NEG---it’s the US social security system and nothing else
Kwong-leung Tang & James Midgley 8, Tang is an Associate Professor in the College of Arts, Social and Health Sciences at the University of Northern British Columbia, Canada; Midgley is Harry and Riva Specht Professor and dean emeritus of the School of Social Welfare at the University of California, Berkeley, “The Origins and Features of Social Security,” Social Security, the Economy and Development, edited by James Midgley and Kwong-leung Tang, Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2008, pp. 17–50 Springer Link, doi:10.1057/9780230582194_2
Although the term ‘social security’ is generally associated with income maintenance and support programmes, it was noted in the introduction to this book that social policy scholars in different parts of the world have used the term in different ways. In some countries, notably the United States, it is used narrowly to refer exclusively to the federal government’s social insurance retirement programme. Similarly, in many Anglophone developing countries where provident funds are the primary form of income maintenance, social security also has a very specific meaning. On the other hand, in Europe and in many other Western nations, the term is used broadly to connote a variety of income protection programmes including means-tested social assistance, contributory social insurance, employer mandates and demogrant or universal social allowances. In several continental European countries, it also refers to health insurance. The term has an even broader meaning in many Latin American countries, referring not only to income protection but to the provision of health care, social work services and even educational and recreational facilities.
Whether broad or otherwise, all definitions of social security have problems. A narrow definition suffers from the fact that it is unlikely to have universal application since it is likely to exclude some provisions that are known as social security in some countries. The broader approach, on the other hand, suffers from the weakness that it is too general to be of much use for comparative purposes. Of course, accounts of social security within specific countries often overcome the problem by formulating an operational definition based on local provisions. But definitions that seek to describe the general features and principles of social security are far more difficult to formulate. It is for this reason that many social policy scholars use the term loosely but nevertheless recognize the different ways it is defined in different national contexts.