Government Regulations and Social Insurance Programs

 

The main social insurance programs like Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment compensation are funded by a payroll tax on the earnings of individuals who may receive benefits. Do you think the social insurance programs are effective? How are social insurance programs affected by the socioeconomic and political forces? Explain your answers.

Sample Solution

The social insurance programs, such as Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment compensation are generally considered to be effective in providing a safety net of protection for individuals who may not have access to other forms of income. Social security provides retirement income for those who have contributed to the system through payroll taxes over their working years (Social Security Administration 2020). Medicare is a health insurance program that helps cover medical costs for people 65 and older or those with certain disabilities regardless of their ability to pay (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2020). Unemployment compensation helps provide financial support while persons search for new employment opportunities (U.S. Department of Labor 2020).

These programs can help protect individuals from the economic hardships associated with loss of wages due to disability or old age by providing sustained sources of income during these periods. They also play an important role in reducing poverty among seniors by helping them stay financially independent and secure in their latter years. Additionally, they provide much needed financial relief when individuals find themselves out of work due to economic downturns or personal circumstances beyond their control (Cahill et al., 2019). Many argue that these types of assistance are necessary if we are going to ensure that our most vulnerable citizens have adequate resources at their disposal during times when they need it most.

Overall, the social insurance programs can be considered effective in helping many Americans avoid poverty and remain financially secure during difficult times. These benefits often serve as lifelines for elderly citizens, disabled persons, and families experiencing job loss – all groups that would otherwise be left unable to cope without this type of assistance from the government.

Vittola, first and foremost, talks about one of the noble motivations of war, above all, is when mischief is incurred however he causes notice the damage doesn’t prompt conflict, it relies upon the degree or proportionality, one more condition to jus promotion bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, nonetheless, contends the possibility of “worthy motivation” in view of “Power” which alludes to the security of political and regional freedoms, alongside basic liberties. In contemporary view, this view is more confounded to reply, given the ascent of globalization. Additionally, it is challenging to gauge proportionality, especially in war, on the grounds that not just that there is an epistemic issue in ascertaining, yet again the present world has created (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Besides, Vittola contends war is essential, not just for cautious purposes, ‘since it is legitimate to oppose force with force,’ yet additionally to battle against the crooked, a hostile conflict, countries which are not rebuffed for acting treacherously towards its own kin or have unjustifiably taken land from the home country (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to “show its foes a thing or two,” yet for the most part to accomplish the point of war. This approves Aristotle’s contention: ‘there should be battle for harmony (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). Nonetheless, Frowe contends “self-preservation” has a majority of portrayals, found in Chapter 1, demonstrating the way that self-protection can’t necessarily in every case legitimize one’s activities. Considerably more dangerous, is the situation of self-preservation in war, where two clashing perspectives are laid out: The Collectivists, an entirely different hypothesis and the Individualists, the continuation of the homegrown hypothesis of self-protection (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). All the more significantly, Frowe discredits Vittola’s view on retribution in light of the fact that right off the bat it enables the punisher’s position, yet additionally the present world forestalls this activity between nations through legitimate bodies like the UN, since we have modernized into a somewhat tranquil society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). In particular, Frowe further discredits Vittola through his case that ‘right aim can’t be blamed so as to take up arms in light of expected wrong,’ proposing we can’t simply hurt another on the grounds that they have accomplished something uncalled for. Different elements should be thought of, for instance, Proportionality. Thirdly, Vittola contends that war ought to be kept away from (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332) and that we ought to continue conditions carefully. This is upheld by the “last resor

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.