Against the state because of deep seated cultural ideological sort of you know ideological frames of

understanding which is largely that the American middle class particular believes in the American dream
and they tend to stigmatize welfare which is why they have not sided with the with the working class
historically yes
Understand the welfare state it is can political equality reduce economic inequality economic inequality is
built into the system as far as capitalism is concerned we're just looking at what type of arrangements can
be created to reduce that inequality and one arrangement especially that we see in the case of the
Scandinavian welfare state is that combined together politically speaking there chances are that they will
actually reduce inequality to a much greater extent whereas in the middle class size with the capitalist
class or with the ruling classes the chances are that inequality will continue to to be
the nature of class politics is very important the difference between objective class and the subjective
class is very important the on that particular on that particular perspective or on that particular position
and exactly take ask what it said and the idea of a class for itself is that they will make claims on the state
or in some cases the employer and are trying to obtain more and more benefits right organizational model
the worker and the employer but when you look at the entire sort of model of this state or other particular
country there it is the working class as part of the electorate and the state or in this case democracy of
parliament and so on right so it's really about the working class forming political parties forming unions
and being able to sort of and influence policy making in a particular way now obviously the extent to
which they can influence policy and the extent to which they can really drastically transformed the system
of inequality that is debatable right in fact as we've seen across the 20th century where social democracy
has succeeded it doesn't necessarily reduce capitalism undermine capitalism existed with capitalism in
some form when I was in when I was in Africa the professor taught us you know political economy that
capitalism is like a dog but social democracy puts a leash on that dog right that's the entire sort of analogy
that is wrong it doesn't it doesn't kill the dog and it doesn't sort of you know taking the dog beyond the
certain extent but it is able to control the dog you know redistribution and reduce the element of
inequality for Scandinavian countries they generally tend to do better right quality quality generally these
countries have done better but if you look at countries where you don't have social democracy where you
have other types of welfare which are more needs tested which are is certainly higher
to reduce inequality in society as well right that's the that's the arrangement that social democracy sort of
you know private property what's good not accident anyone else does that sort of make sense more or less
so that pretty much ends our conversation on the welfare state contemporary phenomenon which is which
rachel that with

Ohh I see the mid 1970s and up till very recently after the like you could say maybe 2010 right
Economically recession 8 recession BIT what was distinctive about yeah so the rise of new liberalism and
we
Unilaterally and what that meant was that many countries that were subsidizing fuel clear on imported
fuel to make their you know energy requirements they suddenly faced a pretty significant price shock as
far as their economies were concerned right stop the import how many think about that's something that
happens very regularly obviously you were about to new program in March April part of the reason why
we go to the IMF is because our imports are more than our exports we don't have enough dollars in the
system right but interestingly when the 1970s oil shock happened countries like Pakistan got screwed in
any case because we were oil imported but even countries like the UK for example had to go to the island
right because even they suffered from a pretty significant shock cancel that but one of the first victims off
this particular. Was the right as governments decided to rollback all their expenditures as governments
decided that they wanted to spend less and less and leave more things to the market to resolve they
obviously cut down on government spending Cortana so since the story since the 1970s had basically
been 20th century 1970s what's the benefits to having rollback condition universal and if you think back
to your relatives who I asked were you know based abroad and in many different parts of the world when
we do a comparative of where people tend to be happier the indication that we get is that privatize more
rapidly and which embrace neoliberalism more rapidly since the 1970s inequalities are there or rather
people also tend to be less happy compared to say Western Europe wher so the story from the 1970s
onwards is this decline of the welfare state especially in countries like like the united states most
prominenet study of the rollback of the welfare state
So the simplest explanation is change because of the economic shocks of the 1970s governments have to
reduce their budgets creating balance budgets which is central to neo-liberalism

Margaret thatcher -> no such thing as society only market & family.
We are only responsible for ourselves, no shared responsibility -> dominated west till 2007s market crash.
Capitalism is what we see emerging since the late 1970s early 1980s in different parts of the world but
most specifically in the United States and the United Kingdom now what is distinctive about Liberal
merotocratic capitalism is that if you go back to our core issue which is how can political equality or in
other words how can democracy reduce economic inequality

inequality actually increased so the defining feature of the late 20th and early 21st century capitalist
States and economies is that inequality seems to be rising right and by inequality we need income
inequality that more and more income is being generated by fewer and fewer people add in other things
like wealth inequality which is like more and more people are fewer people have a higher share of the
total assets that are found

Since the 1970s story has shipted to increasing inequality