I need help creating a thesis and an outline on Esping-Andersens Welfare Regime Model. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is required.

I need help creating a thesis and an outline on Esping-Andersens Welfare Regime Model. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is required. The setting of a state’s welfare is decisive to the operation of the state and the health of the citizens. It is vital to discuss the differences in state welfare regimes. This helps in understanding the differences in state operations and the health of its population among countries. Esping-Andersen came up with the most relevant typology for welfare states. Esping-Andersen using classical European political economy approach differentiates between three types of welfare regimes (Edwards, 2003). Esping-Andersen differentiates the state welfare regimes on three major principles. These principles are social stratification, deco-modification and the public private mix. Deco-modification refers to the extent to which the welfare of the individual is independent of the market. It also refers to the individual’s ability to receive social services as a right. Social stratification describes the welfare state role in matters concerning structure of the society according to Schildt (2010). Lastly, public-private mix focuses on roles played by the state, the market, family and the voluntary sector in the particular welfare regimes. Espin-Andersen identifies three main types of welfare regimes: the conservative, social democratic and the liberal welfare regime models as noted by Edwards (2003). The liberal model incorporates free market maximization for the market maintenance. It makes the assumption that all people are able to participate in the market. The underlying idea in market participation leads to freedom of competition. It emphasizes on public and private sector partnership. The workers in liberal model are unlikely to be fully co-modified, however they advocate for cash compensation. According to Annamari (2009), the liberal model of state welfare regime is found in countries like England and the United States of America Conservative Welfare Regime The conservative welfare regime is popular in countries like Germany, France and Belgium among others. It promotes social assistance and provides for extensive welfare services for all the population. This model perceives the state as a minimal interventionist. Esping-Andersen argues that categorizing the European welfare states as part of the conservative model can be viewed as pejorative (Edwards, 2003). Social Democratic Welfare Regime Social democratic welfare is popular with Nordic countries. It is also referred to as Nordic Model. The social democratic model espouses individualism thus removing individual reliance on the family and it is associated with expensive taxes. This model has an element of egalitarianism which depicts the practice of universalism. The model is also individual oriented as it promotes their well-being (Larsen, 2006). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Comparing Welfare States Using Esping-Andersen’s Welfare Regime Esping-Andersen model has been of importance in as far classification of states according to welfare regimes. The model has several advantages which makes it remain more relevant compared to other welfare regimes. In as far as the social democratic welfare regime is concerned. it is redistributive in terms of the states wealth. Universal welfare and systems of benefits are used as rights and there is public provision of the universal welfare services. Esping-Andersen’s social democratic model depends on high employment levels and thus offers women employment. It also provides less emphasis on the family’s responsibility for its members’ welfare as opposed to other models. The state therefore assumes most of the family responsibility (Larsen, 2006). The elements of egalitarianism depict in Esping-Andersen’s model the practice of universalism as suggested by Mann (2001). The advantage here is that every citizen enjoys same benefits and rights as well regardless of whether they are rich or not.