1. It is alleged that the welfare state is an expensive state. Expenses on social security and welfare measures take away a large chunk from the public exchequer. This criticism, however, is not valid because in advanced states only 10 to 15 per cent of the national income is spent on welfare schemes.

2. It has been argued that the expanding network of welfare schemes may kill individual initiative and spontaneity and may create a pauper mentality. State care from cradle to the grave may stifle individuality, originality and creativity. However, supporters of the welfare state say that this argument does not contain much truth as duty is a matter of character.

3. Another point of criticism against welfare state is that the activities of voluntary associations may sharply decline with the vast expansion of welfare activities. However, it may be noted that the complex problems of modern society could be tackled only by an agency like the state. Voluntary associations supplement the efforts of the state to ameliorate the conditions of the teeming millions.

4. It has been said that the welfare state leads to bureaucratic despotism. It is alleged that a huge amount of money is spent on a top heavy administration. Moreover, bureaucracy ft lacking a sense of commitment to the welfare state ideal.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

5. Mark Heald refers to the danger that the welfare state has a tendency towards “the magnification of the state at the expense of respect for the individual.” Moreover, the benefits of welfare state may be accrued to the affluent and the capable section in Society.

Writing about British government’s welfare state programme, R.M.Titmus admitted that “those who benefitted the most are those who have needed it the least.” The danger that the welfare state may work mainly for the ‘welfare of the better off cannot be ignored.