Quote:
Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington
Mancie, if the last government had not allowed so many people to come into the country.......there may have been a job for this man. And, if they had not given benefits to those coming in from other countries(benefits which they then send back to their own country to improve that country's economy) there may have been a bit more money to dole out to the really needy.
The welfare state was envisaged to help those in genuine need....not as a career option....who made it a career option.......well, I am sure you know the answer to that.
And before you go on and say this is a tory view, why don't you look at some of the other threads which criticise the current government.
I am for NO party...the only party I will vote for will be the one who can get us out of this unholy mess.
This thread was not originally about politics......it should not be about politics....it should be about caring. Looking out for those who live near us......especially those who are old or in need.
|
I can't really comment on the first paragraph, as it is stuff that happened after I left. But ... the thread is about politics; the couple felt abandoned by social services, not by their neighbours. For one reason or another, some folks just fall through the cracks in a fallible system ... Or the "system", being based on "numbers" rather than on compassion, and being operated by routinized civil servants didn't work in this case. These isolated cases happen. And when they do, they make headlines. But, they are not the norm.
And I can't agree that your "welfare system was envisaged to help those in need." It was fought for by the people. It was based on the belief that in a wealthy country, no one should be left behind ... there should be pensions, free education, unemployment insurance, etc. And to say that welfare is a "career option" is, in most cases, wrong. When govts. routinely spend millions bailing out corporations, giving them tax breaks, allowing them to avoid taxes in offshore havens, it is wrong to put all the blame on the poor ... it is the corporate welfare bums who drain the coffers of the state. And when the crunch comes, who suffers?
Maybe the thread is about caring ... but neighbourliness, or lack of it, is difficult to consider in isolation .... and it's not something you can legislate or enforce.
This is a sad case, no doubt about it. But I don't see it as evidence of a massive moral decline. It's an isolated incident.
And here's a question, more or less rhetorical: How many of you would have allowed this to happen to you and to your family? How many of you would have thrown in the towel, whatever the circumstances?