322 / 138
322
E
UR
A
MERICA
Table 4 Decomposition of Household Composition, BTST Income
Poverty, and Welfare Effectiveness
Country
Poverty
Household BTST Income Welfare
Difference Composition
Poverty
Effectiveness
Social Democratic
Denmark
13.49
8.07
14.79
-9.37
Finland
8.66
4.91
12.02
-8.26
Iceland
6.47
4.64
9.43
-7.60
Norway
17.65
9.32
15.50
-7.17
Liberal
Australia
0.69
1.24
4.47
-5.02
Canada
9.48
3.18
10.36
-4.05
Ireland
6.44
1.86
13.41
-8.82
UK
8.97
2.42
13.11
-6.56
US
13.75
4.04
12.71
-3.00
Conservative
Austria
5.19
2.44
7.40
-4.65
France
9.71
2.10
12.41
-4.79
Germany
10.08
5.03
11.97
-6.92
Luxembourg
0.95
0.17
5.86
-5.08
Netherlands
6.67
4.15
10.55
-8.02
Switzerland
1.27
0.28
3.55
-2.56
Post-socialist
Czech Republic
0.93
0.51
3.12
-2.69
Poland
3.77
0.33
6.92
-3.48
Slovenia
3.75
0.11
6.76
-3.11
East Asian
Japan
3.49
0.48
2.96
0.05
South Korea
3.59
0.02
3.63
-0.05
Taiwan
--
--
--
--
Southern European
Spain
10.05
0.00
12.49
-2.44
welfare programs in liberal countries reduce youth poverty relative
to Taiwan (if limited, in the US), this falls far short of reversing the
youth poverty in Canada, Ireland, the US, and the UK due to
higher BTST income poverty levels across households. These
results indicate that if Taiwan
’
s BTST income poverty rate were
replaced
with that of the US (without other factors changing),
Taiwan’s youth poverty rate would increase by at least 12.71