Monday, February 13, 2012

Family Security: Society's Choice

I don't generally pine for the "good old days" which really weren't so good. However, I am profoundly concerned about the persistent attacks against social insurance in all its forms around the world. (The exceptions, ironically, can be found in the Middle East.)

Let's start with some basic principles. Freedom is good. However, poverty and infirmity are antithetical to freedom. Serfs living 1,000 years ago in Europe weren't free mostly because they were poor and constantly at risk of utter destitution and starvation, not because the lords cared much about which songs they sang.

So why, 1,000 years later, in the developed world, do I worry about much the same problems? Why are so many people one illness away from bankruptcy? One spouse's untimely passing away from poverty? One lawsuit away from financial ruin? There are myriad risks, and many governments seem hell bent on dismantling what little social insurance exists. The private insurance market is flawed in many ways, and it's difficult or impossible to insure against these calamities without government.

As one example, consider disability insurance in Singapore. If your employer is typical, and if you have a job of course, you would receive a maximum of two years' salary if you become disabled and cannot work. If you're disabled for 10 years or for a lifetime, tough. You had better hope that someone in your family or a charity takes pity on you. And that's in Asia's most developed economy excluding Japan.

But "we can't afford social insurance." Rubbish. This is a world in which Mark Zuckerberg is a billionaire , but he will pay a far lower tax rate than his company's employees. Developed countries are comparatively wealthy. Decent social insurance is an affordable choice. It also happens to be consistent or even essential to upward mobility and entrepreneurship.