David Cormack
patreon
Social insurance ≠ social welfare
🕑 Added 2022-02-06 01:06:01 +0000 UTCSounds nice. Needs work. That's my takeaway from the social insurance policy announced by Labour.
It's a policy that's been worked on for a while now, and it essentially amounts to middle class welfare.
The fear of losing your job and having your income go to zero is very real, and a very valid fear. The Social Insurance scheme will definitely alleviate that terror. That's good. It also means that if there are large scale redundancies due to companies going under or whatever, it won't decimate that area.
But looking at the proposed scheme, I can't help but feel it's a welfare net for middle class people and their middle class mortgages.
Welfare should be a needs based thing. If anyone needs money to get through tough times then they should get it. It shouldn't be based on circumstance.
Now instead of getting put on the jobseeker benefit with the disgusting poors, you'll be on your nice social insurance scheme. This is a two tiered welfare system, further stigmatising those on the jobseeker benefit.
It also does absolutely nothing to help solve the inequities of unpaid labour, like parenting or caring for someone. These are roles usually taken by women and are part of the systemic sexist policies woven into the fabric of our society.
That's not to say this is a bad policy, it has potential. It just needs to come with some more things.
One thing I haven't seen talked about is what this will mean for the money used for those on the jobseeker benefit. Presumably a fair chunk of this will now be covered by the social insurance pot. This means there should be enough to substantially raise benefits, bringing the jobseeker benefit to a level above poverty and providing more dignity to those in need.
It also does bring us a step closer to a UBI, but also a step away. The UBI replaces all welfare, and this introduces a new welfare net. It perhaps takes us closer to Milton Friedman's negative income tax system, which is supposed to be the great inequality fixer, but only works for those in work and ends up subsidising shitty paying jobs, disincentivisng business from paying a fair wage (think of Working For Families on a grander scale).
National coming out immediately opposed and committing to repealing it just continues their dumb assery in opposition. Businesses love certainty. They can plan for it and accommodate increased costs, so long as they aren't surprised. National plans on leaving organisations unable to plan long term if this could potentially be scrapped.
I'm not opposed to this policy, not by a long way, but I do want to see major welfare reforms come with it. Otherwise we've just made a bougie dole.
