Talk:Welfare capitalism/Archive 1

Archive 1

Most of Europe?

I'm slightly confused by most of Europe — where in Europe doesn't run under this description of welfare capitalism? - FrancisTyers 01:14, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Pullman Strike

I believe the Pullman Strike was in 1902, not 1894. 68.8.71.21 (talk) 06:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Jessi Young

Wikify

This article should be broken down into sections if it doesn't merge with Welfare State (which I don't believe it should). Also, some of the links are broken and other things are not written correctly in the editing part, aka they should link to something but they dont. --72.70.37.86 03:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

This article should definitely be split because it really deals with two separate things. Welfare capitalism as a political philosophy or theory is very different than the American business theory. 70.128.97.255 (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2011 (UTC)historiophiliac

time frame

The time frame established in this article is vague and probably not accurate. The article needs more dates to specify when these things occurred. I think that would actually affect the content as well. 70.128.97.255 (talk) 18:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)historiophiliac

Content

The article needs more specifics to justify points. For example, the claim that company towns were built as a benefit for workers is questionable (and depends very much on if you are talking about the mining towns in Colorado and West Virginia in the late 19th century or if you are talking about a place like Kohler, WI). Also, some of the companies that introduced some of these programs did not do it becuase of a belief in the principle of welfare capitalism (as a described business concept) which really wasn't articulated until the 20th century. It is questionable if the programs sans the theory qualify to fit in the article. This should be addressed by contributors who claim that perhaps. It would be good to clarify. 70.128.97.255 (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2011 (UTC)historiophiliac

Separate from welfare state

This page should not merge with the one on the Welfare State as welfare capitalism was not state driven but capital or industry driven.220.237.231.24 03:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Well its state-instituted. Industry just lead to less need for state involvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.240.255.227 (talk) 09:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Article is not current, and suggestions for improving

The article deals with the history of the topic with interesting facts, but they are building up to something that may not fit the picture of what welfare capitalism is. Any topic can be many things at once, but the article is overweight in its current form, failing to acknowledge aspects responsible for its dynamic evolution into the current form, which is not covered here

What is missing is the contemporary form of welfare capitalism as opportunistically transforming into a more privatized, market driven, welfare for workers. It is through legislation that this process occurred, which the article implies tends to create the welfare on the opposite end of the spectrum.

How legislation was wrested over or what were the exact driving forces behind the shift to market oriented welfare is less important than having the article let the reader understand the current state of welfare capitalism. In this light, it may be necessary to explain why the benevolent portrayal of business largely stopped holding true as opportunistic moments towards marketization and privatization occurred in a less inclusive way that may even be unrecognizable in places like the United States. But this is the story of how the topic evolves and how it can take many shapes, and is not at all stagnant, and still an ongoing project/experiment.

I think this would be a good start in bringing the article current with today's world. Hope this is helpful, and I will if I am able. Louis Waweru  Talk  04:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Welfare Capitalism is not a proper term - please let me explain

Welfare capitalism is an invented term. It has little real meaning.

The definition refers to capitalism with the benefits provided by employers to employees during there employment.

This is a nonense because capitalism requires employers to compete for their employees and one way they do this is to offer incentives as benefits.

Pure capitalism already includes employee benefits. Capitalism also requires companies to ensure the staff are well motivated, healthy, fit and financially secure. Over time, if the goverment has not provided welfare then responsible companies have provided welfare. The amount of welfare provision by each party depends on what the other party is providing. It only a matter of degree.

Its like saying this is a car, and then we have a subset called cars with wheels. But all cars have wheels already.

Please let me know if this is not clear.

Thank you

What I am proposing here is that it should be a subcatagory or an associated variable ? Any thoughts ? - 18:54, January 1, 2016‎ People1750 talk contribs‎