Social Welfare, Human Dignity, and the Puzzle of What We Owe Each Other

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy Pub Date : 2003-12-12 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.478561
Amy Wax
{"title":"Social Welfare, Human Dignity, and the Puzzle of What We Owe Each Other","authors":"Amy Wax","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.478561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Proponents of work-based welfare reform claim that moving the poor from welfare to work will advance the goals of economic self-reliance and independence. Reform opponents attack these objectives as ideologically motivated and conceptually incoherent. Drawing on perspectives developed by luck egalitarians and feminist theorists, these critics disparage conventional notions of economic desert, find fault with market measures of value, debunk ideals of autonomy, and emphasize the pervasiveness of interdependence and unearned benefits within free market societies. These arguments pose an important challenge to justifications usually advanced for work-based welfare reform. Reform proponents must concede that no member of society can hope to achieve complete personal and economic independence from others. Rather, self-reliance and dependency are always a matter of kind and degree. These states must be understood as having a \"social meaning\" that does not rest on conceptually pure absolutes, but rather on the fulfillment of normative expectations regarding conduct and participation in social and economic life. Within this framework, the fact that self-reliance can never be complete does not undermine its worth or importance as a goal. That dependency is sometimes unavoidable or even desirable does not mean that it should be indulged or accepted in all cases. How might welfare reform advocates construct more effective arguments for minimizing dependency and fostering self-sufficiency among the poor? One approach would look to the distinctions ordinary people make between constructive citizenship and social parasitism. The challenge is to give the idea of constructive citizenship definite and rigorous content - content that serves as a useful guide to wise policy and that makes work-based reform less vulnerable to attack on theoretical grounds. The paper explains how the concept of conditional reciprocity, as it informs common notions of acceptable redistribution, can help achieve this goal.","PeriodicalId":46083,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":"27 1","pages":"121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2003-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.478561","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Proponents of work-based welfare reform claim that moving the poor from welfare to work will advance the goals of economic self-reliance and independence. Reform opponents attack these objectives as ideologically motivated and conceptually incoherent. Drawing on perspectives developed by luck egalitarians and feminist theorists, these critics disparage conventional notions of economic desert, find fault with market measures of value, debunk ideals of autonomy, and emphasize the pervasiveness of interdependence and unearned benefits within free market societies. These arguments pose an important challenge to justifications usually advanced for work-based welfare reform. Reform proponents must concede that no member of society can hope to achieve complete personal and economic independence from others. Rather, self-reliance and dependency are always a matter of kind and degree. These states must be understood as having a "social meaning" that does not rest on conceptually pure absolutes, but rather on the fulfillment of normative expectations regarding conduct and participation in social and economic life. Within this framework, the fact that self-reliance can never be complete does not undermine its worth or importance as a goal. That dependency is sometimes unavoidable or even desirable does not mean that it should be indulged or accepted in all cases. How might welfare reform advocates construct more effective arguments for minimizing dependency and fostering self-sufficiency among the poor? One approach would look to the distinctions ordinary people make between constructive citizenship and social parasitism. The challenge is to give the idea of constructive citizenship definite and rigorous content - content that serves as a useful guide to wise policy and that makes work-based reform less vulnerable to attack on theoretical grounds. The paper explains how the concept of conditional reciprocity, as it informs common notions of acceptable redistribution, can help achieve this goal.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会福利,人类尊严,以及我们对彼此亏欠的困惑
以工作为基础的福利改革的支持者声称,将穷人从福利转移到工作将促进经济自力更生和独立的目标。反对改革的人抨击这些目标是出于意识形态动机,在概念上不连贯。根据运气平等主义者和女权主义理论家的观点,这些批评家贬低了传统的经济沙漠观念,发现了市场价值衡量的错误,揭穿了自主的理想,并强调了自由市场社会中普遍存在的相互依存和不劳而获的利益。这些论点对通常提出的以工作为基础的福利改革的理由提出了重要挑战。改革支持者必须承认,没有一个社会成员能够指望实现完全的个人和经济独立于他人。相反,自力更生和依赖总是一个种类和程度的问题。这些国家必须被理解为具有“社会意义”,它不依赖于概念上的纯粹绝对,而是依赖于对社会和经济生活中的行为和参与的规范期望的实现。在这个框架内,自力更生永远不可能完全这一事实并不会削弱其作为一个目标的价值或重要性。依赖有时是不可避免的,甚至是可取的,但这并不意味着在所有情况下都应该纵容或接受依赖。福利改革的倡导者如何构建更有效的论据来减少对穷人的依赖并促进他们的自给自足?一种方法将着眼于普通人对建设性公民和社会寄生的区别。我们面临的挑战是为建设性公民身份的概念赋予明确而严谨的内容——这些内容可以作为明智政策的有用指南,并使基于工作的改革不那么容易受到理论依据的攻击。这篇论文解释了条件互惠的概念是如何帮助实现这一目标的,因为它告诉了可接受的再分配的共同概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is published three times annually by the Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc., an organization of Harvard Law School students. The Journal is one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship. The late Stephen Eberhard and former Senator and Secretary of Energy E. Spencer Abraham founded the journal twenty-eight years ago and many journal alumni have risen to prominent legal positions in the government and at the nation’s top law firms.
期刊最新文献
The Presumption of Constitutionality Immigration, Freedom, and the Constitution Business Transactions and President Trump's 'Emoluments' Problem Free Expression on Campus: Mitigating the Costs of Contentious Speakers Revitalizing the Clemency Process
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1