<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Globalisation and the Welfare State</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/13/globalisation-and-the-welfare-state/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/13/globalisation-and-the-welfare-state/</link>
	<description>If there wasn't one before, it's time we started it...</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Margin4 Error</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/13/globalisation-and-the-welfare-state/#comment-6688</link>
		<dc:creator>Margin4 Error</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/13/globalisation-and-the-welfare-state/#comment-6688</guid>
		<description>The report makes an interesting read, and I certainly agree that globalisation is not something to fear and oppose. 

However - it doesn't explore the alternatives to its democratic explanation of stability. 

While it is plausible that welfare has been maintained because of democratic strength - it is just as plausible that like New Labour, many governments have drawn the conclusion that welfare is an economic asset. 

cutting provision for those most in need might mean cutting taxes, but that may not be as useful a trade advantage as a better educated and more active population, which can be better achieved through welfare provision. 

It would be interesting to see that explored too, as that would suggest globalisation is a great asset for the left.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The report makes an interesting read, and I certainly agree that globalisation is not something to fear and oppose. </p>
<p>However - it doesn&#8217;t explore the alternatives to its democratic explanation of stability. </p>
<p>While it is plausible that welfare has been maintained because of democratic strength - it is just as plausible that like New Labour, many governments have drawn the conclusion that welfare is an economic asset. </p>
<p>cutting provision for those most in need might mean cutting taxes, but that may not be as useful a trade advantage as a better educated and more active population, which can be better achieved through welfare provision. </p>
<p>It would be interesting to see that explored too, as that would suggest globalisation is a great asset for the left.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
