Thrad about a thread and happy todeclare it: 'everyone knows being welfare dependent is morally wrong'. No it'snot, only if you choose that. Otherwise it is luck dependent and

[BethNoireNewNameForPeachy]

luck can't make you morally wrong. It just is.

If your employer goes under, you are not morally wronng.

If your pension plan colapses three years before you retire, you are not morally wrong.

If you are sick,or a carer, or any of a lot of other things- you are not morally wrong.

Passing random judgements in a way that can hurt people is, however, IMO morally wromng.

Please someone tell me why people don't just get that?

And no I don'tcare I broke MN tradition by starting a thread about a thread, first I remember breaking in nigh on a decade and am angry. Arrrrghhhhhhh.

If this gets deleted, so be it.

Well, I am indeed both devious and stupid.

Actually, I think that the welfare state was begun with the intention that there ought to be a reasonable or acceptable minimum standard of living in the UK below which no-one should fall. It wasn't about simply keeping people from starvation or providing health-care.

Initially it was just unemployment support for those who paid NI. The rest came later.

Oh lord. It is nearly 11. And I have spent another night here when I ought to have been working. Sigh. Looks like I will be up early tomorrow...

Nice chatting with you all.

no need to apologise Porto .

We always disagree on these threads lol.

I won't mind paying for it once I'm working. Hell it's kept me/us afloat for a year or so already, and probably another year or so to come -

Actually it's interesting (and this bit isn't aimed at you Porto - just a general "aside" - last month I posted a thread here on MN (with great trepidation - it was a "head over heart" one) giving 2 basic choices that I was tossing and turning (literally at night as well) over. In short

Option 1 was to stay in this house, return to work in the next few months (in whatever job may come along) and hope to god that interest rates didn't go up, that the mortgage provider would let me get a mortgage to take over the house and live "on the edge" for I didn't know how long ( would have paid the mortgage with my CTC while it's still stupidly low interest rates, and fed, clothed us and paid the bills on IS and child benefit while looking for work!)

Option 2 was to move out, and (continue to) be supported by the state until DS3 starts school (or maybe while he's at nursery if something comes up before). Giving me a chance to get some more of my degree done before then

I expected to be absolutely slaughtered for even considering option 2 - but actually there was full support for me.

I've taken (am about to take) Option 2, decided that with all that's happened in the last 6 months or so the potential pitfalls of option 1 were too much for me to cope with. I need that state support right now to give me a chance to take stock of everything that's gone on, and get a clear head so that I can give the boys a better and brighter future

The Report to the Parliament on Social Insurance and Allied Services was published in 1942. It proposed that all people of working age should pay a weekly national insurance contribution. In return, benefits would be paid to people who were sick, unemployed, retired or widowed. Beveridge argued that this system would provide a minimum standard of living "below which no one should be allowed to fall". It recommended that the government should find ways of fighting the five 'Giant Evils' of Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness. Beveridge included as one of three fundamental assumptions the fact that there would be a National Health Service of some sort, a policy already being worked on in the Ministry of Health.[3]

One of its most remarkable assets was the convincing manner of Beveridge's argument which made it so widely acceptable: Beveridge appealed to conservatives and other doubters by arguing that the welfare institutions he proposed would increase the competitiveness of British industry in the post-war period, not only by shifting labour costs like healthcare and pensions out of corporate ledgers and onto the public account, but also by producing healthier, wealthier and thus more motivated and productive workers who would also serve as a great source of demand for British goods.

Beveridge saw full employment (which he defined as unemployment of no more than 3%) as the pivot of the social welfare programme he expressed in the 1942 Beveridge Report, and Full Employment in a Free Society (1944) expressed how this goal might be gained.[4] Alternative measures for achieving it included Keynesian-style fiscal regulation, direct control of manpower, and state control of the means of production. The impetus behind Beveridge's thinking was social justice, and the creation of an ideal new society after the war. He believed that the discovery of objective socio-economic laws could solve the problems of society.

Ack, Portofino - don't talk to me!

Yes, I suppose if you look to Lloyd-George's reforms as the beginning of the welfare state in the 20thC, then yes, it was initially about NI for the unemployed; oh, and pensions.

My remark pertained mostly to the Beveridge report, I suppose. I consider that the more universal or important moment in the 20thC welfare state in Britain.

X-posted. See, much more than just unemployment benefit!

actualy there were 5 big things introduced in the first "phase" of the welfare state between 1944 and 1949

Education Act - free secondary education for all

National Insurance Act - brought in the NI and entitlement to unemployment, sickness, maternity and widow's benefits, and the state pension

Childrens Act - created LA children's authorities - that was when Childcare officers were given the powers and duties to take children into the care of the LA

National Assistance Act - set up a National Assistance Board - which was a means tested "safety net" for anyone not covered by the NI act benefits. Required the LA's to promote the welfare of disabled people and to provide accomodation for disabled, children and homeless

Housing Act - provided for more public sector housing through local councils.

I know that it was after the war these things were opened up to non NI payers. How far have we come after 70 years on these: 'Giant Evils' of Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness' Not as far as we might have liked I guess.....

haha 2nd

I have 1 planned child (DS1 - although I was under the naieve illusion that it can take several months to fall pg if you're actually trying to get pregnant and people still do the sums now to see if he was concieved before or after our honeymoon

DS2 - talked about, thought about, not planned.....

DS3 - talked about, XH dead set against, I had notions of talking to him a few years down the line, alochol, mad rush for MAP following morning - and DS3 9 months later

thesecondcoming - don't worry made me laugh

Toccata - did try to phrase my post with that thread in mind

Penthesileia - thank you

I don't know how my situation fits in with Beveridges original idea - we have never had unemployment of 3% though as far as i am aware. We have totally ditched Keneysian economic theory though - and I'm not sure how much everything else is fit for purpose now.

We are tinkering so much with the welfare state I'm not sure what the overall ideology is, this being neo-liberal times it seems to me like we are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole - sooner or later it's going to fall apart.

I must dig out my "Nella Last's Peace". She was very sceptical about the NHS etc. Thought it took personal responsibility away from people. Very interesting read. I thought she would have LOVED mumsnet if such things had been available.

Trickle - which post with which thread in mind?????

No one answered my question.

This was all very interesting to read though, thank you ladies.

I hypothetically consider a large family in order to support me in my old age. Discuss.

sorry - the choices one and about my choice to keep or terminate my pregnancy - was a choice but a hard one (and once I'd made it didn't feel like one iyswim).

I did acknowledge the question though wasting

You did Toccata, thank you!

ahh am with you.

it was just too complex for me to get my brain around comprehensively - especially given the choice I'd made recently (outlined in one of my posts I 've just made) and me actually believing in hard work and diligence, and payings ones own way when you are pyschically and mentally able to blah blah blahb