Social spending

Introduction

Social spending comprises of tax breaks, cash benefits direct provision of goods and services all with social purposes. Such benefits are to assist the elderly, the disabled, low income earning households and lastly the unemployed. Social benefits are classified as private and general government benefits. For a program to be considered “social”, it has to involve either the reallocation of resources across households or by compulsory participation. Different generations depend on one another in complex ways. A common term coined “Intergenerational solidarity” means a supporting mechanism for mutually beneficial exchanges, both monetary and non-monetary

Conflicts based on age difference are not new.  The rebellion of the working-age population against indirect and direct support of public programs favouring older people, but yielding few clear benefits to younger people is something that was to happen (Raymond K. H.). However, the conflict has not yet escalated, but it is brewing. The only thing they different age group agree on is the support to keep the Social Security program healthy and making sure that older people get adequate medical care. Most notably is the fact that most programs carried out by the federal government put much emphasis on assisting the elderly than families with children. In 2000, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the social spending on programs for the elderly would spike to $615 billion. That is almost four times the amount spent on children. The values associated with collectivity shared with a sense of justice, solidarity generally favours a more excellent distribution of resources to seniors as deserved (Rantanen, McLaughlin, & Toikko, 2015). The spending on elderly persons is excessive and outspends what is left for children who are the future. There are two main reasons why the young generation support programs meant for the old. They include; protecting the programs for future even though they feel underlooked as they do much of the work and also the fact that the programs give them a financial reprieve in helping the older adults in their families.

There are many reasons why there is a conflict between the young and the old. The reasons include; struggle for resources, job opportunities and even power.  The middle-age citizens become the most potent age group compared to the old and young.they act as the orchestrators of power and ensure the distribution of resources aligned with their interest. Most often excluding the needs of others. the conflict perspective of ageing addresses such tension and competition.

. The United States does tax less, and while also spends less on social programs compared to other prosperous and stable countries also, its spending ratio on different age groups provides very minimal information with regards to fairness with which public policy treats different age groups (Ellis). Most of the difference between the age groups spending is attributable to pensions and health care spending. In my opinion, the federal government is rather short-sighted and should embark on pumping more resources and social spending for its people. While more social spending may not the solution to every problem the U.S. faces, it would undoubtedly help a significant portion of them. The U.S should be making considerably larger outlays on social spending and welfare. While it leaves its inhabitants taking care of themselves, the other stable and prosperous countries view their citizens as people with a universal need and part of the society. I concur with Peter Lindert (2004), who researched the relationship between economic growth and social spending at the national level. Its interesting find that the however much or less the state uses on social expenditure, it has no direct effect on personal income growth.

conclusion

In most developed and wealthy countries, as the country grows more prosperous, they proportionally divert more on social welfare. There is a belief that there is a robust and direct relationship between poverty reduction and public social spending . also adding the social expense will definitely reduce unhealthy inequality in society and also improve its well-being.

Bibliography

Ellis, Christopher Faricy and Christopher. Public Attitudes Toward Social Spending in the United States: The Differences Between Direct Spending and Tax Expenditures. 2014.

Rantanen, T., McLaughlin, T. C., & Toikko, T. (2015). Do Finnish young people support the Nordic welfare state? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 35(1/2), 47– 66.

Raymond K. H., Chan Lih‐Rong Wang. Generational conflict and provisions for the elderly in Hong Kong: The relevance of position‐based interest and values. 2018.