In recent years, with the global economic contraction and financial crisis, why did Europe implement a high welfare policy?

Europe has the highest national welfare in the world, and its social security system is called "from cradle to grave". As long as you are born in Europe and China, where the welfare system is implemented, you can basically guarantee a lifetime of luxury and even a very good daily life. But correspondingly, European capitalist countries were forced to bear huge financial pressure in order to safeguard multiple interests, and Greece even went to the road of national bankruptcy. The question is, why do European capitalist countries adhere to the rules and regulations of multi-welfare?

The social welfare system has existed for a long time in human history, but the initial intention of this kind of rules and system is not to let everyone hitchhike, but to take care of the poorest and helpless groups in society and ensure their most basic life. This not only reflects social care, but also contributes to social stability. To put it bluntly, it is to "prevent poverty" for the disadvantaged groups and solve the worries of ordinary people.

No matter what kind of social form, we must provide security and welfare for the people. However, there is also a problem of profit. Too low and too much will lead to negative effects. Many capitalist countries in contemporary Europe have been entangled in multiple welfare rules and regulations.

The background of the establishment of the pluralistic welfare system in Europe is the "cold violence" between China and the West after World War II. At that time, the western camp represented by the United States and the eastern forces in China represented by the Soviet Union wanted to show their institutional advantages, so they competed with each other not only in national defense, but also in the fields of culture and art, plastic arts, culture and education, diagnosis and treatment, sports and so on. In order to improve people's self-confidence and severely hit each other's morale, the other side's forces do their best to invest in the social security system. So in the early days of "cold violence", Europeans experienced a series of interests produced by multiple interests.

Later, as we all know, the Soviet army completely collapsed because its overall strength was not as good as that of the other side. These eastern European countries, which have been following the Soviet Union, will also hit the bottom of our economy. For China in Western Europe, although its competitors have fallen, the multiple benefits they give to the people can only be improved, not reduced. Because any participating party can scrape the bones from the national welfare, it will inevitably be ousted by people who are used to multiple welfare. Therefore, more welfare has become a "moral policy" that Europe and China cannot reduce by promotion alone.

Compared with ordinary people, welfare is a good thing. Who doesn't like such things as "live less, have money and be close to home"? However, for society, the negative effects brought by multiple interests are very obvious. Most people work to make a living, but once they stop "begging", they can still "live" and live well. How many people want to work hard? The development of the times is created by employees. If a large number of school-age youth groups prefer to play games, brush their mobile phones and watch dramas at home, it is obviously a disaster for society.

In addition, more welfare is also a kind of "killing the rich and helping the poor" to some extent. Middle-and high-income earners need to pay a lot of tax time, and the money they give to the state is used to subsidize the social security system. Some middle-class people pay after-tax wages after a year of hard work, and the remaining money is likely to be similar to that of those who receive social security, which will naturally severely dampen their enthusiasm for work. Most wealthy businessmen may simply buy, sort out and leave. For example, the French government introduced a tax increase plan for the rich, which eventually led to a large number of rich French immigrants to these "rich-friendly countries."

Social security system is a "double-edged sword". If it is too low, it will reduce people's satisfaction and enhance the uncertain factors of social development. Too high will also reduce everyone's enthusiasm for work and increase China's economic pressure. Only by balancing the boundaries between welfare and incentives can we promote the social development department to work in the best condition and make profits like Greece to bankrupt our country. This thing sounds really ridiculous.