Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
1834 poor law what was the aim
Essay on the welfare state in britain
The welfare state 1942 uk policy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: 1834 poor law what was the aim
The concept of twenty first century welfare provision is commonly considered to be the provision of social security or benefits payments, social housing, health, social work and educational services. However, historically, the provision of welfare in Britain has been in place since the ineffective Elizabethan Poor Law Act of 1601 and earlier. This paper sets out to critically discuss the extent to which a Marxist analysis of the welfare state is useful covering the period from 1834 up to the inception of the post war Welfare State. Firstly it will provide a background of Marxist ideology moving on to discuss twentieth century Marxist thinking and finally it will consider reforms through this timeframe to provide an analysis to what extent …show more content…
The new poor law of 1834 introduced the workhouse and a more centralised system of administration. It reduced support drastically supporting only those who could work, as opposed to those who would not (Fraser, 2003, p.54). Moreover the bourgeoisie believed the poor were idle drunkards and poverty was much more a personal misfortune than a public issue arguing that access to help should be limited to the “deserving poor” only (Walsh et al, 2000, p.123) a perception repudiated by Mills who argued that to justify mass poverty and unemployment by such factors was an evasion and a failure of government to deal with the real dynamics of poverty, inequality and unemployment (Mills, 1959). Rowntree and Booth further evidenced the clear link between poverty, unemployment and low wages in the findings of their social surveys on poverty thus eliminating the propaganda of the deserving and undeserving poor (Fraser, 2009, pp.318-319). Richard Oastler argued the new Poor Law was yet another example of the callous exploitation of the working class (Fraser, 2003,
When speaking about Welfare we try to avoid it, turning welfare into an unacceptable word. In the Article “One Nation On Welfare. Living Your Life On The Dole” by Michael Grunwald, his point is to not just only show but prove to the readers that the word Welfare is not unacceptable or to avoid it but embrace it and take advantage of it. After reading this essay Americans will see the true way of effectively understanding the word welfare, by absorbing his personal experiences, Facts and Statistics, and the repetition Grunwald conveys.
There was a growing sense that the poor did not deserve assistance and so in 1834 the ‘Poor Law Amendment Act’ was introduced. This was designed to make conditions more severe and to even further force self-improvement amongst the poor. ‘The central objective…was to withdraw poor relief from men judged ‘able-bodied’ in Poor Law terminology’. (Thane: 1978: 29) Alternatives such as the work-house were introduced. The notion that you should only ask for help if you desperately needed it as a last resource loomed. The Charity Organisation Society was ‘a body w...
In fact, many believed the poor were just worthless idlers who were not even trying to better there own situations, but instead were taking the high roads away from taxes and worries (Document 11). There were many observed instances in which those in poverty, when given the opputinity to better their lives, chose to stay poor and recieve handouts. One such cause comes from William Turner, and English Physican for Lord Earl of Somerset when he recounts how poor folks often begged on the Earl's door but when Turner offered to help health wise, they chose to stay sick and beg (Document 6). Similar to modern day abusers of the American Wellfare system, officals became very angry with idlers who did nothing but feed off the wealth of the working class in the form of alms. They even believed that idlers should be expelled from their communites as they only bring economics down (Document 5). Many also thought that in order received any aid at all a person must be working. Reforms such as the Workhouse Test Act in 1723, though this occured later than the period of discussion, were a result of these opinions. This act, among others, required that people work a set amount of hours before they could receive any aid. Even the famous Cardinal Richelieu of France believed that the idlers were “good-for-nothings” who were restricting those who actually needed help from getting it while they were being lazy and greedy (Document 8). This opinion of certain poor indivudals being lazy and abusing resources remains amoung those in power even today in
In the Working Poor, David Shipler shows the different levels of poverty in the United States. Although many people work every day they still do not have enough money to live their lives comfortably or contently. In chapter 1, Money and Its Opposite, discuss the different people that worked hard their entire lives only to remain in or below the poverty line. For instance, in the book Shipler speaks of the disadvantages that the working poor are susceptible to. Often being taken advantage of from employers that do not give accesses that they are entitled to, the working poor are more likely to be audit than the wealthy, and become victims of cons that point toward money for a small payment, first. The many that live in poverty often overspend.
In The Working Poor: Invisible in America, David K. Shipler describes the lives of United States citizens who live within poverty. He highlights the U.S.’s disregard for its working poor, the nature of poverty, and the causes of poverty faced by low-wage earners. Shipler performs an amazing job of describing the factors that play their parts into the lives of U.S. citizens who live in poverty and are in poverty. Shipler explains the effects of tax payments and refunds, the abuse of the poor by private and public institutions, the spending habits of the working poor, the culture of the U.S., and the presence of money as a factor in the lives of the working poor. In dealing with government bureaucracy or private business, the working poor are vulnerable to the abuse of con-artists, employers, financial service providers, and public service providers.
As stated by the author, the “Principle of less eligibility,” meant that those receiving public assistance “should be worse than that of the lowest paid self-supporting laborer.” In a sense this meant if a person dug ditches or scooped human waste for a living, the situation of a public assistance recipient should be much worse. The author points out that in 1834, when the “Poor Law Reform Bill,” passed it enforced the negative attitudes about poverty. Essentially, if someone was poor it was viewed as their fault. Services should never lift a recipient out of poverty, but just provide meager assistance in a stigmatizing way. The author describes how impoverished individuals in England during the mid-1800’s, were viewed in negative, criminal ways if they received assistance. Furthermore, those described as “able bodied and on assistance were particularly maligned in the court of public opinion. Many of the homeless and
...th what little they have, however; why is it left to the poor to have to suffer the consequences of these political choices. The persistence of extreme poverty and social ills speak to a situation that bears for a different approach. It is clear that capitalism and free market solutions cannot spread wealth as advocated. American governments have shown their reluctance to admit this discrepancy through the strategic creations of welfare policies and welfare reform coupled with placing blame upon the citizens who possess little power to change market decisions that govern and effect their lives.
The morality of social welfare systems, or the morality of crafting laws to aid American citizens in poverty, is a subject that (like myriad ethical issues) is hotly debated to say the least. For example, some opponents of social welfare institutions maintain the view that such programs "increase the reward or reduce the penalties" of poverty; thereby ostensibly making an impoverished state appealing even to people who might initially have been motivated to earn a living by conventional means. In other words, welfare programs (according to opponents) encourage otherwise productive individuals to embrace laziness, for basic human needs would be met by such institutions, eliminating the need to work at all. Those opposed to social welfare plans have also been known to claim that an "unfair burden is placed upon workers who must pay for the system." When one considers the above opposing views, it would then stand to reason that proponents of social welfare programs might maintain that it is the moral responsibility of working citizens to provide assistance and funding for programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the Food Stamp program, or the like. This supposition is confirmed upon examination of the notion that, when basic human needs such as "food, housing, and medical care" are not met, one is consequently rendered unable to uphold any level of social freedom. Given the above information, one can safely deduce that modern supporters of social welfare organizations are under the impression that such programs provide the impoverished masses with the means by which to obtain the level of general well-being vital to acquiring work in the first place.
Fraser, D. (2003) 3rd Ed. The Evolution of the British Welfare State. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Stitt, S. (1994) Poverty and Poor Relief: Concepts and Reality.
Hage, David. “Purgatory of the working poor: people seeking help from the job-training and income-support systems face a bureaucratic paper chase and limited resources. There are oases of progress, but much remains to be done”. The American Prospect Inc. Sep 2004.
The history of welfare systems dates back to ancient China and Rome, some of the first institutions known to have established some form of a welfare system. In both of these nations, their governments created projects to provide food and aid to poor, unemployed, or unable families and individuals, however these were based on “moral responsibility.” Later in history, in 1500’s England, parliament passed laws that held the monarchy responsible for providing assistance to needy families by providing jobs and financial aid. These became known as “poor laws” (Issitt).
The Elizabeth Poor Law advocated and placed responsibility of the poor to the churches and government. If parishes could not meet the responsibilities, counties were required to assume relief-giving functions. The government became the chief enforcer of poor relief. However, the local parishes fulfilled their welfare responsibilities in several ways. They provided outdoor relief to persons in the homes; provided indoor relief to person in special institutions that came to be variously known as almshouse, poorhouses or workhouses; or required person to become indenture servants or apprentices. It also required relatives to care for their impoverished relatives. The poor were provided with unemployment relief, initiated works; regulated local prices to help poor persons; gave in-kind assistance such a as food, clothing, and wood, provided health care; and removed children from abusive households’ and gave legal protection . Many local jurisdictions possessed “laws of settlement” that entitled people to receive local poor law relief after a year’s residence.
In the film 1964 Johnson called Poverty an “Unconditional law” and then declared a “War on Poverty.” In one of our readings from Zinn and Arnove called “Mechanic” it talks about the troubles that poor people endure every single day. The unknown author states “I once got 25 pounds of bacon for a day’s work. What do I get now? Only two” (“Mechanic,” in
Born from the revolutions of 1848 throughout Europe, Marxism sought to end the class struggles that were destroying the continent. The solution to the problems of all nations occurred to Marx to be Socialism, a branch that is presently known as Marxism. Under this seemingly “utopian” socioeconomic system, equality was granted to all citizens who were in essence a community of one. “. . . universal free education; arming of the people; a progressive income tax; limitations upon inheritance; state ownership of banks. . .”(Palmer 506). These rights of which constituted Marxism eventually went on to be incorporated in Leninism and modern-day socialism. At least in its beginning, the intent of Marxism and the Communist League were noble towards the goal o...
Charles Dickens shows notable amounts of originality and morality in his novels, making him one of the most renowned novelists of the Victorian Era and immortalizing him through his great novels and short stories. One of the reasons his work has been so popular is because his novels reflect the issues of the Victorian era, such as the great indifference of many Victorians to the plight of the poor. The reformation of the Poor Law 1834 brings even more unavoidable problems to the poor. The Poor Law of 1834 allows the poor to receive public assistance only through established workhouses, causing those in debt to be sent to prison. Unable to pay debts, new levels of poverty are created. Because of personal childhood experiences with debt, poverty, and child labor, Dickens recognizes these issues with a sympathetic yet critical eye. Dickens notices that England's politicians and people of the upper class try to solve the growing problem of poverty through the Poor Laws and what they presume to be charitable causes, but Dickens knows that these things will not be successful; in fact they are often inhumane. Dickens' view of poverty and the abuse of the poor