answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Bismarck wanted to head off socialism. To combat it, he devised an employer paid welfare system that provided so many "welfare" type benefits, workers in his united Germany had no reason to rebel over lack of health care and other issues that socialists wanted to install in Europe.

User Avatar

Wiki User

9y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Why did Bismarck create a cradle to grave society for workers in Prussia?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Economics

What do republicans want for the economy?

Republicans want as little interference fromthe Government as is possible to allow the largest number of people to be free to become wealthy or self sufficient. They would prefer the lowest possible taxation on the average American and the most freedoms to do as you wish. Basically, they want to be fre to do what they can to provide for them selves and their families. Democrats want to be wet nursed and the ability to feed from the trough of those that work. They would prefer cradle to grave babysitting for themselves. They believe the roll of government is provide for anything they don't wish to work for and to protect them from themselves. Bottom line is that Republicans believe you can do it and Democrats believe you are too stupid to do anything. I believe that if anyone were to think through the issue, they could not be a Democrat under the current beliefs system today. Democrats were not always like this, nor were Republicans. This is a current issue.


What is the strongest criticism of Sweden's economic system?

They have cradle-to-grave security. Everyone is entitled to medicare, education, retirement benefits and other essential needs. All you have to do is be born. Thus High Taxes.Answer: high taxesFrom Economics 10e Stephen SlavinBasically the economic system in Sweden is really complicated. As you can see, Sweden is one of the few countries that has a percentage increase in GDP 4.1% (increase in Economic Growth). Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries have survived from this economic crisis for 2 reasons1) Fiscal Policy, which involves increase in Government Spending and decrease in taxation. That's why the swedish government bought some of the banks, allowing the government to manipulate the interest rates. Even though Fiscal Policy is expensive, they took the risk rather than Monetary Policy which is much cheaper2) They are out of the Euro currency.Sweden uses ideas from Planned and Free Market that's why is so successfulRead more: What_economic_system_in_Sweden


Do you and should you use the gold standard today?

No country in the world currently fixes its currency to gold. The last currency to be officially decoupled from gold was the Swiss Franc in 2000. As to whether or not the gold standard should be employed today, one's worldview on government is usually the determining factor. If you believe that government has a responsibility to protect you from every possible harm, and provide cradle-to-grave security for everyone within its borders, than the gold standard is impossible. This is because government spending requires a fiat (fake) currency so that the central bank can inflate the monetary base to allow more government spending. However, this debases the value of the currency, making your money buy less and less, which is an insidious and indirect form of taxation. If, however, you take a limited government view, where the government is responsible only for enforcing contract law, protecting individuals from directly harming one another, and securing national borders, then the gold standard is the best recipe for limiting the size of government, since it cannot create gold out of thin air, and thus must be able to have on hand the gold reserves for all the money it prints. This ensures that your money is always worth the same amount of gold, which will actually result in deflation, making your money worth more and more all the time, meaning you can buy more with the money you have, as prices (and yes, wages) will fall over time. However, that directly rewards savings, meaning that your retirement fund or purchasing power will grow in value continually, since the same amount of money is constantly chasing more goods, driving down costs. The answer for today is not necessarily a government-mandated gold standard, but instead competing currencies. If gold and silver were allowed, like the Constitution says, to be legal tender (i.e. the Federal Reserve Note system is 100% unconstitutional, and therefore illegal), then the worthless fiat dollar would have to compete with hard money like gold, silver, platinum, and whatever else was determined to hold market value as money. Of course, this would destroy the government's ability to inflate, since FRNs would eventually be ignored because of their plummeting value, forcing the government to actually cut spending. So yes, we should have a hard money-backed financial system. Things get ridiculously out of hand when you have bailout-guaranteed, well-connected banks that create a derivatives market of ten times the national debt, and can lose billions and billions of dollars in mere seconds. Then, of course, these banks that made risky moves can then look to their pals in Congress to steal more funds from you, through direct taxation, postponed taxation (borrowing), or indirect taxation (inflation), to prop up their stupid financial decisions.