3 ms·

Not really. All you do is have a claim over a chunk of the future earnings of that country. All this could have been avoided many times, if the Greek governme

by brc 11y ago

Not really. All you do is have a claim over a chunk of the future earnings of that country. All this could have been avoided many times, if the Greek government had stopped expanding its government and welfare programs. People sounded the alarms back in the 1980s when the expansion of the state was first begun in earnest. Really, it betrays a fundamental principle that voters will knowingly keep returning government with no intention of handing down a balanced budget, if they think they can get away with it. It's rational behaviour to vote yourself largesse if you think someone else will get stuck with the bill.

_delirium 11y ago
Greece has a lot of problems, but I don't think it was specifically expanding welfare systems, at least as I understand the term welfare (programs aimed at the poorest segments of society). Health coverage isn't universal and excludes the long-term unemployed; there is no income-support or cash welfare-payment system for the poor; no public housing at all, no rent-assistance program, etc. Even post-Hartz4 Germany has a more generous welfare system, never mind the more social-democratic countries. Without mentioning what a country like Denmark provides, we can look at the U.S., not usually thought of as the most generous welfare state, which has programs like Medicaid, food stamps, EITC, TANF, and Section 8 that Greece lacks any analog to. Greece does have quite a lot of middle-class and upper-middle-class entitlements, like good benefits for government employees, extremely generous employment terms for doctors, fairly good unemployment insurance for the temporarily unemployed, early retirement for professionals, etc. These tend to support people who already have more money, though. A possible exception is that the pensions in some cases act as a de facto welfare system, because pensioners are expected to support their unemployed kids, so in the case of poor households, one pension supports a meagre lifestyle for 3-4 people. So as long as you have at least one pensioner in your household, there is some minimum level of guaranteed income. If you don't, say that you're a long-term-unemployed 40-year-old who doesn't have family support, then you're pretty much screwed. At best you may try to get some support from the church, which runs soup kitchens and such. And of course it has a big tax-evasion and corruption problem, also largely among the better-off segments of society, which causes problems on the revenue end.

by brc 11y ago

_delirium 11y ago

Greece has a lot of problems, but I don't think it was specifically expanding welfare systems, at least as I understand the term welfare (programs aimed at the poorest segments of society). Health coverage isn't universal and excludes the long-term unemployed; there is no income-support or cash welfare-payment system for the poor; no public housing at all, no rent-assistance program, etc. Even post-Hartz4 Germany has a more generous welfare system, never mind the more social-democratic countries. Without mentioning what a country like Denmark provides, we can look at the U.S., not usually thought of as the most generous welfare state, which has programs like Medicaid, food stamps, EITC, TANF, and Section 8 that Greece lacks any analog to. Greece does have quite a lot of middle-class and upper-middle-class entitlements, like good benefits for government employees, extremely generous employment terms for doctors, fairly good unemployment insurance for the temporarily unemployed, early retirement for professionals, etc. These tend to support people who already have more money, though. A possible exception is that the pensions in some cases act as a de facto welfare system, because pensioners are expected to support their unemployed kids, so in the case of poor households, one pension supports a meagre lifestyle for 3-4 people. So as long as you have at least one pensioner in your household, there is some minimum level of guaranteed income. If you don't, say that you're a long-term-unemployed 40-year-old who doesn't have family support, then you're pretty much screwed. At best you may try to get some support from the church, which runs soup kitchens and such. And of course it has a big tax-evasion and corruption problem, also largely among the better-off segments of society, which causes problems on the revenue end.