수업 - 3월31일 (월)

 Richard Titmuss: was Professor of Social Administration at LSE from 1950 until his death in 1973. His publications on welfare and social policy were radical and wide-ranging, spanning fields such as demography, class inequalities in health, social work, and altruism.  

Titmuss' work played a critical role in establishing the study of social policy as a scientific discipline; it helped to shape the development of the British Welfare State and influenced thinking about social policy worldwide. 

Titmuss was born in 1907, the second child of a farmer; he was brought up in the countryside and left school at 14 with no formal qualifications. An autodidact, he worked for a large insurance company for 16 years whilst simultaneously pursuing an interest in social topics through reading, debating and writing. His initial concerns were with such issues as insurance and the age structure of the population, migration, unemployment and re-armament, foreign policy and the peace movement. In 1938 he published Poverty and Population, which focused on the regional differences between the North and South . In 1939, he published Our Food Problem. Around this time, Titmuss was also active in the British Eugenics Society.

In 1942, he was recruited to write a volume in the civil series of the official war history, Problems of Social Policy, a work which established his reputation as well as securing him the new chair at the London School of Economics. In this process, he was strongly supported by the sociologist T.H.Marshall.

At the LSE, he transformed the teaching of social work and social workers and established Social as an academic discipline. He also contributed to a number of government committees on the Health service and social policy. He also did some consulting in Africa, sometimes together with Professor Brian Abel-Smith, who was later his successor in his chair.

His concerns focused especially on issues of social justice. His final and perhaps the most important book, The Gift Relationship expressed his own philosophy of altruism in social and health policy and, like much of his work, emphasised his preference for the values of public service over private or commercial forms of care. The book was influential and resulted in legislation^[which?] in the United States to regulate the private market in blood.

He has been criticised^{[by whom?]} for a somewhat poor reading of some sociological classics (though he never claimed to be a sociologist), such as the works of Emile Durkheim; while this may partly reflect his somewhat inadequate academic training, it also derives from his impatience with non-participatory sociology and his preference (this became a defining characteristic of "his" discipline of 'social administration') for engagement with contemporary social policy issues and even some of its more fallible institutions. For example, he was much criticised for his role as a vice-chairman of the government's Supplementary Benefits Commission which some critics felt did not allow him enough distance. He, by contrast argued in favour of trying to make inadequate institutions work better for the benefit of the poor even if his involvement with them had the potential to sully the purity of his reputation.

He held his chair from 1950, after brief spells in the Cabinet Office and the Social Medicine Research Unit, until his death in 1973.

 

 

 

Developmental state 발전국가

 서양사람들이 동아시아의 경제기적(East Asian Miracle)에 대해서 연구를 하다가 최근에는 동아시아가 아닌 아시아 경제기적(Asian Miracle)로 대상을 넓여서 연구를 하게 되었는데, 연구결과 아시아에서는 국가가 의도적으로 경제성장을 위해서 국가가 역할을 가했다고 주장하고 있다. 국가의 역할은 사회주의(공산주의) 국가에 가까운 사상이긴 하지만... 복지국가의 발전모델이란 국가가 의도적으로 복지를 계획하고 진행했다는 뜻이다. 서양의 복지국가같은경우에는 많은 세금을 걷어서 복지에 투자를 하였는데, 아시아 국가의 경우 사적이전이란 것이 작용함으로서 복지비 지출이 작아도 사회유지가 된다는 연구결과도 있다.

 우리나라의 경우 무역의존도(수출총액이 GDP를 차지하는 비중)가 OECD국가들 중 1위인데 기술력이 부족한 상황에서 살아남으려면 낮은 가격으로 시장에서 승부를 봐야 한다. 그러므로 기업은 어떻게 하면 인건비를 줄이고 복지를 덜할까? 고민을 하게된다. 그래서 지금의 기업은 성장했지만 복지는 상대적으로 다른나라에 비해 낮은 경우 이러한 정책을 덤핑정책이라고 불린다.

위의 표를 보면 시장소득(세금, 사회보험료 등등을 때기 이전의 소득)으로 만 보면 지니계수가 0.329이다. Private transfer(사적이전)을 통하여 지니계수는 0.316으로 줄어들었고 Public transfer[cash](공적이전)을 통해서 지니계수가 0.308까지 줄어들었다. Direct tax(직접세)을 통해서 지니계수가0.297까지 줄어 들었다. Social security contribution(사회보험료)을 통해서 0.295까지 줄어들었다. (한국에서는 사회보험과 민간보험 전부다 사회보험료라고 정의 하지만, 외국에서는 contribution을 사회보험료라고 정의하고 premium이 민간보험이라고 정의한다.)  Consumption(간접세)를 통해서 역진적인 성격을 가진 간접세 때문에 지니계수가 0.296까지 올라간것을 볼 수가 있다. 마지막으로 현물급여를 통해서 0.273까지 지니계수가 줄어든 것을 볼 수가 있다. 지니계수는 얼마나 많은 부가 사회각계층에게 잘 분배되었는가를 알려주는 수치이다 0<x<1 이 범위이며 낮을 수록 좋다.

 

 수평적 재분배: 부과방식(pay-as-you-go system)은 세대간 재분배이다. 한시대에 3세대가 존재하는데 중간세대가 경제계층에 속하니 경제계층의 소득중 일부를 세금으로 걷어서 노인세대에게 분배할 경우 세대간 재분배가 이루어진다.

 수직적 재분배: 세대내 재분배이다. 한세대내에서 소득계층간의 재분배이다. 소득재분배는 부자→가난인 positive소득재분배와 가난→부자인 positive소득재분배로 나누어진다. 전자는 Tax나 사회복지정책을 통해서 이루어지지만 후자는 역진적인 소득 재분배효과를 가져옴으로서 예를 들면 간접세가 있다.