在台灣的社會福利發展歷程中，一直存在著與資源有限性之間 的緊張關係。一方面，經濟學者不斷提醒我們資源要用在刀口上， 相對於社會福利學者不斷發掘更多的需求與要求資源的投入；另一 方面，我們也看到了相當多政治勢力藉「社會福利」之名擴充某 些給付，排擠其他施政之後又進一步讓社會福利背上浪費資源的惡 名。就在這樣的緊張、衝突、乃至抗爭中，逐步消磨掉了台灣社會 福利的互信基礎。由於政治的作用，使得福利議題在近些年得以攻 佔上政黨政策辯論的檯面，但政治的不確定性卻也爲社會福利帶來 致命的效果，尤其是混淆了、窄化了、或偏頗了社會福利的本質。 社會福利絕不是「發錢」如此簡單的事情而已，這些錢如何發出 去？依據什麼標準？都會牵動社會結構背後所隱藏的價値，甚至影 響到社會運作的基本原則。本文的目的在探討「平等」理念於台灣 福利論述中的重要性，尤其是透過「公民權」概念的轉化而成爲普 遍性的福利權利。但在資源有限性的偈限下，這些理念的實施卻面 臨實質的困難，也引發了進一步對「何謂社會福利？」問題的質 疑。而這樣的質疑則直指社會結構的本質，亦即是「平等」在日益 分化社會中的適用程度，由此突顯出西方福利國家的另一個理念一 「凝聚」（solidarity)作爲思考台灣福利發展的可能性。但値得注意 的是，「平等」與「凝聚」不是相互替代的，我們最後以二者之間 關係的討論爲結論，點出平衡這兩個理念的重要性。

There is always a tension between limited resources and welfare development in Taiwan. The economists often remind us efficient usage of resources, contrasting to more needs discovered by the welfare scholars, on the one hand. The intervention of political forces expands so called welfare benefits’ for their own sakes and this does risk abusing and wasting public resources, on the other hand. Under such a situation, social welfare is losing its ground as a foundation of social integration. Politics is the main moment behind recent welfare development in Taiwan, but it also confuses the nature of social welfare. We must argue, social welfare is not so simple as spending money. The ways of resource allocation and rationing are all linking to social values and principles of social functioning. This paper examines the importance of equality in Taiwanese welfare discourses, especially the rising of universal allowances in pursuit of real citizenship. However, the difficulties of limited resources critically constrain state capacity to realize the ideal and further lead to more inequality because of the exclusion of some potential welfare consumers from benefits, just for saving money. To cope with this contradiction, a new meaning of equality is necessary that should be beyond equally share and towards equally treatment, and this in turn induces another important concept -solidarity - in a growing differential society. In conclusion, we argue that solidarity should be taken into account accordingly with the new fashion of equality.