Syndicate content

Add new comment

Submitted by Nithin on

We need to start being a little more forward looking in terms of evolution of welfare state in our work. I am pleased to see you bring the issue of nature of work and its consequences for the welfare state. Universal income is one simple - albeit probably expensive - solution. The real challenge to address the revolution in labor markets - and more appealing to me at least - is to work on a sophisticated system that uses variety of instruments such as in-work (labor policies, tax credits), direct assistance and insurance. We have a long way to go in terms of seeing the welfare state in this framework. We say we do, but practically the "resolution" of our "view" is low. Some folks are quite adept with "vanilla" type cash transfers, some are experts on pensions and others in "in-work" benefits. But I hazard to claim that very few in our practice yet have the skills to deal with tax expenditures. Therefore my sense is that we need more staff who can integrate these bits to achieve, what could be potentially a more optimal solution than a simple universal income scheme. The reason is that simplicity of a universal income scheme in a fiscally constrained world (most of it at least ) would probably generate assistance that is inadequate, and/or incentive distorting. So "Occam's razor argument" may not follow in this context. But would be interesting to watch this space and hope we all can develop further on being more expert integrators of different types of instruments for achieving social justice...