I personally agree, but again, that hasn't been the case historically. I'm not arguing in favor of the American system, just trying to explain how it came about and why up till now it more or less worked.
 

Spengler

Banned
Americans are more religious than Europeans.
Yeah I really don't think that explains it. Or else Greece would just be fine with the austerity regime. Hendryk you forgot to mention how your country also developed its own carrier force.
 
The point was in reference to the difficulty of imposeing a uniform system on all of the states.

But that's about as relevant as the danish's comment.

You're using a federal system conceived over 200 years ago to measure respective attitudes towards government? This is Sparta.
 
Top