DISCUSS ANYTHING & EVERYTHING: Money, Dating, Health, Internet, Legal, Jobs, People, Places and more

Sponsored Links

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Chatbox
Please log in to join the chat!
Forum -> DISCUSS ANYTHING & EVERYTHING: Money, Dating, Health, Internet, Legal, Jobs, People, Places and more -> POLITICS -> benefit dependency
Post Info TOPIC: benefit dependency
chedlebb


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Date:
benefit dependency
Permalink   
 

The welfare state has been an integral part of the communion of Britain since most of us can remember. Is it the fault of the dependents of a nanny state, since the state provided the midwife and NHS at the very birth of the citizen. Inoculations, free milk,(for those of us old enough to remember) clinics for evaluation of well being, social workers, nursery, (compulsory) education provided by a curriculum which was not for everybody; in fact it was orientated towards 'academic achievers' and to remind 11 year old, (non academics) that they were to spend a further few years compulsorily attending an education 'factory' which was mutually tolerating. Not all bad you may suppose? Britain was predominantly an engineering, manufacturing and industrial base; the reward for all of the 'latent' time was the expectation that you would follow into the foot steps of your forefathers and do what the state had intended and developed you for (in line with the traditions within the nuclear family). I personally can 'never' remember being prepared for the changing face of Britain (naive you may think); education was accepted on face value and accepted (grudgingly). Elected governing administrations came and went. Politics was for the ruling elite,and the average working man.........need not bother; where did the idea of individual responsibility come from? Those of us that have a 'strong' evolutionary gene for survival have managed to do just that! The rest have 'remained' dependent, inactive, and accepting of the welfare (in all of its forms) which (conveniently) has been distributed in order to keep the population inactive. This could stop right now for the younger generation? Simply reduce the expectations by providing a form of benefit and accommodation which does not offer brand new houses, and the necessary finances to furnish and live a comfortable (singular)existence, but an alternative pre fabricated affordable lifestyle with facilities for the needs of a moral and civic community with a sense of self promotion and worth. We (human beings) are nothing without discipline and a shared sense of pride culminating in rewards from self achievement. Please have some thought and respect for the long term unemployed and disabled who have come through the benefit system(jobs war) as a result of failure and convenience of the elected administrations. Not to forget that the education provided was indoctrination and served to the masses by the very state that failed them long ago.     



__________________
Ex-huyton


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Date:
Permalink   
 

Beveridge's proposals were never meant to be a lifesyle, and he would, I am certain, be appalled if he could come back and see what has evolved. What he intended was that people would be supported ("given a hand-up") during a temporary period of difficulty that might arise in their working life. Council estates of single mothers was beyond his imagination, I'm sure.

The education system produced by Rab Butler in the 1944 Education Act was designed to get Britain back on its feet after WW2; we had almost been bankrupted by the cost of the struggle. I myself was an 11-Plus failure and so received an inferior secondary education (I have to accept that I was a late developer). In the 1950s, for every £1 spent on each grammar school pupil, one-tenth of that was spent on each secondary modern pupil. So unfair to our modern eyes, it was probably right for that particular period because we had to produce able people who could get out there and help our industries to succeed in the world.

By the way, the U.S. was singularly unhelpful and unfriendly in that postwar period because they disliked the Attlee government. They wouldn't help us - their wartime ally - financially because they liked Churchill and were shocked that we had dumped him in the 1945 election. This greatly added to our problems, and things only picked up when the U.S. became alarmed by the prospect of the various Western European countries turning communist, and devised the Marshall Plan.

__________________
Chedlebb

Date:
Permalink   
 

Who wouldn't be disappointed ? Churchill was brought to the Prime ministerial lead during the most frightening period of recent history;he was the most successful and confident leader with great tactical ability. He was the dependable father of a broken and subjugated nation; he inspired confidence, community and all of the shared values of a nation coming together as one. Churchill was the man that invited William Beveridge to create a vision for a new Britain. "The five giants". The Marshall plan and the requested £8,000,000 would have been a little more successful had the 'wards of Churchill's legacy' been a little more respectful of their "Victorious father". I personally can't believe what the people of Britain did to show their gratitude for such a great man, so soon after the "VE celebrations". Perhaps we are reaping what we sew !!! 



__________________
Ex-huyton


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Date:
Permalink   
 

As the saying of the time went: "Thank Churchill; vote Labour". The people remembered that Lloyd George's promises after WW1 had proved hollow (e.g. his promise to build "homes fit for heroes to live in"), and it was understandable that ordinary folks were unwilling to return to the squalid conditions they had experienced in the 1930s. Churchill excelled as a war leader, but the people trusted Attlee to lead them once the conflict had ended. If FDR had lived into the post-war period he would, I'm sure, have pressed for greater generosity to be shown to America's most crucial ally. As it was, poor sick John Maynard Keynes hit a brick wall when he visited Washington and pleaded for financial help. He died very shortly afterwards, no doubt killed by the effort.

I am well aware that Churchill was crucial to us winning the war. Without his strategy and wise leadership things would almost certainly have gone badly awry, leading ultimately to failure. For example, after America entered the war he persuaded FDR to accept the war in the desert as a first step, when the U.S. generals were all for invading France immediately.

__________________
goldenladyfun


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 78
Date:
RE: benefit dependency - A different perspective
Permalink   
 

Is it possible that the war, the government, democracy, socialism, etc. was all one coordinated effort to derail humanity so that we would never ever be able to challenge the minority of people who run things?

There is a large body of evidence that supports the concept that the war as all wars are trumped up to keep a status quo and to depower the people from over throwing the minority.  There is plenty of evidence that people in the British elite were working with the Nazi's and financially supported the Nazi's.  The remnants of those private and secretive orders are still in power to this day.

I find it interesting how many British people still refuse the believe that the great war to save their island was in fact a British creation.

Comments please.



__________________

Web Models Internationale
Anonymous

Date:
RE: benefit dependency
Permalink   
 

I am well aware of the "Dark forces"; it is rather sad that in reality Britain was no better than the dictators and propaganda machines employed to rid Europe of the innocent and intellectual elite; this disguised as ethnic cleansing. As any historian or 'honest' politician would agree: The British Bourgeoisie quite enjoyed the 'prior' "Status quo"; which was not difficult to resume because of the indoctrination/education which had and was becoming ever more accessible with the provision of a curriculum devised and engineered by the Aristocratic Bourgeois in their continued  attempt to make every British subject proud to be 'dictated to'.

My issue is the multi faceted ethics employed by an increasing number of Quangos sponsored by the pious for the pious,all in the name of Welfare and forced integration. The average working man is often reminded of his duty to embrace and welcome immigrants and refugees both in the name of reparation (for the massive debt that Britain owes to its former colonies which might not have needed the assistance, had the Aristocracy not invaded raped and pillaged in the first place) and humanitarian necessity. Britain and the culture of the British would always be admired because those that have known (ascribed) poverty and hardship learned to share whilst creating communities of inter dependence and inclusivity while sharing an islands 'cultural' norms and values learned/survived by the greed of those that enjoyed profiting from the Agricultural revolution; followed swiftly by the Industrial revolution. Two wars later and a diminished industrial and economic heartland, due to our sterling efforts during the "Fight" for absolutely nothing. The expectation of gratitude and welcoming with a great understanding as to our 'moral obligation' for a benevolent contribution and understanding for (perfectly decent) people of all nations who have been provided with a share (without a reasoned explanation to either host or hosted) of the rightful welfare afforded by the British for the Proletariat AKA the (former) British working class and the anticipated expectation of gratitude ( from all recipients) with all encompassing tolerance of both Micro and Macro communities of diametrically opposing cultural, religious and political expectations. None of the previous efforts to 'force' tolerance, understanding and community cohesion have or will meet with any success until the "powers" introduce education and "aim" at the means of introducing reason and understanding for all with a shared moral development of a multicultural 'primary education lead' curriculum which appears to be seconded to criminalisation and (welfare) penalisation of those that display the ignorance of understanding learned from the lead of Sensationalist press, and opposing values of the contemporary political arena in opposition to common sense and the electioneering manifesto of "Mass" appeal.          



__________________
Ex-huyton


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Date:
Permalink   
 

We're going a bit off topic I suppose, but I don't buy your 'big conspiracy' theory. If the sort of thing you are talking about is the attitude of people like Lord Halifax before WW2 then it is quite comfortably explained by the desire, widespread at the time, to avoid another war at almost any price.

Hitler's military power was terrifying, so of course any peace-loving person contemplating the situation would be likely to conclude that a policy of cooperation might be the way of avoiding trouble. I don't blame poor Neville Chamberlain at all for his Appeasement policy, which after all bought us time to make a few serious preparations for war. The poor man did his best for us, and without those preparations we probably wouldn't have survived up to the point where America became our ally.

I grew up in the post-war era and I was puzzled by what I read about the land battles. Given that Germany was so powerful militarily, how did it come about that we beat them on the battlefield? It took until 1974 for my question to be satisfactorily answered, when F.W. Winterbotham published his book blowing the gaff on the Ultra secret.

__________________
goldenladyfun


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 78
Date:
Permalink   
 

May I also add that the largest beneficiaries of the "welfare state" are the major corporations and the military industrial complex.



__________________

Web Models Internationale
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   
 

These perusals of history are all well and good but that was then and this is now.  How do we sort out our legacy?  How do we reach a state of mutual respect where we can help the ones who need help, restore the apparently lost sections of the younger generations to a productive, respectful and healthy life?  Blaming anyone including the poor themselves never solved anything.  I agree Welfare was never meant as a lifestyle choice however blaming Welfare for causing this country's woes isn't fair either.  The times change and either we keep up or we sink.  It seems to me we are sinking, and it doesn't matter whether we blame the chosen few or America or Hitler or whomever we still have to fix it.  It seems to me Britain is in as much peril now as it was during both the great wars, now the war is drugs and degradation, ignorance and apathy.  I don't agree with the Political Elite but at least they are doing something.  If anyone can tell me where to start I would be grateful.



__________________
Ex-huyton


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Date:
Permalink   
 

By and large I approve of what the coalition government is doing in the benefits sphere although some things (e.g. the closure of the Remploy factories) raise my eyebrows. The situation on drugs is dispiriting and I can't imagine why so many young people can be so foolish as to support crime in that way, quite apart from put their precious health at risk, but this current push to legalise drugs doesn't persuade me to jump on that beguiling bandwagon; why should the nation's treasure be spilled out to put right people who were stupid enough to choose that path despite all the warnings? Voter apathy is a worry too, but other than these things I find the current state of the country quite encouraging - and I say that as someone who once swore I would never in my life vote Conservative again.

To answer your last question - allow Cameron's government to continue operating its policies for a good long period.

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   
 

Ex Huyton,(Pennard ave ?) and anonymous, thank you for your contribution. First of all, I would like to agree on the point regarding, "Remploy": I was also disappointed at this announcement, particularly as there was a programme on television epocally reporting the difficulty experienced by a company attempting to re-locate from China to (Kirkby !) UK. The predominant need was for a skill which was ubiquitous in the North of England when I was growing up; cushion making and the skill necessary, 'sewing machinists' was a make or break. who would ever believe that we could have lost such a widespread sustenance of the British economy ? I did email this company to advise of the Remploy situation to no avail.

 

Drugs, another multi agency ethical conflict. Where is the common sense and vision that a nation once commanded. Education and curriculum I will highlight once again. The young and disinterested forced to attend a non-vocational institution with a hidden curriculum (peer revolt) and cultural indifference amongst other preferences (non-conformist).

Charlie Stevenson Check out our society.. promoting educational opportunities and inclusivity for difference, Asperger's, ADHD and those related conditions on the spectrum are not a curse - just a difference, and a difference that can be worked around.Auto-Circle Spectrum Society. University Northampton.



__________________
Ex-huyton


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 136
Date:
Permalink   
 

Well done. At least your conscience is clear for you did your bit.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Forum -> DISCUSS ANYTHING & EVERYTHING: Money, Dating, Health, Internet, Legal, Jobs, People, Places and more -> POLITICS -> benefit dependency
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us