This new book by Theodore Roszak looks intriguingly on target for a lot of the things I believe Marsha's been talking about in our social policy class. I can't wait until inter-term to have the time to read it!
The Making of an Elder Culture reminds the boomers of the creative role they once played in our society and of the moral and intellectual resources they have to draw upon for radical transformation in their later years. Seeing the experience of aging as a revolution in consciousness, it predicts an “elder insurgency” where boomers return to take up what they left undone in their youth. Freed from competitive individualism, military-industrial bravado, and the careerist rat race, who better to forge a compassionate economy? Who better positioned not only to demand Social Security and Medicare for themselves, but to champion “Entitlements for Everyone”? Fusing the green, the gray, and the just, Eldertown can be an achievable, truly sustainable future.
Here are some of the main points from The Situationist article I like:
...we are all victims of our own stereotypes about aging and health. We mindlessly accept negative cultural cues about disease and old age, and these cues shape our self-concepts and our behavior. If we can shake loose from the negative clichés that dominate our thinking about health, we can “mindfully” open ourselves to possibilities for more productive lives even into old age.
---
Most people try to dress appropriately for their age, so clothing in effect becomes a cue for ingrained attitudes about age. But what if this cue disappeared? Langer decided to study people who routinely wear uniforms as part of their work life, and compare them with people who dress in street clothes. She found that people who wear uniforms missed fewer days owing to illness or injury, had fewer doctors’ visits and hospitalizations, and had fewer chronic diseases—even though they all had the same socioeconomic status. That’s because they were not constantly reminded of their own aging by their fashion choices. The health differences were even more exaggerated when Langer looked at affluent people: presumably the means to buy even more clothes provides a steady stream of new aging cues, which wealthy people internalize as unhealthy attitudes and expectations.
We are surrounded every day by subtle signals that aging is an undesirable period of decline. These signals make it difficult to age gracefully. Similar signals also lock all of us—regardless of age—into pigeonholes for disease. We are too quick to accept diagnostic categories like cancer and depression, and let them define us. . . . [W]ith a little mindfulness, we can try to embrace uncertainty and understand that the way we feel today may or may not connect to the way we will feel tomorrow.
No matter what your race or gender, all people are born with the potential, if they're lucky enough, to be aged. Yet, the discourse around ageism is minute compared to that of other biases and cultural prejudices.
In our Social Policy class, a few of us are working on a project about Language, Ageism and Policy. Essentially, we're researching ways that raising awareness about the usage of negative or positive labels regarding the older population can have a cultural impact. The fact that there's such minuscule discussion about the topic of Ageism as a whole confirms that this is a "hidden" problem, though it's hidden in plain sight.
My point is - let's get talking about "talking about" aging and stereotypes!
Now, how can we utilize Social Policy to get that going?
Some notes for me to refer to later for our project in the Social Policy class:
According to the March 2006 Journals of Gerontology and Social Sciences, “Among 546 people ages 70 years and older, those who had negative images of aging (describing older adults as senile, feeble or stooped) were more likely to experience hearing loss than those who had positive images (describing older people as wise or active).” On the other hand, those with a positive aging self-image live and average of 7.6 years longer than those with a negative self-image. ---
For older adults to accept the stereotypes as future reality is to threaten their future health and well-being. If there is a single myth about aging that most symbolizes our dread, it is the assumption that our memory will decline in old age. In a stunning study, Harvard psychologist Dr. Ellen Langer demonstrated that it is the near-universal expectation of memory loss that actually brings that fate upon us. The fear of aging is the single most powerful agent creating exactly what we fear. Accordingly to Langer, “As people age, low expectations lead to decreased effort, less use of adaptive strategies, avoidance of challenging situations, and failure to seek medical attention for disease-related symptoms.”
----
To avoid creating unintentional negative perceptions, PRAXEIS avoids the use of words that sound institutional or might trigger negative mental images. Managers and operating team members are encouraged to use members instead of residents; residences or homes instead of units, beds, or apartments; and neighborhoods instead of facilities. They avoid using words like senior, elderly, continuing care, or retirement community all together. These are just a few of the words addressed in the growing Life Fulfilling Community Vocabulary to help redefine community living for life’s second half. Our simple rule to combat aging stereotypes is “if a word, title or description sounds institutional, negative, or ageist” do not use it.
William Thomas (thank you Nancy for the introduction to his work!) is the proponent for the term "Elder," and many, many notions that flow from that concept.
I thought this was brilliant as it relates to Francie's theme of promoting inter-generational melding:
For thousands of years, relationships between young and old have made life better for both groups. In Eldertopia, all school construction and remodeling projects would include housing and community services for elders.
ageist language - Ageist language is the term for words and phrases commonly used to refer disparagingly to older people. While there are some terms that are intended to honor the old (e.g., senior citizen, golden ager, old-timer, mature citizen), others are derogatory. They include some that apply to older women-bag, hag, harridan, crone, biddy, and even witch. For men the terms are fewer and perhaps not quite as unpleasant- codger, coot, geezer, mossback, etc. Other terms attribute disagreeable habits and personality traits to older individuals: crank, fogy, fossil, fuddy-duddy, grump, miser, reprobate, DOM (dirty old man), and cantankerous. Yet others single out the physical weaknesses of the older generation-- doddering, tottering, rickety, decrepit, frail, shriveled, long-in-the-tooth, moribund. Older people are sometimes characterized as mentally incompetent, as when a well-intended younger person will comment that an older person is "still sharp as a tack," as if to suggest that the old in general are mentally dull. Terms that disparage the mental state of the old include rambling, dotty, driveling, gaga, second childhood. Even the names of nursing homes and retirement communities may inadvertently contribute to the ageist lexicon by calling facilities by such soppy titles as Tender Care, Crystal Pines, Leisure World, Forest Villa, Happy Time Rest Home, instead of employing more straightforward language. Two publications designed to prevent ageist portrayal of older people now exist: Truth About Aging: Guideline for Accurate Communication and Media Guidelines for Sexuality and Aging. Continual vigilance will be necessary if ageism is to be reduced significantly, if not eradicated from our language and literature. One positive step has already begun in this regard. The newly established national intergeneration organization, Understanding Aging, Incorporated, has recently established an award for authors who portray the elderly in a realistic and nonstereotype fashion.
Nuessel, F. "Old Age Needs a New Name," in Aging, Goldstein, E. C., ed. Vol. 2, Art. 70. Boca Raton, Fl.: Social Issues Resource Series, Inc., 1981. Spencer, M. E. "Truth About Aging: Guidelines for Accurate Communications." Washington, DC: AARP, 1984. Wisnieski, C. J. "Media Guideline for Sexuality and Aging," in Television and the Aging Audience. San Diego: University of Southern California Press, 1980.
Wow. That's all I have to say. I just had to clip this response in total from the article on "Older Workers Need Not Apply" in the NY Times.
This is just a part of what Laurence J. Kotlikoff wrote. What do you think???
Pay the Aged Less
The solution?
First, modify the Age Discrimination Act by establishing a national age-productivity reference profile that employers can use to defend pay cuts they feel they need to impose on their older workers in order to retain them.
Second, scrap employer-based retirement programs in favor of a Personal Security System under which all workers would invest 8 percent of pay in a global stock/bond index fund. The government would split contributions between spouses, match contributions by the poor, convert balances at retirement to inflation-adjusted annuities, and guarantee that retirement balances equal at least what one contributed adjusted for inflation.
Third, scrap employer-based health care in favor of a Medical Security System under which all Americans receive an annual voucher to buy a basic health plan for the year. The size of the voucher would equal one’s expected costs under the basic plan. So those with pre-existing conditions would receive larger vouchers. The aggregate voucher budget would be set at 10 percent of G.D.P., which means the country won’t go broke.
Fourth, scrap the current tax system in favor of the “FairTax” plan, which is equivalent to a very low, flat-rate wage tax plus a one-time tax on wealth plus a monthly “demogrant.” This “right-wing” proposal is something every Democrat should love. The tax is implemented by taxing all retail sales. In my version, I’d tax the consumption services (called imputed rent) from living in your own home. Such a broad-based FairTax would have a very low rate. Indeed, most older, as well as younger, workers who move from paying roughly 40 cents of every dollar earned to Uncle Sam to only 18 cents.
This will give older workers plenty of incentive to stay on the job.
How can I supervise someone who has more experience than I have, how do I motivate them when they are less concerned about the carrot of promotions or the stick of being fired? Managing older workers in fact doesn’t require rocket science, but it does require a more collaborative approach that respects their expertise and engages their interests.
Another interviewed expert:
Older workers are desperate. Their 401(k) plans are devastated, and they realize they do not have enough to retire. My guess is that they are clinging to their jobs. If we had data on quit rates — which we don’t — I bet the rate for older workers has dropped sharply. And long tenure and anti-discrimination laws make it hard to fire older workers... But older workers without jobs are a different story. No law can really prevent the “not hiring” of older workers.
Nancy sent me this great article on ageism, though I agree with her comment that it's a little too hoo-rah, swinging to the opposite end of the spectrum on what's expected in aging.
The article led me to the International Longevity Center site because the ILC's founder, Dr. Robert N. Butler,coined the term "ageism" in 1968.
I thought Karen's group would be particularly interested in the work that the ILC is doing related to aging and corporate America. I also like the consistent messaging of the "Age Boom" and "Longevity Revolution" on the site. Very positive. It turns the notion from "aging" to "living longer."
While researching a class project ageism and how it's played out in our language, I came across the NATLA site. The broad subject of our project for the social policy class is to combat ageist attitudes in language usage via a social policy program. NATLA fits neatly with that, in that it's entirely about teaching to counteract ageism. What Do You Call Older People?
The study by the AARP referenced in this article is an example of a Research and Development project on ageism.
I gave up on existentialism after reading Kafka's "The Trial" in college and getting very, very bummed about the meaningless of it all. This was in a literature class, mind you, not a philosophy class, so I didn't have anyone outlining what "existentialism" was. This was kind of like getting thrown into the deep end of the pool without a helmet. Or a life jacket. You get my point.
Roll forward a number of years and I downloaded a podcast on "Death Anxiety" aribitrarily on iTunes. The lecture was given by Ernesto Spinelli, an existentialist therapist from London, at a 2008 Conference on Personal Meaning. It was re-broadcast as a portion of a larger episode of the podcast series called "Big Ideas."
Anyway, I found the lecture to be pretty phenomenal in outlining the usage of contemplating meaninglessness as a way of creating meaning. I don't know... made sense at the time.
All I know for sure is that I feel like a more evolved person for having listened to it (while commuting to class the other day!), and I post it here because I know that some aspect of my studies in this Masters in Gerontology program I'm in will revolve around aspects of death and dying.
Here's the link to info on the podcast, where you can listen to it streaming:
Here's where you can download Spinelli's portion of the podcast on iTunes. WARNING: This link will automatically attempt to open iTunes on your computer so you can get the podcast. If that's what you want to do, great! Otherwise, don't click. Once iTunes opens, scroll through the episodes until you find the one from 12/13/08, and there you have it! http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=129166905
This speaks to the power of the press and perception. The Huffington Post published two articles yesterday that covered the same issue - where the Public Option option stands in Congress. Robert Creamer's interpretation is upbeat, as he figures that the 'near miss' of a passage connotes a "Growing Momentum for Public Option." On the same day, the aptly named Ryan Grim reported that the "Public Option Amendments Fail in Senate Finance Committee." I suppose it's all in how you look at it.
Yesterday, we had a great lecture about the Aging Network, which touched on the history of the AOA, Administration on Aging. The AOA, which oversees the Aging Network, was created as a result of the passage of the OAA, the Older American's Act in 1965. According to the site, the OAA:
The original legislation established authority for grants to States for community planning and social services, research and development projects, and personnel training in the field of aging.
Ever since the passage of the OAA and subsequent creation of the AOA in 1965, there has been a once-a-decade White House Conference on Aging. President Bush was notoriously absent from the most recent White House Conference on Aging, which was held in December, 2005. Instead of having a speaking at the conference, as all of his predecessors have done since its inception, President Bush was stumping the successful passage of the Medicare Part D law.
The website for the White House Conference on Aging is pretty thin on info... essentially a splash page that doesn't so much as highlight successes of conferences past. It does, however offer a webcast of the most recent conference... I find it more than mildly disturbing that the webcast is hosted via "Kaisernetwork.org." Can you say "conflict of interest" anyone?
In our class discussion yesterday, someone mentioned TR Reid's September 14, 2009 speech at the California Commonwealth Club, entitled "Can We Really Fix US Health Care?"
I haven't listened to it yet - I like to download podcasts and listen to them on my commute in to class! Here's the direct link, if you prefer to copy and paste.
I haven't seen Michael Moore's new movie yet, on Capitalism, but I guess it makes reference to FDR's idea of creating a Second Bill of Rights.
Here's a quick quote:
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.
Also, here's a clip (audio, but hosted on YouTube) of Roosevelt' speech.
This is unbelievably powerful. If Roosevelt had succeeded, what would things look like now? In order to make these "rights" realities, we would have had to have made some hard choices... One of my first thoughts is that we certainly couldn't have globalized our markets nearly as much as we have. Secondly, in order to secure "the right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad," we must have limited corporate power to some extent. Finally, and unpopularly, it seems that in order to provide many of these rights, we would have had to limit our population growth, which would have meant further immigration quotas than already exist.
I saw this article about how effective smoking bans have been. I wanted to put it here because it relates to a pet interest of mine - High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS), or, more specifically, how it's in everything.
Clearly, the success of the smoking ban is largely due to reductions in second-hand smoke deaths, and there isn't a correlative "innocent bystander" in eating, but the study does demonstrate that banning substances can have a big impact on public health.
We spend a LOT of time in our Social Policy class discussing the present debate over a national health care plan. It's pretty grim, the stakes are very high, and I, personally, have small faith that Congress is going to do the right thing. I'm sure some bill will pass, that it will be sweeping and effect major change... only... I don't think that the "change" will ultimately benefit we, the people.
When the discussion becomes dour, our esteemed professor rallies us with the notion that we can influence Congress via letters, phone calls and educating our peers. After all the readings we're doing, which are pretty rife with references to how large the system is, and how the government is increasingly controlled by institutions, not people, it's hard muster faith that individuals have power in the US, much less voices.
This is a tragic situation - last week a 64 year old mother entered the nursing home where her 43 year old, disabled and brain damaged daughter lived, and killed her daughter and then herself. The whole event is a tragedy - not just the two women's deaths, but also what seems to have led up to the act.
I read the initial report of this crime the day it happened, and thought that it related to Gerontology studies for three reasons:
The mother was aging and it appeared that she was largely motivated to commit this crime because of ailing health, which would have ultimately limited her ability to advocate for her daughter. Aging and not being able to care for dependent loved ones is a Gerontology issue.
The daughter was in a nursing home and vulnerable. Though she's not of the "aged" cohort, she is within the same system of care that so many of our aging population fall into. Therefore, the issues of quality of care that were implied in the crime relate to Gerontology.
Even in the initial crime report, it seemed that this crime was motivated by some version of quality-of-life-motivated suicide that's often the fodder for assisted suicide and euthanasia arguments that we will only be seeing more of in the years to come.
This most recent article, which alludes to details that were given in the mother's letter to a local news channel, confirms a lot of my suspicions. Again, this tragedy is rife with all the things that can go wrong in caring for people in fragile economic and health states, and the numerous ways that government oversight can let things fall through the cracks. Perhaps the daughter would have been unhappy no matter where she stayed - it seems part of her brain damaged condition led her to be a pretty difficult patient. However, the fact that so many complaints have been registered against this home and so little official censuring (lots of confirmation, but little punishment) occurred will always leave a shadow (or pall) of doubt as to whether the outcome and quality of life could have been different had the checks and balances worked correctly here.
What are your thoughts about this in relation to Gerontology?
A great deal of the reading we're doing in the Social Policy class talks about how the present structure of public policy tends to force elders into institutions and poverty (if they weren't already impoverished to begin with). Recently, some states have been working on ways to redistribute Medicaid money so that more people can stay at home rather than nursing homes.
This article from the New York Times (linked here in the mobile version, which has less banner ads, etc), does a pretty decent job of going over some of the high-level pros and cons of these "Money Follows the Person" programs.
Some main points:
PRO: people are thrilled, thrilled, thrilled to escape having their final days in a nursing home
PRO: it looks like people moving out of nursing homes costs less money
CON: the "less money" part is most likely due to family members doing labor that is paid for in nursing homes. The article implies that this is a problem, or at least potential hardship for family members, but doesn't delineate that most of the burden of care falls on... you guessed it... women.
The article is very good also because it touches on how devastating things can be in older age - a slip and fall can rapidly lead to being shuttled into a nursing home and never getting to go home, much less wrap up your possessions. Life is so very fragile.
Finally, the article mentions:
A recent study by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, found that home care costs taxpayers $44,000 a year less than a nursing home stay - though this number cannot be used to estimate total savings, because often home-based services replace family care, not nursing home care.
I'd bet that Carroll Estes is somehow related to that study!
(the article noted in this post is "Helping Elderly Leave Nursing Homes for a Home" by John Leland)
One of my questions about study on Universal Mid-Life Crisis seems is a little satisfied. I'd asked why economists were performing the study. What I meant by that was why economists and not psychologists, since it seems to be about a relatively "soft" topic of subjective states, as opposed to "hard" definable topics like numbers.
The study looks like it was done at the NBER via their
Here are some handy links: http://www.nber.org/programs/ag/ - Great synopsis, state of the state-type overview of economics and aging in the "Program Report" on this page.
Recent research has argued that psychological well-being is U-shaped through the life cycle. The difficulty with such a claim is that there are likely to be omitted cohort effects (earlier generations may have been born in, say, particularly good or bad times). Hence the apparent U may be an artifact. Using data on approximately 500,000 Americans and Europeans, this paper designs a test that makes it possible to allow for different birth-cohorts. A robust U-shape of happiness in age is found. Ceteris paribus, well-being reaches a minimum, on both sides of the Atlantic, in people's mid to late 40s. The paper also shows that in the United States the well-being of successive birth-cohorts has gradually fallen through time. In Europe, newer birth-cohorts are happier.
This article in The Financial Times discusses a recent study that claims mid-life crisis is universal.
I found this article to be interesting on a number of levels. First, it's interesting that women appear to have the crisis earlier in life. I wonder if there's a correlation between dwindling biological reproductive prospects and the depression of mid-life crisis.
Second, why are economics professors doing a study on mid-life crisis?
Third, both of the readings from the classes I'm taking referenced how perspectives on aging have shifted since gerontology began. The initial belief was that as we age, we disengage from society and life. Two newer perspectives are that we either have successful aging, wherein we are active and get more involved in life after retirement, or that we simply experience an extension of ourselves throughout the life spectrum. The quote below from the article seems to reference this last perspective as having been a point now refuted by the study:
"...the findings contrasted with many previous studies and with applied psychology textbooks – suggesting that, on average, our mood stays relatively consistent as we age."
The article also gives a few descriptions of the aging process that are very interesting, again, considering that the observations are coming from economists:
The most likely explanation, the researchers speculate, is that people “learn to adapt to their strengths and weaknesses, and in mid-life quell their infeasible aspirations”. Minor contributing factors might include a “selection effect”, with people living longer if they are cheerful than miserable, and – towards the end of life – a “comparison process” in which people count their blessings as they see their old friends dying off.
“For the average person in the modern world, the dip in mental health and happiness comes on slowly,” said Prof Oswald. “Only in their 50s do most people emerge from the low period. But, encouragingly, by the time you are 70, if you are still physically fit then on average you are as happy and mentally healthy as a 20-year-old. Perhaps realising that such feelings are completely normal in mid-life might even help individuals survive this phase better.”
Estes mentions the term "social structures" a number of times in the second chapter of Social Policy and Aging. Here's a specific quote:
A more recent dimension of this theory is the concept of structural lag, wherein social structures (e.g. policies of retirement at age 65) do not keep pace with changes in population dynamics and individual lives (such as increasing life expectancy).
Social structure is a term used in sociology and anthropology to refer to relationships or bonds between groups of individuals (e.g. societies). Whereas 'structure' refers to "the macro", "agency" refers to "the micro". (See also: Structure and agency)
In a general sense, the term can refer to:
entities or groups in definite relation to each other,
relatively enduring patterns of behaviour and relationship within a society, or
social institutions and norms becoming embedded into social systems in such a way that they shape the behavior of actors within those social systems.
By the 1930s, the term was in general use in social science[1], especially as a variable whose sub-components needed to be distinguished in relationship to other sociological variables.
It looks like Estes is using the term in the third sense here - that of "social institutions and norms becoming embedded into social systems in such a way that they shape the behavior of actors within those social systems. I think she also means it in a bigger sense, that social structures can be institutional - such as companies having a standard retirement age of 65.
I like that this glossary was created by someone who was posting their notes and assignments while studying for their master's in Education. Great minds, I guess.
...more recent studies focus on understanding the process of aging from the perspective of the life course and the relation of coping, social support, personal control, self-efficacy, and focus on the behavioral dimensions of aging.
Wikipedia has a really clear-cut description of "self-efficacy:"
The concept of 'self-efficacy' is an important one in the self-management of chronic diseases because doctors and patients often do not follow best practice in using a treatment. For instance, a patient using combined oral contraceptive pills to prevent pregnancy may sometimes forget to take a pill at the prescribed time; thus, while the perfect-use failure rate for this form of contraception in the first year of use is just 0.3%, the typical-use failure rate is 8%
Normative models of social research hold that human behaviour is law-like and should be investigated by natural science's techniques of observation. Behaviour is determined by the past. General theories are sought to account for social behaviour.
Interpretive models work explicitly from within the human perspective. Action, i.e. future-oriented intentional behaviour, is emphasised and theories are emergent, multi-faceted, and attentive to the meanings created by the participants.
Normative Concerned with rules, recommendations or proposals, as contrasted with mere description of the statement of matters of fact.
Interpretive sociology Any sociological theory or approach that emphasises that humans give meaning to social reality before deciding how they are going to act, requiring explanations to refer to the subjective states of social actors.
Estes states:
Another classification dimension of different gerontological theories (also consistent with the larger disciplinary social sciences) is the "normative" versus the "interpretive" perspective...
The Wall Street Journal had an interesting article today about special training programs for people who do merchandising for health-related stores, such as drug stores. The program is run by the Kimberley-Clark Corp. Sadly, the WSJ doesn't allow full access to articles older than a day, unless you have a paid subscription.
I'm still confused on this, as it seemed that a universal transfer could be the dispersement of your wealth to your heirs prior to your death, as a means of "spending down" to qualify for Medicaid. Technically, I think this is a transfer, but I found some economics-based definitions of "transfer payments" to be helpful:
Transfer Payments definitions:
The Congressional Budget Office: Payments made to a person or organization for which no current or future goods or services are required in return. Federal transfer payments include Social Security and unemployment benefits.
In this context, "transfer payments" definitely relates to spending down on a micro level. It doesn't account for the "modest universal" part of the term I'm trying to understand though... does Social Security count as this?
World Bank: Payments from the government to individuals used to redistribute a country's wealth. Examples are pensions, welfare, and unemployment benefits.
When a person gets "means-tested assistance," they somehow qualify for it, such as Medicaid. You need to have limited means in order to qualify for the assistance. Means-tested assistance is frequently associated with stigma because, well, if you're getting X assistance, then it's known you qualify for it by X means, as in, low income.
The discussion went on to point out that in order for people to qualify for the long-term care that is provided by Medicaid, they need to "spend down," by divesting of their savings and investments (home, properties, stocks, etc).
--------
Social Security, on the other hand, is not a means-tested assistance. It is an institution that goes to all who contributed to it. Often, women exit the workforce to raise children and therefore the Social Security program is a social policy structured against women.
This isn't really a definition... it's just the main source quote I could find about it... it doesn't delineate the difference between "modest universal transfers,""means-tested assistance" and modest social-insurance plans."
...the liberal welfare state, in which means-tested assistance, modest universal transfers or modest social-insurance plans predominate. Benefits cater mainly to a clientele of low-income, usually working-class, state dependants. In this model, the progress of social reform has been severely circumscribed by traditional, liberal work-ethic norms: it is one where the limits of welfare equal the marginal propensity to opt for welfare instead of work. Entitlement rules are therefore strict and offer associated stigma; benefits are typically modest. In turn, the state encourages the market, either passively - by guaranteeing only a minimum - or actively - by subsidizing private welfare schemes.
How public policy defines citizen rights is highly determinative of the "life chances" available to members of society, including the elderly. In liberal states such as the United States, there are modest universal transfers and means-tested assistance with strict entitlement rules, often associated with stigma... In contrast to the "largely individualistic and sometimes asocial views of the New Right" in which citizen rights are based largely on labor market participation and property, the opposing concept of "social rights" emphasizing notions of independence and solidarity...
Deficit spending is the amount by which a government, private company, or individual's spending exceeds income over a particular period of time, also called simply "deficit," or "budget deficit," the opposite of budget surplus.
Unfreedom is the "domination of one's instincts, domination that society makes into second nature and that perpetuates the institutions of domination. But civilized unfreedom is oppression of a particular kind: it is rational unfreedom, rational domination. It is rational to the extent that it makes possible the ascent from a human animal to a human being, from nature to civilization..." (The Essential Marcuse, p. 168)
Quote from "The Sex/Gender System" section, Social Policy and Aging text:
According to Brown... women face the "rational unfreedom regulated by the state" versus their state of "nature" in which there is arbitrary violence by men against them as women. The state meets the requirement of men to protect women from the violence that men cause. The role of dependency in the health and aging of women is explored in greater detail in both Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.
