David Cameron is optimistic!
I'm not sure what scares me the most, the optimism of politicians or the facts as I can read them in the newspapers.
The situation facing the United Kingdom along with the rest of Europe and to a degree the United States gives me no grounds for optimism.
I recently read an article by the Chair of the Church Urban Fund arguing that we must not abandon the principles of Lord Beveridge.
Well, the fact that the Church Urban Fund was meant to be an exemplar of the Churches commitment to social justice and meant to be wound up five or so years after Faith in the City, notwithstanding, although whether it was felt necessary to keep it going because of pressing social injustices or whether it was kept going for other reasons it's hard to say, the issue of Lord Beveridge and his recommendations make for an interesting discussion.
As a sixteen year old in the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance I was sent to Birmingham on a course to be introduced to the Beveridge principles as they underpinned the work I would be doing as a very junior clerk.
The principles are clear and it is also clear that they are being traduced by the Government of the day.
But once at work in my new career I was told by a number of older colleagues that, to quote a TV advert 'There would be trouble ahead'.
The 'trouble' as they saw it was that the principle that no individual should be left without income or home when through sickness or old age they couldn't earn their living whilst right and fair and just, depended entirely on those in work paying through National Insurance and taxes, the benefits and pensions that were needed to honour the principle.
Their argument was that what should have been introduced was some form of actuarial based insurance scheme, so that those in work set funds aside for periods of sickness or unemployment and ultimately to pay for their pensions in old age.
Of course Beveridge's birds are coming home to roost.
The triple dip recession into which we are about to move, brought about by the coalition governments toxic programme of cuts and austerity, has resulted in fewer people in full time employment forced to fund an ever increasing welfare bill made up in its largest part of people over sixty five claiming their pensions.
Often saying, well I've paid in, so I'm entitled to my pension.
The problem with that of course is that what you paid in, paid for previous generations of pensions and yours rely on increasing taxation on bankers who would rather have bonuses, because there are fewer folk in the UK making anything and nearly all the new jobs are part time and we all rely on financial services.
So its not surprising that MP's are becoming younger and it is increasingly seen as a career opportunity for young and upcoming folk who either don't want or can't find a day job.
The Conservatives are the UK equivalent of the Republicans in America and UKIP is the equivalent of the Tea Party.
They are equally against taxation and for unbridled capitalism, despite the lessons of history which have shown again and again that these measures simply don't work.
From 1939 to 1945 Britain had to employ a command economy, it was called the war effort but it involved a form of socialism, of course there were profiteers but they were largely looked down on and booed, both at the time and later by history.
I'm not sure what scares me the most, the optimism of politicians or the facts as I can read them in the newspapers.
The situation facing the United Kingdom along with the rest of Europe and to a degree the United States gives me no grounds for optimism.
I recently read an article by the Chair of the Church Urban Fund arguing that we must not abandon the principles of Lord Beveridge.
Well, the fact that the Church Urban Fund was meant to be an exemplar of the Churches commitment to social justice and meant to be wound up five or so years after Faith in the City, notwithstanding, although whether it was felt necessary to keep it going because of pressing social injustices or whether it was kept going for other reasons it's hard to say, the issue of Lord Beveridge and his recommendations make for an interesting discussion.
As a sixteen year old in the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance I was sent to Birmingham on a course to be introduced to the Beveridge principles as they underpinned the work I would be doing as a very junior clerk.
The principles are clear and it is also clear that they are being traduced by the Government of the day.
But once at work in my new career I was told by a number of older colleagues that, to quote a TV advert 'There would be trouble ahead'.
The 'trouble' as they saw it was that the principle that no individual should be left without income or home when through sickness or old age they couldn't earn their living whilst right and fair and just, depended entirely on those in work paying through National Insurance and taxes, the benefits and pensions that were needed to honour the principle.
Their argument was that what should have been introduced was some form of actuarial based insurance scheme, so that those in work set funds aside for periods of sickness or unemployment and ultimately to pay for their pensions in old age.
Of course Beveridge's birds are coming home to roost.
The triple dip recession into which we are about to move, brought about by the coalition governments toxic programme of cuts and austerity, has resulted in fewer people in full time employment forced to fund an ever increasing welfare bill made up in its largest part of people over sixty five claiming their pensions.
Often saying, well I've paid in, so I'm entitled to my pension.
The problem with that of course is that what you paid in, paid for previous generations of pensions and yours rely on increasing taxation on bankers who would rather have bonuses, because there are fewer folk in the UK making anything and nearly all the new jobs are part time and we all rely on financial services.
So its not surprising that MP's are becoming younger and it is increasingly seen as a career opportunity for young and upcoming folk who either don't want or can't find a day job.
The Conservatives are the UK equivalent of the Republicans in America and UKIP is the equivalent of the Tea Party.
They are equally against taxation and for unbridled capitalism, despite the lessons of history which have shown again and again that these measures simply don't work.
From 1939 to 1945 Britain had to employ a command economy, it was called the war effort but it involved a form of socialism, of course there were profiteers but they were largely looked down on and booed, both at the time and later by history.
After the 1945 general election, the Labour Party was
elected, and set about restructuring the British economy in favour of working people.
Taxes increased,
industries were nationalised, and the welfare state was created.
The next four years saw some of the most rapid growth Britain has
ever experienced.
With the ending of the sixties came Thatcherism and what the Beatles called a Hard Days Night.
Of course, despite Judy Dench's speech in the latest bond movie, we are not on a war footing, but we are facing some dramatic challenges.
There is no room for optimism.
Whether you are employed, disabled, sick or elderly the message is that the coalition does not have your interests at heart.
So don't be bamboozled into a false optimism.
No comments:
Post a Comment