4 ms·

It's hard to say if the article is tautological, or if there's a fundamental (and common) confusion here about what the state is in relation to capitalism. The

It's hard to say if the article is tautological, or if there's a fundamental (and common) confusion here about what the state is in relation to capitalism. The modern state co-evolved with capitalism, and as a result, it's institutions are generally what capitalism needs to survive and prosper. The point about a welfare state is not really whether or not one is necessary for capitalism; the point is more that it is necessary for a specific type of capitalism. For instance, Toyota wouldn't work without a welfare state, because you need the kind of social stability a welfare state creates to preserve and shepherd a really skilled workforce. Ford, on the other hand, neither needs nor desires a particularly skilled workforce, but rather leans more heavily on intense capital investment (automation) - so an expanded welfare state, necessitating higher taxes, is a net loss for Ford, since they aren't all that interested in stability, but they are interested in low taxes. Making arguments about whether or not people like or support free markets is kind of missing the point. The point is, certain business models are predicated on certain forms of social organization. That's why Google is based in Silicon Valley, not in Shanghai, and why Foxconn is in China, not Japan.

zozbot123 8y ago
> The modern state co-evolved with capitalism, and as a result, it's institutions are generally what capitalism needs to survive and prosper. This is either tautological or empirically wrong, depending on what exactly is meant by "the modern state". In many ways, the problem with our current welfare states stems from the fact that they evolved under the material constraints of mid-20th-c. capitalism, when, for example, even the unskilled could easily find lucrative manufacturing jobs, and a welfare state simply had to fill in a limited amount of income gaps resulting from unemployment (generally due to short-term business crises), medical conditions, retirement and the like. Back in the mid-20th century, a baseline UBI wouldn't have made much sense, for example. The situation today is vastly different, since incomes are skill-biased to an extreme extent. Welfare states should be reformed to provide a baseline subsidy even to those who are currently working (assuming a low income, of course), while at the same time leaving them with the right incentives to improve their skills, productivity and income, perhaps in unconventional ways such as "bootcamps", MOOCs or "gig" work, that governments can't easily track or manage. Something like UBI, or Milton Friedman's proposed NIT, would seem to be highly appropriate.

zozbot123 8y ago

> The modern state co-evolved with capitalism, and as a result, it's institutions are generally what capitalism needs to survive and prosper. This is either tautological or empirically wrong, depending on what exactly is meant by "the modern state". In many ways, the problem with our current welfare states stems from the fact that they evolved under the material constraints of mid-20th-c. capitalism, when, for example, even the unskilled could easily find lucrative manufacturing jobs, and a welfare state simply had to fill in a limited amount of income gaps resulting from unemployment (generally due to short-term business crises), medical conditions, retirement and the like. Back in the mid-20th century, a baseline UBI wouldn't have made much sense, for example. The situation today is vastly different, since incomes are skill-biased to an extreme extent. Welfare states should be reformed to provide a baseline subsidy even to those who are currently working (assuming a low income, of course), while at the same time leaving them with the right incentives to improve their skills, productivity and income, perhaps in unconventional ways such as "bootcamps", MOOCs or "gig" work, that governments can't easily track or manage. Something like UBI, or Milton Friedman's proposed NIT, would seem to be highly appropriate.