Protecting People Or Finance? On the Need To Free Social Policies From Financial Markets During And After Crises (original) (raw)
Related papers
Financial system stability vs. social policy
2017
The paper adds to the discussion of social costs of financial crises through theoretical elaboration, arguing for the position that supporting the stability of financial systems, if combined with public confidence in financial markets and banking, leads to a reduction of social costs by reducing the frequency of crises associated with the long-term development of the financial sphere in the world. Following the theoretical function proposed by Adrian, Covitz and Liang [2014], the author elaborates that prudential regulation may lower the social costs of crises. This calls for an active role of regulating the financial sector and that of the central banks, as the preferred sensitivity of the financial system to shocks may be achieved by prudential regulation and the increasing of transparency of the system, as well as by the management of social perception of stability (security) of this system. The paper postulates the abovementioned relation by reviewing selected empirical studies and framing the discussion in theoretical elaboration on social costs and financial stability.
Financialisation and Social Policy
2012
Recent developments in social policy under neo-liberalism have been driven by the requirements of, and responses to the dysfunctions of, financialisation. Whilst the current crisis has undermined the legitimacy of neo-liberalism, shifts in social policy will require a combination of greater resources and commitment to programme-specific approaches that are geared towards creation of some form of (developmental) welfare state. Otherwise, early evidence from response to the crisis suggests minimal intervention relative to need and continuing subordination to the imperatives of financialisation.
Social Investment and the Euro Crisis: The Necessity of a Unifying Social Policy Concept
2012
The economic crisis has given rise to signifi cant challenges to the welfare state. Given that welfare expenses account for a large proportion of all state spending in the member countries of the European Union, reducing government spending means cutting welfare measures. Yet social protection, in particular unemployment insurance benefi ts and minimum income support, has signifi cantly softened the impact of the crisis for millions of individuals. The global recession calls into question the fi nancial viability of current programmes, and the crisis is being used by some as an opportunity to roll back the welfare state permanently. The present Forum discusses challenges to and opportunities for the welfare state after the crisis.
Commentaries on the financial meltdown that began with Lehman Brothers’ collapse in September 2008 trace its origins to greedy bankers exploiting lax regulatory practices to take excessive risks through exotic and arcane financial instruments. While not wishing to demur from this analysis this chapter takes issue with the frequent failure to acknowledge that this has come about as a consequence of the (mis)application of state power over the past 50 years (see Helleiner 1994). Starting with the tacit support for the development of the Euromarkets in the 1960s and culminating with the responses to the turmoil of 2008-2010 the chapter describes how and why states, when confronted with a choice of restraining or liberalising markets, have invariably plumped for the latter simultaneously cultivating the ideal conditions for the propagation of financial crises and undermining their capacity to cope with the consequences. Much of this is accounted for by states pursuing national interests, in particular funding deficits and extending the competitiveness of financial services industries, but it also reflects the faith amongst financial policymaking elites in the perspicacity of markets presented by neo-classical and neo-Austrian economic paradigms which insist the state confine itself to the alleviation of market failures. Even ardent proponents accept these ideas have been badly tarnished by the present financial imbroglio. Nevertheless, proposals enumerating a greater role for the state have been quietly junked in favour of ‘market friendly’ reforms. It is argued that the reluctance to dispute these ideas will perpetuate or even exacerbate the problems they seek to address. Here a broader role for the state will be advocated rooted in a political vision which does not assert that the world is composed of self-interested, atomistic individuals and firms motivated solely by profit. In contrast to Hayekian models postulating markets as a discovery process for entrepreneurs to innovate in pursuit of profit and their private good the chapter argues that the democratic process, including at the level of international and global governance, can and should be a discovery process for innovations in pursuit of public goods, not least global financial stability.
Financial System Stability and Social Welfare
2017
The financial system has an important role for economic growth and social welfare of individuals, households, enterprises, civic and public institutions. Despite its imperfection, the financial system has the power to help us create a better and a more fair society, having an essential role in the development of wealthy economies. The recent financial crisis is the largest, most complex and delicate challenge of the current period. Authorities are deeply concerned with improving the existing framework of supervision and regulation and develop strategy programs in order to ensure stability and sustainable growth throughout Europe. The European Council has adopted the Europe 2020 Strategy which is the EU’s growth agenda for the current decade. It aims at overcoming the negative effects of the global financial crisis and emphasizes sustainable economic development and social inclusion. The fundamentals of the Europe 2020 Strategy are the five key objectives: employment, R&D expenses, c...