Some authors argue that the welfare state is impossible to dismantle in Europe, others consider that it is unsustainable. are certain veelfare regimes (as defined by Esping-Andersen) more likely to be dismantled than others? Do Esping-Andersen’s expectations contradict the Varieties of Capitalism approach? This question as. that you explore the conditions under which any of the three welfare systems in Esping-Andersen’s approach could be threatened and whether it matches the conditions under which a supporter of Varieties of Capitalism would consider (if at all) that co-ordinates economies may dismantle their welfare scheme. In your essay, ma. sure to explain what about one system or another may make it more or less likely to be maintained or dismantled. Note the essay doesn’t ask whether extensive welfare models would need to reduce expenses or size, but whether they can change their fundamental nature and the principles that sustain each model.
n small before it became small. Moreover, if things only became smaller, and not larger, eventually everything would be miniscule. And if it was the other way around, where everything only became larger, and not smaller, everything would eventually be one thing, because everything would have joined together. If this were the case then we would notice that things only become smaller, shorter, or uglier, and never their opposites, or vice versa. Socrates shows that things do transition from two opposites, by referencing to observable examples. He contrasts this to death, and claims that there has to be a cycle of becoming alive and becoming dead, or else everything would become dead, or vice versa. The analogies that Socrates uses are applicable to every corporeal thing in the universe. Everything is either large or small, tall or short, etcetera. He claims that there is a process of becoming from its opposite (e.g. something becoming larger from being small), and that this process is cyclical. For if everythi>GET ANSWER