Posted: Jul 22, 2019 10:56 pm
by jamest
The ideals of socialism are wonderful. Where they fail is that the system is still all based upon money and no amount of wonderful ideals based upon money is going to convince the selfish/rich to give to the selfish/poor, especially when a good proportion of them are just taking the piss.
I speak from experience, because for the most part I've been relatively poor and have mixed with the relatively poor. I have first hand eperience of many people taking advantage of the welfare state. This is what many people do (not all!): they seek to take selfish advantage of ideals that were surely never adopted in the first instance for people like them. I've even being doing care work for the last two decades, so I have a broad spectrum of understanding needs.

Notwithstanding the obvious examples of people claiming welfare whilst working for undeclared cash (rife!), or of people claiming to be ill/incapacitated because they're essentially lazy and don't want to work (such as some of my neighbours to my left), there are utterly numerous abuses of the welfare system which should understandably undermine (even to a relatively poor man such as myself) any desire on the part of the rich or middle-class to want to contribute towards the quality of life of the poor beyond the bare minimum, certainly in the UK.

I learnt recently that another neighbour's son is now being transported by taxi, twice a day every day of the school week, to his new school and back, a good 60+ mile 2-hourish round-trip. He's about 6 years old now. Knowing the price of taxis, I would estimate that to be costing close to £500 per week. I don't know if other kids share the taxi, but if so that cost will rise somewhat anyway as time/distance = money.
What's wrong with this is that there's a school a 5 minute walk from here, in fact there are several quite close to here and many much closer than the school he's now being forced to attend, which is some kind of 'special' school obviously. But this kid is not disabled in any way. I know this for a fact as he's even been in my house and played with my daughter. He's just 'a handful', if you like, a bit mischievous, troublesome maybe. Fair enough, but the bottom-line is that he can be described as 'naughty' enough at the age of 6 or 7 by the present authorities to now cost our tax-payers another £15000 a year. Such examples as these exemplify why the welfare state is utterly abused/corrupted, yet the welfare state has opened itself up to such abuse.

I once worked for 4 years with someone who had muscular dystrophy and that is a classic example of someone who actually needed the full helping hand of the welfare state, as he could hardly move/breathe and eventually died relatively young. So spare me the spiel of not being sensitive or empathetic. Indeed, it's probably my experience of working for such people which has helped me to forge my scale of judgements of such things, alongside my experience of seeing the widespread abuse of the welfare state.

The bottom-line is that in my opinion, working solely on a monetary basis, knowing the extent to which the welfare state is abused (even in-house), that the rich and middle-class have every right and reason to complain.

If society needs to evolve, it's to the extent that it shouldn't be founded upon a monetary basis. If the welfare state is to evolve, it's to the extent that it won't be a fucking sucker any longer to a society which still is.