To be amazed by the amount of people who think the state shouldnt help people?

[malificent7]

I mean with job creation, welfare, regulation of private employers etc.
I hear so many times...its not the state's job to do x, y and z.

So what is the point of gaving a state if it cannot produce conditions for people to thrive?

Of course some take the piss but the state shouldctry to peovide more jobs and less zero hour contracts, they should regulate how the private sector treats employees, they should moderate wages anf provide housing.

Of course, some take the piss but most have a genuine need and the state dosnt want to know.

Nope. Years ago the BBC did a documentary about disability benefits where they asked the public what percentage of disability benefit claims they believed to be fraudulent. Average answer was over 40%, whereas the government’s own figures put it at 0.5%

I think what this shows is the disconnect between what the government considers fit for work, and what society considers fit for work. It seems the people believe the government should raise the standard.

People don't always think things through with disabilities and how it can affect holding down a job

People don't always think things through with disabilities and how it can affect holding down a job

I have heard people say that if you can move one finger to press a button you can have a job. Not to sure where these button pushing jobs are though.

Hmm. DD has worked part time with MS, but when she has a relapse the major challenge is leaving the house. So she could do a job, but is not very reliable. You not only need a job you can do, but an employer who can be flexible.

I do think t h state should help people in need, and create laws which enable equal opportunities and lack of discrimination, min wage, as well as things like policing and healthcare.

I don't think thr state should help when it moves to a nanny state ie control how much booze people can drink or taxing unhealthy foods to make peoole eat more healthy. That's where I think state intervention should stop

Of course some take the piss but the state shouldctry to peovide more jobs and less zero hour contracts, they should regulate how the private sector treats employees, they should moderate wages anf provide housing.

It's exactly all the labour/employment laws/rights that has led to many employers using contractors, pseudo self employment and zero hour contracts instead of taking on permanent employees. It's all a matter of balance. Some say we've gone too far, others say not far enough.

So basically Bluntness you think the state should just pick up the tab. Eat what you want, smoke what you want, work if you fancy it - any problems, we'll pay to sort them?

@Kazzyhoward do you have a link to back up your claims about Grenfell residents on page 1

Kazzyhoward do you have a link to back up your claims about Grenfell residents on page 1

Just google "grenfell tower fraud" and "grenfell tower illegal subletting" - lots of links to various cases.

I've no idea how true any of this is, but on the Grenfell fraud thing, there's a list of names and brief info on here (ITV had one too, but it was very short on detail):

talkradio.co.uk/features/grenfell-fraudsters-who-are-people-who-falsely-profited-tragedy-18092228023

He claimed to live in the tower when he didnt He was not a resident. Which was WHY he was charged with fraud. BECAUSE he was not a resident.

He claimed to live in the tower when he didnt He was not a resident. Which was WHY he was charged with fraud. BECAUSE he was not a resident.

Which is what we're talking about re that comment in page 1 you referred to.

"there were 1 or 2 cases of people fraudulently claiming they were in grenfell tower when it burnt down."

@Cupfullofjoy

"Community service - so they can at least contribute to society for once, and at the time they will hopefully learn the value of doing so."

What about all the working poor who need their wages topped up to live?

Those who object to a giant, all-powerful state are not morally inferior to you, OP.

I'd like the state to start forcing companies into a carbon netutral position ASAP and monetising plastic pollution, but they're very busy with HS2, tearing up perfectly good roads and carrying our various reviews.

@Cupfullofjoy birth rate is around 1.8. Below replacement level.

@Inliverpool1 I knew people on minimum wage after it was brought in. Before that they'd been on a £1/hr.

@Kazzyhoward re. Pensions. Would you prefer it if people were left to starve as pensioners if they didn't have enough NI contributions?

*invest in small businesses.

That's a principle of left-wing anti-globalist economics, and yes I agree with it being a part of the solution*

First time I have ever been called left wing😀

I do think there has been an enormous shift in companies paying people to do a job and paying people a basic salary and expecting that if they can’t get by then the state will help out.
This though is to a certain extent ok for those that qualify for benefits but for those who have a family income of one salary of over £60,000 or don’t have the right age children or own a home then the door is slammed in your face.

I think this is where people coming into the country get the idea that British people are lazy. This isn’t a sign of idleness but on how a salary is paid now.

"Community service - so they can at least contribute to society for once, and at the time they will hopefully learn the value of doing so."

Criminalising poverty. Didn't we already try this in the 19th century with The Poor Laws? Those laws and others were partially responsible for the Famine in Ireland which resulted in the deaths of millions from starvation as well as here on the mainland and the transportation and abuse of thousands of children. But it did not result in less poverty. You cannot criminalise people, children, out of poverty. Fucking abomination.

It goes back even further than the 19th century. In the 17th century people resented elderly women/widows and poor people for needing parish money to live...........................

HelenaDove Mon 01-Apr-19 18:32:16

Ive just finished reading Witchfinders A Seventeenth Century English Tragedy.

The "witches" tried and hanged were not all women. Some were men.

One accused was an eight year old boy.

What most of them had in common was that they were poor. Yes poor. A lot of them were widows who needed what was known then as parish money to live. Elizabeth Clarke was an 84 year old one legged widow who was hanged. Many more were elderly. Neighbour turned against neighbour. Many resented their rates and parish money going to help these "wretches"

See any parallels? Because i do.

At the end of the book (although he does allude to it throughout) the author mentions how lack of liberty and welfare and political and economic uncertainty leads to this kind of climate.

We wouldnt get people persecuted for practising witchcraft now (although this still goes on in parts of the developing world) but we still get people persecuted for being poor/disabled etc.
Matthew Hopkins John Stearne and Sir Harbottle Grimston etc are long dead But some of their ideals are still very much alive.

There are parallels and its chilling.

its a tactic as old as time.

Completely agree with Fairylea.

Not to sure where these button pushing jobs are though.

There's only one, Jo has it.

To say “why do some think the state should not help people” is a bit like asking “when did you stop beating your wife?” It frames the issue in a manner designed to put any answer in a bad light.

I doubt very much that there are many people who ardently wish for the return of serfdom. I suspect you are on about people who talk about benefits dependency and rail against make-work.

I’ve seen what three generations of the dole does and I wouldn’t call that help. I think if the question were asked in a more nuanced manner it might help.

I’m proud to live in a country where those who are unable to work can access benefits, and where healthcare and school education is free for everyone at point of use.

I would like to state to limit the scope of what it does, but put more resources into things like care for the elderly and support for disadvantaged young people (especially those who are in care).

Our society has become so unbalanced where a couple working full time may need help from the state to make ends meet. This imbalance is disturbing. I’m not an economist and don’t know how that could be fixed. It does some wrong however that the state has to top up living costs where private employers aren’t paying enough. The state is subsidy private industry.

Obviously there is also the question of entitlement and dependence on the state which is a cultural problem. My husband and I waited until we could afford to have children before having them, and we’ve made sacrifices to avoid relying on the state. There is a built in unfairness in the fact that our taxes subsidise the lifestyles of others who have not been as careful. In spite of that, I don’t think a perfect system is possible and perhaps some unfairness is inevitable.

My husband and I waited until we could afford to have children before having them, and we’ve made sacrifices to avoid relying on the state. There is a built in unfairness in the fact that our taxes subsidise the lifestyles of others who have not been as careful

You realise you can be the most careful person ever and stillend up on benefits, don’t you?

And what if two minimum wage working people living in the South East where they grew up and where they have family and a support network want children? How are the figures going to ever add up for them?

what if two minimum wage working people living in the South East where they grew up and where they have family and a support network want children? How are the figures going to ever add up for them

They either get better paying jobs, a second one, move etc. Lots of people who don't turn to the state to pay for their choices manage to live within their means. They just choose a family size and area they can afford.

I don’t think a perfect system is possible and perhaps some unfairness is inevitable

A perfect system no but it would be very easy to make it fairer and out the emphasis back on individuals. Make childcare a subsidised cost for workers and cease all other child related benefits. Just have a safety net for job loss, illness and disability. No top ups for living in expensive places, having children, not working due to children etc. A level playing field. Everyone free to make their own choices based on what they alone can afford.