结构性偶然性:养老金兴衰中的资本主义约束与历史偶然性

IF 0.4 Q1 HISTORY Critical Historical Studies Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI:10.1086/702547
Michael Mccarthy
{"title":"结构性偶然性:养老金兴衰中的资本主义约束与历史偶然性","authors":"Michael Mccarthy","doi":"10.1086/702547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After World War II, collectively bargained private pensions were installed as an alternative to Social Security expansions. But these plans began to go into decline in the 1980s, when defined-contribution retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s, came to replace them. This article makes three arguments about this rise and fall to contribute toward a theory of structural contingency. First, in both episodes, state intervention into labor-management relations triggered policy changes in the private pension system. Second, policy makers were motivated to intervene because of a structural condition—namely, to manage perceived crises in capitalism. And third, the particular way they intervened and how their policy choices spurred pension marketization were driven by contingent historical circumstances. This article argues that structural constraints that inhere in capitalist democracies established a range of possible policy options available to policy makers, yet contingent and historical factors channeled policy selection within that range.","PeriodicalId":43410,"journal":{"name":"Critical Historical Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":"63 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/702547","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structural Contingencies: Capitalist Constraints and Historical Contingency in the Rise and Fall of Pensions\",\"authors\":\"Michael Mccarthy\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/702547\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After World War II, collectively bargained private pensions were installed as an alternative to Social Security expansions. But these plans began to go into decline in the 1980s, when defined-contribution retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s, came to replace them. This article makes three arguments about this rise and fall to contribute toward a theory of structural contingency. First, in both episodes, state intervention into labor-management relations triggered policy changes in the private pension system. Second, policy makers were motivated to intervene because of a structural condition—namely, to manage perceived crises in capitalism. And third, the particular way they intervened and how their policy choices spurred pension marketization were driven by contingent historical circumstances. This article argues that structural constraints that inhere in capitalist democracies established a range of possible policy options available to policy makers, yet contingent and historical factors channeled policy selection within that range.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Historical Studies\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"63 - 92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/702547\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Historical Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/702547\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Historical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/702547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

第二次世界大战后,集体协商的私人养老金被设置为社会保障扩张的替代方案。但这些计划在20世纪80年代开始走下坡路,当时401(k)等固定缴款退休账户取而代之。本文对这种兴衰进行了三种论证,以期对结构权变理论有所贡献。首先,在这两次事件中,国家对劳资关系的干预引发了私人养老金制度的政策变化。其次,政策制定者之所以进行干预,是因为一种结构性条件——也就是说,为了管理资本主义的危机。第三,他们干预的具体方式以及他们的政策选择如何刺激养老金市场化是由偶然的历史环境驱动的。本文认为,资本主义民主国家固有的结构性约束为政策制定者提供了一系列可能的政策选择,但偶然和历史因素将政策选择引导到该范围内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Structural Contingencies: Capitalist Constraints and Historical Contingency in the Rise and Fall of Pensions
After World War II, collectively bargained private pensions were installed as an alternative to Social Security expansions. But these plans began to go into decline in the 1980s, when defined-contribution retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s, came to replace them. This article makes three arguments about this rise and fall to contribute toward a theory of structural contingency. First, in both episodes, state intervention into labor-management relations triggered policy changes in the private pension system. Second, policy makers were motivated to intervene because of a structural condition—namely, to manage perceived crises in capitalism. And third, the particular way they intervened and how their policy choices spurred pension marketization were driven by contingent historical circumstances. This article argues that structural constraints that inhere in capitalist democracies established a range of possible policy options available to policy makers, yet contingent and historical factors channeled policy selection within that range.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Colonialism, Surplus Population, and the Marxian Critique of Political Economy Hayek against Malthus: Julian Simon’s Neoliberal Critique of Environmentalism Temporalities of Emancipation: Women, Work, and Time in 1970s America Reactionaries Marching Forward: On Worldmaking and Its Enemies Enclosed Futures: Oil Extraction in the Republic of Congo
×
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