seanie

Well actually growth under Thatcher compares rather poorly with most of the post war period. Not suprising given she engineered a massive recession followed by a unsustainable boom leading to another recession. And this despite the benefits of North Sea oil unavailable to previous governments. And whilst to some extent she was a victim of wider economic circumstances the same is true of those Governments of the 1970's.

Does the phrase "oil shock" mean anything to you? "Stagflation"?

In anycase you seem to have ignored my basic point. Unemployment is an inevitable part of our economic system. And since it is inevitable you really are forced to address it in some way. The alternative is to let people starve.

It is far from uncommon to attribute unemployment to the moral degeneracy, fecklessness and "idleness" of the individuals involved. Whereas in reality unemployment in general has far more to do with economic circumstances that individuals have little control over.

Welfare clearly was necessary. That's why we introduced it. Those charitable institutions that did exist were failing to meet the needs of the poor and destitute.

And since, as a matter of historical record, voluntary provision failed to guarantee a minimum standard of living, I see little point in returning to The Poor Law and workhouses.

meritocrat

Who? I'm not American.

Quote:

And welfare is not necessary. The welfare state is built on the notion of force. Why can't people voluntarily aid the poor or worse off? Maybe we should start questioning your intelligence as well?

No, just your knowledge of politics. Still know what a natural right is?

Gurdur

Some people are addicted to parodying themselves.

meritocrat

People cite this 'great period of growth' yet fail to realise that other major industrialised nations grew faster in that period. In the 1980's (and the 1990's) Britain grew faster than most other G7 nations.
The early 80's recession was a result of a global downturn, as was the early 90's one.

Stagflation occured under the Wilson government of the 70's, not Thatcher.

seanie

No shit Sherlock.

And when I mentioned "oil shock" and"stagflation" immediately after mentioning the Governments of the '70s what point do you think I was making?

meritocrat

I don't think so. You wouldn't know how I act or rationalise.

meritocrat

OK, but how was the 'Winter of Discontent' based on 'external factors'?

brighid

Some information about Corporate Welfare (and perhaps where our ire should be placed)

"The $150 billion for corporate subsidies and tax benefits eclipses the annual budget deficit of $130 billion. It's more than the $145 billion paid out annually for the core programs of the social welfare state: Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), student aid, housing, food and nutrition, and all direct public assistance (excluding Social Security and medical care)."

http://www.corporations.org/welfare/
(I have not read the entirety of the site and cannot vouch for the accuracy of it.)

Brighid

Treacle Worshipper

Personally, I am unutterably grateful to the UK welfare state that has kept my head above water for the last 18 months while I have been suffering from severe illness. I have had to spend half my savings, but my benefits have been an immense help. (I'm also extremely grateful to my parents, who put money aside for me as I was growing up.)

Now I am starting to get about again (in an NHS-provided wheelchair, no less), I am hoping to be able to start looking for work again soon. If I'm unable to find paid work, I'll do voluntary work & put something back into society that way.

And I'm sure I would've enjoyed crawling round the streets begging if we hadn't had a welfare state

Oh, I voted "no" on the poll.

TW

brighid

Some myths about immigration and welfare:

One widespread myth about recent immigrants is that they take advantage of our welfare state. However, most immigrants are not even eligible for public assistance when they first arrive. Legal immigrants who are not refugees are not allowed to receive public welfare benefits until they have lived here at least three years. Immigrants who are sponsored by a family member - roughly 70 percent of total legal immigrants - cannot receive public assistance until they have been in the U.S. for at least five years.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba400/


Brighid