福祉国家の現実と見過ごされた存在

●Tyler Cowen（2002）, “Does the Welfare State Help the Poor?（doc）”（Social Philosophy and Policy, vol.19(1), pp.36-54）

I look first at how much the welfare state transfers to the poor, which turns out to be a surprisingly small sum, relative to the stock of wealth. This, of course, limits both the benefits and the costs of the welfare state. I then consider the empirical evidence for the traditional conservative argument that the welfare state is bad for the poor. In general the evidence indicates that current recipients of welfare benefit from the transfers, contrary to what Charles Murray and some other critics have suggested. Nonetheless the welfare state appears to harm the interests of future generations and foreign citizens, and in this regard it does not help the poor more generally.

The debate over the welfare state thus should be recast. Common philosophical opinion suggests that impersonal consequentialism favors the welfare state, by creating obligations to support others in need. If good consequences matter, and all persons are to count equally in the social welfare function, it would seem that our obligations to the poor, through the welfare state, are very high. In contrast, I argue that impersonal consequentialism is more likely to militate against a welfare state, once the interests of all individuals are considered. The case for a welfare state rests upon assigning priority to the claims of one particular set of individuals -- namely currently living domestic citizens -- over the claims of future generations and foreign citizens. Throughout the paper I focus on a United States context, although the central arguments can be generalized to any modern capitalist economy with a welfare state.

あとで読も。