Contre l'individualisation des droits sociaux

Henri Sterdyniak ()

Revue de l'OFCE, 2004, vol. 90, issue 3, 419-460

Abstract: Both neo-classic economists and feminists defend social and fiscal rights individualisation as a way to incite married women to work by penalising inactive ones. According to us, this is not a good reform direction. Individualisation would reduce both the income of the poorest families and the redistributive capabilities of the system. Only a family-based system can allow the distribution of adequate social allowances, especially to family with children, and tax according to the "contributive capacity" principle. In the French system, health insurance is universal, while unemployment and retirement allocations are individual. Social allowances and taxation are and must stay family-based. France has preserved both a satisfactory birth rate and a high and growing level of female activity. Work disincentives weight on unskilled people living alone or in a bi-inactive couple, but not especially on married women: they must be corrected by labour-market reforms.

Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.cairn.info/load_pdf.php?ID_ARTICLE=REOF_090_0419 (application/pdf)
http://www.cairn.info/revue-de-l-ofce-2004-3-page-419.htm (text/html)
free

Related works:
Working Paper: Contre l'individualisation des droits sociaux (2004)
Working Paper: Contre l'individualisation des droits sociaux (2004)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cai:reofsp:reof_090_0419

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Revue de l'OFCE from Presses de Sciences-Po
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jean-Baptiste de Vathaire ().