Czy programy Rodzina 500 Plus i Mieszkanie Plus mają według Ciebie charakter głównie socjalny czy inwestycyjny w kontekście wieloletniej, perspektywicznej polityki społeczno-gospodarczej?

Zapraszam do dyskusji

Do the Rodzina 500 Plus and Mieszkanie Plus programs, according to you, have a mainly social or investment character in the context of a long-term, prospective socio-economic policy?

I invite you to the discussion

These are interesting programs. The Family 500 plus is rather similar to the old Australian child endowment scheme , which paid an increasing amount of money for each child above one. I see the aim is to increase the falling birthrate and to prevent child poverty. It is clearly a social welfare programme. However the transfers are so great (1/12 of average gross wage to nearly 4 million children, or almost 5 billion euros, that it is bound to provide an economic stimulus.

I suppose it depends where the 5 billion comes from, but paying money to lower income families is generally regarded as increasing household expenditure and boosting the economy, usually as GDP. This is also part of a long term investment in future citizens, though it will take 20 years to begin to pay off.

The first evaluation (May 2018) showed a 15% rise in birthrates. The rates of extreme poverty are expected to fall by 80%. IBS showed a small fall in labour force participation by these mothers, which might lower GDP in the short term.

The Mieskanie Plus is a new affordable housing programme for households unable to afford the private market but too well off for public housing. These programmes are also nominally social welfare, but they do typically provided a significant short term Keynesian economic boost - housing has one of the best multipliers because of the on-flow to supply industries and labour.

The conservative neoclassical procedure here would be to run these programs through a closed CGE model which will account for price rises caused by increased demand and will also account for the loss of billions of euros from other parts of the economy. Because these models regard all government expenditure as distortions, they usually show a loss of GNP from government interventions - but not always.

I should have added that neither program would be regarded as an 'investment' program by any Treasury or by economists. Education is not regarded as an 'investment program' (which it really is) let alone birthrate support, which is much harder to justify. Many of us have argued unsuccessfully for decades to have affordable housing treated as 'infrastructure' and funded accordingly - but Treasuries have always regarded it as a social transfer and continue to do so.

The Family 500 Plus and Flat Plus (Mieszkanie Plus) programs are to fulfill many important social and investment functions in the context of long-term, long-term socio-economic policy. However, since they have been conducted for almost 4 years, it is still necessary to wait for a full assessment of the economic, social and demographic effects of their activities. However, in many other developed countries, among others in many other countries in Europe, similar programs have been conducted for many years as part of pro-development socio-economic policy and they bring many positive economic, social and also demographic effects, i.e. counteracting the negative process of demographic aging societies in developed countries.

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply

Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,

On the basis of the above considerations and discussion on interesting issues, I formulated the following thesis that social and housing programs carried out as part of socio-economic policy supporting middle-class citizens achieving low income are an important pro-developmental, pro-cyclical factor activating consumption, production and economic growth. Examples of such pro-development socio-host policy programs are the Family 500 Plus Program and the Flat Program Plus (Mieszkanie Plus Program), which I examine and describe in my publications.

In the context of the above considerations, the following key questions arise:

- Should social and housing programs, such as the Family 500 Plus Program and the Flat Program Plus (Mieszkanie Plus Program) implemented within the framework of socio-economic policy, be conducted mainly in times of economic downturn and low economic growth or should they be carried out permanently, at all times, independently from what phase of the business cycle is the national economy in?

- Have social and housing programs such as the Family 500 Plus Program and the Flat Program Plus (Mieszkanie Plus Program) been conducted in your countries for many years as part of socio-economic policy?

- If YES, what are the effects of these programs on the analysis of economic growth, citizens' income, property status, housing situation, situation on the labor market, etc.?

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply

I invite you to discussion

Thank you very much

Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,

I suggest concentrating this discussion on the following issues: Guaranteed income system as an element of pro-development socio-economic policy

In the context of the above discussion, the following key questions arise:

- How should a guaranteed income system be built as part of a pro-development socio-economic policy?

- Analysis of guaranteed income as a key element of pro-development, anti-crisis, anti-cyclical socio-economic policy?

- Can guaranteed income be an effective instrument for pro-development, anti-crisis, counter-cyclical and, under certain economic conditions, Keynesian socio-economic policy?

- What should be the state of state finances, what level of security, indebtedness, possible public debt and budget deficit would be possible to enter guaranteed income into the policy of socio-economic policy?

- How should a system of guaranteed income rationing be established in the society in order for this instrument to effectively increase the level of consumption and investment in the economy?

- Should a system of income guaranteed rationalization be built so that this instrument of pro-development, anti-crisis, anticyclical socio-economic policy would also meet the long-term goals of counteracting unfavorable changes in the demographic structure of society, i.e. the aging population in a given country?

I conduct research in this area. The conclusions of the research I published in scientific publications that are available on the Research Gate portal.

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Do you agree with me on the above matter?

Please reply

I invite you to discussion and scientific cooperation

Best wishes

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Hello everyone, The above discussion inspired me to reflect on the following question: Is the guaranteed income for citizens a good, effective instrument of anti-crisis socio-economic policy?

What do you think about this?

Thank you very much and best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear Joe Flood, Thank you very much for your inspiring, interesting and highly substantive answer. Best wishes, Have a nice day,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

… While fiscal support for families had been relatively modest overall in Poland, the Family 500+ programme nearly doubled it compared to 2013, lifting it well above the OECD average to more than 3% of GDP... Magda, I., Kiełczewska, A., & Brandt, N. (2018). The “Family 500+” child allowance and female labour supply in Poland. Warszawa: Instytut Badań Strukturalnych. http://ibs. org. pl/news/ile-kobiet-odeszlo-z-rynku-pracy-naskutekswiadczenia-500. Dostęp, 18, 2019.

Seems there are long term effects ...Magda, I., Kiełczewska, A., & Brandt, N. (2018). The “Family 500+” child allowance and female labour supply in Poland. Warszawa: Instytut Badań Strukturalnych. http://ibs. org. pl/news/ile-kobiet-odeszlo-z-rynku-pracy-naskutekswiadczenia-500. Dostęp, 18, 2019.

visit the following link

http://media.aclj.org/pdf/Marcin-KULCZYK-Family-rights-and-family-policy-in-Poland.pdf

Dear D A Gayan Nayanajith, Adnan Majeed,

Thank you very much for the given bibliographic sources and participation in the discussion. Thank you very much for participating in this discussion and for a substantive, constructive reply. Thank you very much for the answers to the question: Does Family 500 Plus and Mieszkanie Plus Program significantly increase country's GDP? In line with the above, the importance of the issue ... has been growing in recent years. This discussion shows the growing importance of the issue pro-development social policy as a factor of economic growth.

Thank you very much and best regards, Have a nice day,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

https://freepolicybriefs.org/2019/12/16/from-partial-to-full-universality-the-family-500-programme-in-poland-and-its-labour-supply-implications/

Dear Sule Akkoyunlu, Thank you very much for the link to the publication, which describes important issues in this matter. Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In my opinion, mandatory guaranteed income programs may be an important factor in the anti-crisis socio-economic policy in a situation of falling consumption. However, the essential conditions for introducing this type of guaranteed income for citizens are: - national currency, - low inflation, around the level of 0, - stability of the national currency against other currencies, - an effective financial system with a low level of financial risks.

What do you think about it?

What is your opinion on this topic? Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In the context of this discussion, the question arises: Did social policy programs play the role of an important anti-crisis factor in counteracting the strong economic downturn during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic?

Regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz