This comparative review of the policy literature aims to better understand the relationship between social policy programs and income inequality, particularly by examining whether income inequality is a choice or not. According to our textbook, Ch. 35 focuses heavily on the discussion of welfare states, poverty reduction, and social policy spending. For example, our textbook provides examples from Peru, Bolivia, and Colombia demonstrating that economic openness was associated with a decline in the level of social policy spending (Kaufman and Segura-Ubiergo 2001). However, unlike our textbook, this review of comparative political literature aims to examine more countries than just Latin America, building on previous studies conducted over the past 30 years. What struck me most about this research is the growing importance of better understanding how social policy programs, welfare states, and income inequality have been studied for some time, but additional work is necessary in the field of comparative politics to fully understand their relationships. The question I will explain is: is income inequality a choice or not? Analyze the role that comparative politics plays regarding social policy spending and how income inequality increases or decreases with respect to the amount of money spent on social policy programs. Social policy programs are essential to the survival of many citizens around the world. They help bring basic amenities and other things to many populations. The growing debate is whether countries that implement social protection programs at higher rates than countries that do not have a better chance of limiting income inequality? We can build on previous research in comparative policy studies that illustrates that social programs actually help citizens improve their incomes. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get an original essay Additionally, it is important to note that other comparative politics studies have found contrasting views that the increase in the number of social policy programs to help reduce income inequality may not be beneficial after all. These two contrasting opinions are quite interesting since the purpose of my research question is to determine whether income inequality is a choice or not. Poverty reduction is at the center of the concerns of many political parties around the world. For example, one of the roles of government is to improve the quality of life of its citizens. Income inequality is one of the key points in improving the quality of life of citizens, because the greater the gap between certain groups of people can lead to the loss of the middle class. Can you think of a place where this is happening right now? If you were thinking of the United States, you would be right. There has been much debate about the disappearance of the middle class, the rise of elites, and the lack of social policy programs aimed at helping people financially. After reading many different articles on social spending, welfare states, and income inequality, I have selected a number of comparative policy studies that help explain whether or not income inequality is a choice . Much of the literature on government anti-poverty policies focuses on the behavioral effects of thesepolicies, for example on labor supply, participation, turnover and family structure (Moffitt 1992). According to Carnes and Mares (2007), early studies of social policy fusion hypothesized that economic growth and development were key factors explaining the emergence and expansion of modern welfare states. According to Cares and Mares (2007), these processes would lead to an increase in employment and technological capacity. Wilensky (1975) believed that this would incentivize governments to educate their workforce and protect older people no longer able to work in industry, which in turn would lead to higher levels of social spending . One set of explanations has focused on the needs of employers in the labor market (Carnes and Mares 2007). Earnings benefits are important because people in highly skilled positions have an incentive to produce better results, thereby increasing their income. Unfortunately, the opposite can be said for people in low-income jobs. People in low-income positions are less likely to receive incentive rewards because social policies focused on income-related benefits focus primarily on high-skilled jobs. Mares (2003, 2005) describes these types of social policies as skills retention instruments (p. 877). Social policies that act as skills retention instruments can help keep employees in the same position, thereby creating stronger competition in the market. We can look at this from a comparative policy perspective when we look at why some countries may have less income inequality than others or perhaps how some countries use social policies to reduce income inequality. Income inequality can be attributed to a number of factors and Mares (2003, 2005) highlights how income-related social policy programs help reduce income inequality. Looking at European countries such as Sweden and Denmark, we see the positive effects that implementing social policy programs can have on efforts to reduce income inequality. Esping-Anderson (2016) explains that welfare states are places where the government redistributes resources, benefits, etc. hoping to improve its citizens' current levels of housing, work and social markets. For example, if we look at the statistics, Denmark and Sweden have very low income inequality among their citizens. In fact, previous studies show that Denmark has the lowest income inequality in the world! The United States, on the other hand, is very different from the two aforementioned countries. People living in poverty in the United States tend to live in poverty longer than those living in Sweden and Denmark (Esping-Anderson 2016). Swedish and Danish citizens may experience poverty at some point in their lives, but they manage to escape poverty at a much faster rate than American citizens. For what ? TO better understand this phenomenon, I will create a hypothetical example illustrating the differences. For example, for every dollar of revenue the United States collects, it could spend 30 cents on aid for social and educational policies, while countries like Sweden and Denmark could spend 60 cents on aid for their citizens. Citizens who receive this type of assistance can benefit from it in several ways. Let us think of the citizen who is currently too old to work but who suddenly receives an income, or the.