1. Introduction

It may be more than just a coincidence that as poverty and economic inequality are growing and immigration is causing enormous rise in ethnic heterogeneity in most high income countries, questions of long-term financial viability of the welfare states have prompted to the politics of austerity. No doubt, the politics of austerity go much deeper, dividing many countries and the United States and Europe in particular over a more immediate concern of steering their struggling economies into a path of sustainable growth. But the need for austerity in the way their welfare state policies and programs are structured and financed has been a more persistent battle dividing those who see the value of welfare states in redistributing resources and leveling the playing field across individuals and those who see expansive welfare states threatening individual freedom and independence. It is also logical for countries with extensive social protection policies to vigorously debate whether major retrenchments would ensure greater financial viability of their welfare states, something that has shaped the election as well as everyday politics for more than 2 decades. To a surprise, this issue of austerity and retrenchment has also dominated the politics even in countries like the United States where welfare state policies have never reached to the level of guaranteeing economic security to the poor and vulnerable.