\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Differences in Social Attitudes in Rural Areas and Prague: Implications for Social Peace},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2014-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2014)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2014-01-15}
\title{Differences in Social Attitudes in Rural Areas and Prague: Implications for Social Peace}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Jana  Hrbkova}

             \author[2]{Jana  Hrbkova}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 12 December 2013 Accepted: 2 January 2014 Published: 15 January 2014}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Inour paper we present one part of the results of our  research  which  focused  on  factors  that  determine  young  people?s attitudes towards the older generation and the level of  their  social  and  inter-generational  solidarity.  In  our  article  we  evaluate the conditions and possibilities of how to reach social  peace taking into account young people?s attitudes and values  and  we  analyze  established  difference  in  social  attitudes  between young people from rural areas and those from towns  or  cities  (represented  here  by  respondents  from  Prague).  Moreover,  we  present  our  conclusions:  are  there  any  threats  (and which ones) to social peace and through it to social and  regional development which could be triggered by how young  people  perceive  the  justification  of  social  policy  and  its  principles? content. 

\end{abstract}


\keywords{social attitudes, social peace  1, social policy, young  people  from  rural  areas, young  people  from  towns/cities.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 \par
Differences in Social Attitudes in Rural Areas and Prague: Implications for Social Peace Jana Hrbková ? \& Ivan Hrbek ? Abstract-In our paper we present one part of the results of our research which focused on factors that determine young people's attitudes towards the older generation and the level of their social and inter-generational solidarity. In our article we evaluate the conditions and possibilities of how to reach social peace taking into account young people's attitudes and values and we analyze established difference in social attitudes between young people from rural areas and those from towns or cities (represented here by respondents from Prague). Moreover, we present our conclusions: are there any threats (and which ones) to social peace and through it to social and regional development which could be triggered by how young people perceive the justification of social policy and its principles' content.  {\ref 1} The paper is a part of research project TA?R, the OMEGA programme, the Development of an improved SIPP questionnaire version including the growth of its possible application in practise; PID TD020248 2 Social policy can be defined as a complex of activities which purposefully lead to the improvement of the fundamental living conditions of population as a whole or given groups of population, to the securing of social safety and social sovereignty in the frame of specific economic and political conditions. Social sovereignty and social safety can be considered to be the basic general characteristics of people's life position and all the individuals are trying to reach them (Krebs et al., 2007, p. 24). cannot be the same or permanent. Depending on the global socio-economic and political development of the society they change in time and are often rather contradictory.\par
People's different characteristics and their standing in the society basically rule out the possibility of unified opinions in this area. A certain unifying consensus is being reached by means of complicated and rather confrontational negotiations. Why? Social policy is basically a combination of expenditure which people try to avoid, and allowances of which -on the contrary -they try to secure for themselves the biggest possible amount. It follows from this that social policy can be considered good and acceptable and as such is supported by people, or the inhabitants don't identify themselves with it and they choose various kinds of disagreement and/or protest (Krebs et al., 2007, pp. 40-41).\par
Social policy should observe some basic principles which determine it and which are more or less visibly shown in it. The most important principles are: the principle of social justice, the principle of social solidarity, the principle of subsidiarity and the principle of participation. The key principle of social policy is that of social justice. It can be defined by rules according to which are allocated not only income or wealth but life opportunities and conditions as well (opportunity to educate themselves, to work etc.) (Krebs et al., 2007, p.  28).\par
According to Krebs (2007, pp. 458-459), social solidarity can be both an important stimulant of socioeconomic development and a tool of social peace reach and its barrier. It doesn't concern only those who benefit from solidarity funds but those who contribute to them as well. Solidarity cannot be therefore marked with a clear plus sign: on the one hand it can be activating and motivating, on the other hand it can demotivate people and lead to parasitism.\par
The problems of social peace which we will investigate further are connected with social state existence \hyperref[b1]{3} . According to Potucek (1995, p. 35), typical of the social state is the fact that within various laws, in people's consciousness and attitudes, in institutions' activities and practical policy currently winning recognition now is the idea that social conditions people are living in aren't just the concern of individuals and families but are public affairs. All the inhabitants are given a certain approved minimal level of support and help in those life situations which could be a threat to them or to their families (potential or real).\par
Discussions about the crisis of the welfare state and the necessity to re-evaluate the current system or to create a completely new concept of social policy are nowadays more frequent than ever before. The primary impetus of these thoughts has always been constantly more and more urgently looking problem of population ageing \hyperref[b2]{4} and its economic consequences. The most frequently mentioned are: ? the growth of social expenditure \hyperref[b3]{5} connected with the necessity of taking care of very old people which will be further multiplied by the growing percentage of lonely people (childless, widowed, divorced) who will not be looked after by other members of their families; ? the growth of healthcare expenditure as older people are usually more endangered by illnesses and there are a lot of illnesses directly connected with the old age; ? the problems of pension systems as the number of people in post-productive age per one person in the productive age has been growing etc. \hyperref[b4]{6} Discussions have become more intensive since 2007 in connection with the economic recession and so called debt crisis which various countries (and not only the more developed ones) are trying to settle: How should we then approach social policy? Is social consensus which is the precondition of any functioning welfare state under threat?\par
Are young people's social attitudes in rural areas and in towns different? If it is the case what are the implications?\par
Are young people's attitudes a threat to social peace? The results of our research point out to some important facts and unless we take these facts into consideration we cannot succeed in finding answers to these questions.\par
Our research, the partial results of which we present in our paper, was grounded on a quantitative \hyperref[b2]{4} According to the middle variant of population development the life expectancy at birth in 2050 will be 82 years for men and 86.5 years for women. See (Burcin-Kucera, 2010). \hyperref[b3]{5} The share of pension security expenditure in the Czech Republic increased from 7.3\% GDP in 1995 to 9.4\% GDP in 2011, the share of total expenditure on social care and health care went up from 18.6\% GDP in 1995 to 20.2\% GHDP in 2011. See http://www.vupsv.cz/index. php?p=economic\textunderscore social\textunderscore  indicators\&site=default \hyperref[b4]{6} For details see for example (Fiala-Langhamrova, 2010). methodology based on a deduction research approach.\par
We based it on a fundamental hypothesis: Young people's attitudes towards the older generation are influenced by two factors: a small inter-generational solidarity and the low support of a universal welfare state. We created a set of eleven working hypotheses to verify its validity and tested them on a sample of the population. The sample comprised 402 university students, aged 20 -23: students from the Faculty of Civil Engineering of the Czech Technical University and from various faculties of the Czech University of Life Sciences. Women comprised 41 \%, men 59 \%. Our respondents didn't form a representative sample of young population but a choice on the base of availability and advantageousness or "an age group available at the given time at the given place" (Hendl, 2004, p. 52). And even though we cannot simply claim our findings as valid for all young people in the Czech Republic we can consider them to be a useful source of information about what determines young people's attitudes (and what are these attitudes)towards social problems \hyperref[b5]{7} , the attitudes of young people with a higher level of education than the average (and not only young) population.\par
Data collection was done by a questionnaire method in the period from December 2011 to February 2012. For data processing we used the SPSS program. Conclusions we found by the analysis of questionnaires' data were compared with information gained via group interviews with students about their own personal experience in social problems solving. \hyperref[b6]{8} As in the paper we concentrated on whether there are different attitudes of young people from rural areas and from towns and if -as a result of these differences (should they exist) -the rural (agricultural) areas are endangered by social conflicts more or less than towns (Prague, the Czech Republic); we don't evaluate here answers to questions \hyperref[b7]{9} from the questionnaire received from all 402 respondents but we work with replies from respondents from Prague (103 students) and from municipalities with population less than 2000 inhabitants, i.e. from villages (105 students). We provide results we found out while looking for answers to two research questions. The first one: \hyperref[b5]{7} In addition, university students are very well co-operative respondents who are interested in social development problems and are able to (and were willing to) think over its rather complex connections. Moreover, working with university students was useful because it allowed us to eliminate completely one of the well-known disadvantages of used questionnaire technique for data collection -the low response rate. \hyperref[b6]{8} Even though the basis of our research was a quantitative methodology, the use of group discussions which is frequently used within the triangulation of methods allowed us to complete our results and to understand them better. \hyperref[b7]{9} Even though we use the word "questions", in the questionnaire there were no questions ending with a question mark. The respondents should have usually chosen one of options expressing if they agree or disagree with a statement or mark their opinion of a social problem. Do young people prefer social policy efficiency to solidary redistribution and the reduction of social differences?\par
We expressed social policy efficiency by means of:\par
the limited amount of unemployment support the fact that social policy doesn't increase the national debt the implementation of health care fees recommended individual savings for retirement social policy which doesn't lead to the increase of public finance deficit the minimization of social help range no increase of social help Solidary redistribution and the reduction of social differences we expressed by means of:\par
the high level of unemployment support the increase of taxes in the period of a crisis the rejection of fees which increase the cost of living reliance on age pensions guaranteed by the state only redistribution even at the cost of the public finance deficit increase the rejection of the minimum of social help scope support to wider social help than the current one The summary of the frequency of answers through which we made our decision about the first research question is shown in Table  {\ref no} 1. The frequency of answers in the table is divided into two columns: data gained from Prague respondents are shown in column 2, data from respondents from municipalities with the population less than 2000 inhabitants are shown in column 3. The statements from the questionnaire to which the respondents answered are shown in column 1. Markings 1. A, 1. B, 2. A, etc. which are in front of the statements in the first column of Table  {\ref no} 1 represent numbers of questions or symbols under which they were input into the questionnaire. In questions number 1, 2 and 4 (in Table no 1) the respondents were asked to choose from two statements the one which better corresponded with their opinion (for example 1.A or 1. B). In questions 9, 10, 15 and 17 the respondents chose from the following answers: I agree, I don't know, I disagree.\par
Our second research question was: Do young people support the liberal concept of social policy more than universal and wide-ranging activities of the state in social area?\par
The liberal concept of social policy was expressed by means of:\par
people's obligation to prove the fact that they are entitled to social security benefits flat-rate income tax the rejection of the minimum wage the conditional provision of social help benevolent approach to the checking of social help entitlement progressive taxation the setting of the minimum wage flat-rate child benefit payment the guarantee of maximal range of health care from public insurance\par
The summary of the frequency of answers through which we made our conclusion about the second research question is shown in   {\ref no} 2) the respondents were asked to choose from two statements the one which better corresponded with their opinion (for example 3.A or 3. B). In questions 13 and 16 the respondents chose from the following answers: I agree, I don't know, I disagree.\par
Table no 1 : The relative frequency of answers to questions through which we made our conclusion about the first research questions 10 1.\par
2.\par
3. The statements from the questionnaire to which the respondents answered or the statements from which they chose the one which better represented their opinion:\par
The relative frequency of answers from respondents from Prague (\%)\par
The relative frequency of answers from respondents from villages \hyperref[b9]{11} (\%)\par
1. A Unemployment support should be high enough to allow people to keep reasonable standard of living until they find a new job.\par
28.1 13.3\par
1. B Unemployment support should below enough to force people to find a new job as quickly as possible.\par
71.8 82.9\par
2. A If there exists a danger of a rising national debt and there is an economic crisis it is appropriate to limit or even cancel some social security benefits.\par
47 Source: Authors' own research \hyperref[b8]{10} In the table we show the frequency of answers "I agree" and "I disagree"; the balance to 100\% includes answers "I don't know".\par
Table 2 : The relative frequency of answers to questions through which we made our conclusion about the second research questions \hyperref[b10]{12} 1.\par
2. 
\section[{3.}]{3.}\par
The statements from the questionnaire to which the respondents answered or the statements from which they chose the one which better represented their opinion:\par
The relative frequency of answers from respondents from Prague (\%)\par
The relative frequency of answers from respondents from villages \hyperref[b11]{13} (\%) With all (seven) questions from the questionnaire shown in Table  {\ref no} 1 the frequency of answers related to the support of social policy efficiency was higher than the frequency of answers related to the support of solidary redistribution and the reduction of social differences. The most significant agreement was registered with these three statements: Unemployment support should be low enough to force people to find a new job as quickly as possible with which agreed 83 \% of respondents from villages and nearly 72 \% of Prague respondents.\par
Everyone should save for their retirement and not rely on what they receive from the state only where the agreement amounted to more than 76 \% of respondents from villages and 67 \% of Prague respondents.\par
We should only have such social policy which will not lead to the increase of public finance deficit: with this statement agreed 60 \% of respondents from villages and 64 \% of Prague respondents.\par
Nearly one half of respondents from villages and 48 \% of Prague respondents agreed with If there exists a danger of a rising national debt and there is an economic crisis it is appropriate to limit or even cancel some social security benefits.\par
Over 50 \% of respondents from Prague supported health care fees implementation; in the case of respondents from villages the percentage of those who supported it and those who were against it was about the same, nearly 48 \%.\par
The biggest differences in the answers between respondents from villages and from Prague were with this statement: Social security range should be as small as possible for people to actively try to solve their own problems with which agreed slightly below 42 \% of Prague respondents but over 54 \% of respondents from villages. (Disagreement with this statement was expressed by nearly 40 \% of Prague respondents but only 26 \% of respondents from villages). About the same was the difference between the frequency of answers between respondents from villages and from Prague supporting the statement Social policy in the Czech Republic helps the poor at a satisfactory level and there is no need to increase social help with which agreed less than 38 \% of Prague respondents but nearly 50 \% of respondents from villages.\par
Even this small sample of young people's attitudes exemplifies how complicated and complex the problems of social policy are: the respondents expressed the clearest agreement with the statement unemployment support should be low enough to force people to find a new job as quickly as possible and with the proposition that everyone should save for their retirement and not rely on what they receive from the state only. There is no doubt that unemployed people are clearly considered to be a group which must be pushed not to misuse their social position and to try and solve their situation actively. Nevertheless, even though 54 \% of respondents from villages agreed with a more general statement minimal range of social security, from Prague respondents it was less than 42 \%.\par
a) The analysis of data shown in Table  {\ref no 2} From the data shown in Table no 2 it can be seen that from among statements expressing the support of the liberal concept of social policy the most supported statements were: the payment of social security benefits must be thoroughly checked to prevent their misuse with which agreed 90 \% of Prague respondents and even 98 \% of respondents from villages, and after that everybody's welfare depends in the first place on themselves with which identified themselves 85 \% of respondents from villages and more than 90 \% of Prague respondents.\par
Relatively high support also had the statement social security for long-term unemployed people should be provided on the condition that they do public-benefit work where we found nearly the same values of frequency of answers both from respondents from villages and from Prague, nearly 84 \%.\par
More than 50 \% relative frequency of answers supporting the liberal concept of social policy can be found with two more questions: more than 61 \% of Prague respondents and 46 \% of respondents from villages agreed that a flat-rate income tax is more equitable than a progressive tax, and 61 \% of Prague respondents and 57 \% of respondents from villages pronounced in favour of children's allowance to be paid to those families with children who really need it. Nevertheless, with these two questions we can notice one rather interesting circumstance -a relatively high support of alternative answers: progressive income tax rates as an effective means of raising money needed for state budget were supported by nearly 45 \% of respondents from villages but only by 34 \% of Prague respondents. And the statement A flat-rate child benefit should be paid to all the families with children regardless of their income was approved by nearly 42 \% of respondents from villages and nearly 37 \% of Prague respondents.\par
In only two out of seven questions shown in Table  {\ref no} 2 there was higher relative frequency of answers supporting state universal wide-ranging activities in social area: nearly 83 \% of Prague respondents and 79 \% of respondents from villages agreed with the setting of a minimum wage and just 13 \% of Prague respondents and 16 \% of respondents from villages chose the statement the setting of a minimum wage doesn't help anybody and it forms an unnecessary barrier for the employment of more people. Furthermore, about 60 \% of respondents (59 \% from Prague and 63 \% from villages) were of the opinion that the state should guarantee the maximal range of health care from public health insurance without further patients' participation. 
\section[{b) The interpretation of group interviews results}]{b) The interpretation of group interviews results}\par
Group interviews which we used as a complementary technique of data collection took place from December 2011 to February 2012. The groups were formed by students from the Faculty of Civil Engineering of the Czech Technical University: two groups had eight members, one had ten. Our interviews were halfstandardized, took approximately 90 minutes and were with respondents' approval recorded on iPad. Our task was to find out if the attitudes expressed in group interviews correspond with what we discovered from the questionnaires. Here we only present the conclusions which concern the topic of our paper:\par
The current social policy in the Czech Republic was -as a whole -regarded highly. According to the respondents its range is appropriate to our possibilities and traditions and is sufficient. Essentially there didn't exist any area in which the state should substantially increase the range of social support or help. On the contrary, some respondents expressed the view that it would be reasonable to reduce the range of state social expenditure to guarantee help only for those people who are not able to secure means for life themselves (for example due to their health condition). Even though social policy should be solidary it should also be effective and well controlled as not to be misused easily. Mainly, unemployment support should not be available to those who just "hang around" and don't want to work.\par
Unambiguous support was given to the flat-rate income tax (the rich pay higher taxes anyway) and progressive tax rates were deemed to be unfair and demotivating. Health care fees implementation was appropriate but there exists the need to guarantee that health care is available to all people, especially to the elderly. It would also be useful for people who consciously damage their health (e.g. smokers) to pay higher health insurance or to contribute to their treatment in some other way. If someone is rich and wants to pay to get higher than standard care, the system should allow them to do it.\par
It was characteristic for the respondents to grasp the social policy in its narrowest sense of the word, e.g. as solving critical social situations. The primary principle which should be applied in it is justice. Nevertheless the respondents marked as just only help to those who are not responsible for their difficult situation (for example to people with serious health handicaps) and furthermore to those who even though they do their best to make their living by work have low wages so the state should help them. But solidarity with people who don't work and "live on social benefits" should not have a place in any social policy. The means earmarked for the social area shouldn't grow as not to increase taxes and social insurance.\par
As the main area which should be reduced as much as possible the respondents marked unemployment benefits and social support for long-term unemployed. On the contrary, the problem of population ageing with all its possible consequences didn't arouse any negative reactions; it is considered to be "an objective fact" which all people must take into account so people in productive age should save for their retirement themselves.\par
To the question of care for very old grandparents two respondents who had had experience with this problem from their families expressed their views: both considered it "normal" that the families take care for grandparents even though in one case it required an assistant to be paid to help during the day when the family members were at work.\par
By the analysis of questionnaires and information from group interviews we found out that young people: ? Grasp the social policy in its narrowest sense of the word, e.g. as solving critical social situations. From this narrow view follows their belief that the scope of social measures should be as small as possible and basically limited to help for people who aren't able to deal with their difficult situation on their own. ? Are convinced that social area expenditure shouldn't go up -excessively generous social help or support leads to the increase of demands from those individuals who would like to live -because of various reasons -at the expense of other people. ? Believe that social policy must be effective and in the long-term its expenditure mustn't be higher than the sources from which it is funded. Therefore it is necessary to check the legitimacy and justification of social security claims rather strictly. ? Base their attitudes on the belief that the society is formed by free citizens whose individual life successes or failures are first of all the result of their own activities, qualification and effort and that all the difficulties and life barriers everybody must overcome mainly by their own active approach. There is no reason for the government to require from more active, more hard-working and richer people more money (in the form of higher taxes) to be redistributed to less hard-working or passive individuals.\par
The analysis of data shown in Table  {\ref no} 1 shows that young people prefer social policy efficiency to solidary redistribution and the reduction of social differences and that it is more clearly valid for respondents from villages: the frequency of their answers supporting social policy efficiency were higher in four cases out of seven and the difference if the frequency of answers ranged from 9.2 to 12.5 \%.\par
Overall, from respondents' answers a rather frequent contradiction characteristic for attitudes towards social policy became evident: on the one hand people agree with the liberal concept "all the people should look after themselves" (everybody's welfare depends in the first place on themselves)-this view expressed 90 \% of Prague respondents (Table  {\ref 2}) -but on the other hand the statement that social security range should be as small as possible was supported by only 42 \% of Prague respondents how we found from replies in Table  {\ref 1}. A considerable majority of respondents (approximately 80 \%) supported the setting of a minimum wage a rather high percentage (37 \% from Prague and 42 \% from villages) would even agree with a flat-rate child benefit to be paid to all the families with children regardless of their income (Table  {\ref 2}). Even though about a half of respondents considered health care fees implementation as an appropriate measure (Table  {\ref 1}), approximately 60 \% of respondents supported the view that the state should guarantee the maximal range of health care from public health insurance without further patients' participation (Table  {\ref 2}).\par
Young people's attitude towards unemployed people is more definite. The support of the liberal concept of social policy is rather straightforward here: 72 \% of Prague respondents and 83 \% of respondents from villages agreed that the unemployment support should be low enough to force people to find a new job as quickly as possible (see Table  {\ref 1}). Moreover it became evident that up to 84 \% of respondents are convinced that social help for long-term unemployed people should be provided on the condition that they do public-benefit work (see Table  {\ref 2}).\par
The biggest difference between the answers from Prague respondents and those from villages was at the question relating to flat-rate income tax which was supported by 61 \% of Prague respondents which was higher by 15.5 \% than the support from respondents from villages where it was 46 \%. The reason for this probably lies in generally higher income in Prague and out of that ensuing opinion about just flat-rate income tax. In the areas of lower income -e.g. in rural and agricultural areas -the support of progressive tax rates for higher income is more frequent. For other questions the differences between Prague respondents and respondents from villages were not that significant. In two cases -the statement relating to social help for long-term unemployed people and the state guarantee of health care maximal range from public health insurance without further patients' participation -the frequency of answers by Prague respondents and those from villages was nearly the same.\par
In young people's attitudes strong individualism and a very low level of solidarity with unemployed people are reflected. Unemployment benefits should in their opinion be paid for a limited, as short as possible, period and only at a level which will "force" people to find jobs as soon as possible. The system can't be set up in such a way which would enable people to live without much trouble on the support and other social benefits. We registered these attitudes from Prague respondents but to a considerably bigger extent from respondents from villages, i.e. from rural areas.\par
From the results gained we deduced the following conclusion: young people prefer social policy efficiency to solidary redistribution and the reduction of social differences. They also support the liberal concept of social policy more than universal and wide-ranging activities of the state in social area. And the respondents from villages (rural areas) seem to be more pronounced in their attitudes and we found out that they have a lower level of social solidarity and a stronger support of efficiency and the liberal concept of social policy than that shown by Prague respondents.\par
Young people expressed their support of the liberal concept of social policy mainly in their attitudes towards unemployed people, first of all the long-term unemployed: they supported only such a level of unemployment benefits which will force people to find a new job as soon as possible. And they agreed that social security for long-term unemployed people should be provided on the condition that they do public-benefit work. One half of Prague respondents considered health care fees implementation as appropriate but out of respondents from villages, an equal number of people accepted and refused it. Similarly, respondents voted for the state to guarantee the maximal range of health care without further patients' participation.\par
Young people grasp the social policy in the narrowest sense of the word. Therefore they are of the opinion that social security should be actually limited as much as possible to help only those people who aren't able to deal with their difficult life situation on their own. We believe that the source of conflicts which could disturb the reaching of social peace is the need of increasing social expenditure for unemployed people in the form of benefits and social help for the long-term unemployed. So it is not the redistribution of social system funds due to population ageing as has currently been proposed -based on a rather simplified interpretation of demographic data. Taking this into account, social peace is now (and will be in the future) most imperilled in the regions with the highest rate of unemployment from which arises the need to spend a relatively high amount of funds on unemployed people and mainly on the long-term unemployed. At the same time, potentially endangered by social disruption seem to be the areas and regions with the lowest average level of education because people with a low level of education usually have bigger problems finding jobs. Therefore these regions suffer from higher unemployment more than areas where more qualified labour lives: The highest unemployment rate has permanently been in these regions: Moravskoslezsky, Ustecky and Karlovarsky. In the years 2010 and 2011 the highest percentage of longterm unemployed people was in Karlovarsky a Ustecky regions. In these two regions also lives the highest proportion of people with elementary education only (Labour Markets, 2011)\par
The above mentioned facts are supplemented by other sources of conflicts with individuals and groups living in socially disadvantaged areas which have not been analyzed here. \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png}
\caption{\label{fig_0}-}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_0}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.7715309633027523\textwidth}P{0.034116972477064224\textwidth}P{0.0038990825688073397\textwidth}P{0.03655389908256881\textwidth}P{0.0038990825688073397\textwidth}}
3. A Flat-rate income tax is more equitable than the\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
progressive one -why should be richer people punished for\tabcellsep 61.2\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 45.7\tabcellsep \\
working harder and consequently earning more money.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
3. B The state needs to get enough money to its state\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
budget therefore it must tax those who have money, e.g.\tabcellsep 34.0\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 44.7\tabcellsep \\
those with higher income -progressive income tax rates are\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
more equitable than flat-rate tax.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
5. A The setting of a minimum wage is fair as it protects\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
the employees from wages' falling below a reasonable level.\tabcellsep 82.6\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 79.0\tabcellsep \\
5. B The setting of minimal wages doesn't help anybody\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
and it forms an unnecessary barrier for the employment of\tabcellsep 12.6\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 16.2\tabcellsep \\
more people -in this case those people who would work for\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
lower wages cannot find jobs at all.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
6. A Social security for long-term unemployed people\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
should be provided on the condition that they do public-\tabcellsep 83.5\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 83.8\tabcellsep \\
benefit work. .\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{6. B 13.6}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 13.4\tabcellsep \\
7. A Flat-rate child benefit should be paid to all the\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
families with children regardless of their income.\tabcellsep 36.9\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 41.9\tabcellsep \\
7. B Child benefit should only be paid to those families\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
with children who really need it and under clearly specified\tabcellsep 61.1\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 57.2\tabcellsep \\
conditions.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
8. A The payment of social security benefits must be\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
thoroughly checked to prevent their misuse.\tabcellsep 90.3\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 98.1\tabcellsep \\
8. B Too many frequent checks of social security benefits\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
entitlement is not desirable as it can cause in people the\tabcellsep 4.9\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 1.0\tabcellsep \\
feeling of humiliation and frustration.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
13. The state should guarantee the maximal range of\tabcellsep agree\tabcellsep 59.2\tabcellsep agree\tabcellsep 62.9\\
health care from public health insurance without further\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{disagree 15.5}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{disagree 15.2}\\
patients' participation.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
16. Everybody's welfare depends in the first place on\tabcellsep agree\tabcellsep 90.3\tabcellsep agree\tabcellsep 84.8\\
Them selves.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{disagree 6.8}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{disagree 11.4}\\
Source: Authors' own research\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Firstly we will deal with the analysis of data\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
shown in Table no 1:\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{A social state, a welfare state or a state of public social service can be defined in various ways. Even though they are basically synonyms, we can find various definitions.in literature -e.g. (Vecera, 2001, pp. 22-29),(Potucek, 1995, pp. 35-37),(Krebs et al., 2007, pp. 73-75),(Musil, 1996,  p.  83 and pp. 212-214),(Duben, 1994, pp.  27-30), (Esping-Andersen, 1990, pp. 2-5).} 			\footnote{In the table we show the frequency of answers "I agree" and "I disagree"; the balance to 100\% includes answers "I don't know".} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Northamtpon and Usa ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{},  		 			M A Northamtpon 		,  		 			Usa 		.  		2000. Edward Elgar Publishing.  	 	 (ISBN 1 85898 796 2 (3 volume set) 
\bibitem[Fiala (2010)]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{Available at http://kdem.vse.cz/resources/ relik10/PDFucastnici/Fiala\textunderscore Langhamrova.pdf [Accessed 30},  		 			T. -Langhamrova Fiala 		,  		 			J 		.  		2010. August 2012.  	 	 (The Economic Consequences of Population Ageing in the Czech Republic. in Czech) 
\bibitem[In the Czech Republic There Lives the Lowest Number of People Imperilled by Poverty]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		\textit{In the Czech Republic There Lives the Lowest Number of People Imperilled by Poverty},  		 \url{http://www.mpsv.cz/cs/12637}  		 	 	 (Accesed 1) 
\bibitem[Labour Markets in Regions in 2011 (2012)]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		\textit{Labour Markets in Regions in 2011},  		 \url{http://budoucnostprofesi.cz/trhy-prace-v-regionech/regiony2011.html}  		September 2012. 10.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Burcin ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{Prognosis of Population Development in the Czech Republic for},  		 			B. -Kucera Burcin 		,  		 			T 		.  		 \url{http://www.mfcr.cz/cps/rde/xbcr/mfcr/Prognoza\textunderscore 2010.pdf[Accessed31}  		2010. 2008 -2070. August 2012.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Krebs (ed.) ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		\textit{Social Policy. 4th},  		 			V Krebs 		.  		Praha, Czech Republic, ASPI. (ed.)  		2007.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Approaches Praha Republic Slon ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘Social State. Starting Points and’.  	 	 		\textit{Czech). VECERA, M},  				 			Approaches,  			Czech Praha,  			Republic,  			Slon 		 (ed.)  		September 2012. 2001.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Hrbkova (ed.) ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		\textit{Solidarity and Justice in Social Development. Collection of papers from a PhD conference},  		 			J Hrbkova 		.  		HRBKOVA, J. (ed.)  		2012. Praha, Czech Republic. p. .  	 	 (Ceske vysoke uceni technicke, Fakulta stavebni. in Czech) 
\bibitem[Goodin ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘Stabilizing Expectations: The Role of Earnings -related Benefits in Social Welfare Policy’.  		 			R E Goodin 		.  	 	 		\textit{Cheltenham -Northamtpon}  		GOODIN, R. E. -MITCHELL, D. (ed.)  		1990. 2000. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. .  	 	 (The Foundations of the Welfare State. Volume I. 1st. ISBN 1 85898 796 2 (3 volume set) 
\bibitem[The Development of Principal Economic and Social Factors in the Czech Republic (2012)]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{The Development of Principal Economic and Social Factors in the Czech Republic},  		 \url{http://www.vupsv.cz/index.php?p=economic\textunderscore social\textunderscore indicators\&site=default}  		September 2012.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[II. 1st (ed.) ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{The Foundations of the Welfare State},  		II. 1st (ed.)  		2000. Cheltenham -Northamtpon, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. p. .  	 	 (ISBN 1 85898 796 2 (3 volume set) 
\bibitem[Nakonecny ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		\textit{The Social Psychology of an Organization. 1st},  		 			M Nakonecny 		.  		2005. Praha, Czech Republic: Grada Publishing.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Hendl ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		\textit{The Summary of Statistical Methods of Data Processing (Analysis and Metanalysis). 1st},  		 			J Hendl 		.  		2004. Praha, Czech Republic.  	 
\bibitem[Esping-Andersen ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{The Three Economies of the Welfare State},  		 			G Esping-Andersen 		.  		1989. GOODIN.  	 
\bibitem[Duben ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{Vysoka skola ekonomicka (in Czech)},  		 			R Duben 		.  		1994. Praha, Czech Republic.  	 	 (The Welfare State. 1st) 
\bibitem[Musil (ed.) ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{Welfare State Development in Europe},  		 			L Musil 		.  		1. st. ed. Brno, Czech Republic, Doplnek. (ed.)  		1996.  	 	 (in Czech) 
\bibitem[Hrbkova ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘Young People and Social Policy: Implication for Social Peace’.  		 			J Hrbkova 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Economics}  		 0013-3035.  		2013. 61  (7)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
