Individualism Vs Collectivism

[Anna B 1,401]

4 hours ago, El Cid said:

I very much support helping vunerable people, but the welfare state now takes care of the poor, instead of local people getting together and helping them. We have lost that connection.

Whose job is it to look after the elderley, I am not sure. Is it the family or is it the state, or perhaps when we get older we should have our own money?

Inheritence should be what is left, as a reward for the people that have cared for that person.

The post war welfare state did indeed help vulnerable people, but it also helped everyone. Free (at the point of use) Healthcare and dentistry, Free higher education (and grants for living costs,) and free or subsidised evening classes covering every subject under the sun at colleges, schools and Universities, subsidised bus and train travel, free milk and orange juice for children, old people got free places in care homes if required, and free home care. There were subsidised council houses, free libraries, art galleries, museums and places of interest, and affordable entertainment for all.  

 

Energy and Utility companies were all state owned, any profits returning to the country's coffers, bosses pay was roughly 8 x the pay of the average worker, (it's now 276 x the average worker.) Even workplaces contributed with things like subsidised canteens, social clubs, sports clubs, and other entertainments. In a large industry based place like Sheffield these were invaluable perks and brought people together. A working man's wage was enough to pay for all the essentials of family life without too much stress. Mothers could afford to stay at home with their children, nurture community spirit and community activities and watch out for their elderly relatives too. Vandalism and serious misbehaviour were far less in evidence. 

 

 All this began to change with Thatcher in the 80s, whose whole ethos was on rolling back the state. This coincided with mass unemployment thanks to the demise of industry which hit Sheffield very hard, and from which many have never recovered creating an 'underclass' of rolling unemployment and an ever increasing gap between the rich and poor. 

This is now filtering up into the middle classes who are experiencing unreliable incomes and unemployment for the first time. This is likely to continue, and in fact increase, with new systems, further automation and Artificial Intelligence.

 

We work hard for our money and still pay a lot of tax in this country, but we seem to be getting less and less in exchange. Yet we have virtually no say in how it is spent, or who profits. I get sick of seeing headlines like 'Test and Trace consultants paid £7,360 per DAY.'

We are a rich country, yet we now have high rates of hunger, poverty and homelessness, which can all be traced back to long term conservative thinking over the last 40 years on 'Individualism.'  

 

Individualism is all very well on a level playing field, but with the reductions in welfare and subsidies given in the past, the playing field is anything but level at the moment. We should all be working together to effect change that benefits everyone.

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by Anna B

[El Cid 213]

1 hour ago, CaptainSwing said:

When was this golden age when local people got together to help the poor?  Prior to the welfare state, the principal way in which local people got together to help the poor was by putting them in the workhouse.  My own family were affected by this.

 

Unless that is you were considered to be "deserving" poor,  and were lucky enough to live in a time and place when an almshouse or whatever became available.

In my own childhood I was looked after by our extended family whilst my father went to work, as my parents split when I was young.

Family Income Supplement was brought in 1970 by the  Conservatives and there was the family allowance before that, but I assume the payments were minor compared to what is given away today. But we still have child poverty and deprivation; so perhaps we are doing something wrong?

We have always helped the poor, so why is poverty still around, has it even helped those families?

[El Cid 213]

10 minutes ago, Anna B said:

There were subsidised council houses, free libraries, art galleries, museums and places of interest, and affordable entertainment for all.  

We work hard for our money and still pay a lot of tax in this country, but we seem to be getting less and less in exchange.

The subject of "subsidies" interests me. Its just the Government favouring one sector. Social housing was not subsidised, but the land that they were built on was free. Councils have the choice of borrowing money to build social housing on the land that they have, or they could sell that land to developers for £xxx,xxx

They often choose to sell the land.

[Anna B 1,401]

23 hours ago, El Cid said:

The subject of "subsidies" interests me. Its just the Government favouring one sector. Social housing was not subsidised, but the land that they were built on was free. Councils have the choice of borrowing money to build social housing on the land that they have, or they could sell that land to developers for £xxx,xxx

They often choose to sell the land.

 

I've no problem with councils / governments selling land for housing, (is it theirs to sell, or does it belong to the people of the city? just asking,) but they should keep control of the buildings, in terms of rent. If left to builders they will build more expensive houses which means more profit for them. Just adding in a couple of 'Affordable' houses (affordable for whom?) just doesn't cut it.

I believe the council also had their own house building teams at one time, building houses at cost and providing good secure jobs.  

 

And, if private landlords can get rich by buying 'buy to let' homes, then it's good business. What is to stop the council building good strong council houses and letting them out at a fair rent? Any profit made can then go into building more council houses. There are plenty of brownfield sites ripe for building, and old houses that can be bought and demolished or brought up to standard by the council.

Council houses provide long secure tenancies, unlike  houses owned by private landlords who can ask the tenant to vacate through no fault of their own, (with correct notice procedures etc) and sell the house from under them. 

 

Edited October 17, 2020 by Anna B

[El Cid 213]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

 

I've no problem with councils / governments selling land for housing, (is it theirs to sell, or does it belong to the people of the city? just asking,)

We elect the councils, they work on our behalf, that is the basis of democracy.

[Anna B 1,401]

5 hours ago, El Cid said:

We elect the councils, they work on our behalf, that is the basis of democracy.

Ah, but do they work on our behalf though? It often doesn't seem like it.

Do we have any say in how our money is spent? Or what the council get up to ? (Tree felling anyone?)

 

And please don't wheel out that 'well you can always vote for somebody else.'

It is virtually a closed shop in Sheffield, and they're all the same anyway. 

A meaningless cross in a box for a preselected candidate once every few years is not real democracy.

[El Cid 213]

4 hours ago, Anna B said:

Ah, but do they work on our behalf though? It often doesn't seem like it.

Do we have any say in how our money is spent? Or what the council get up to ? (Tree felling anyone?)

 

And please don't wheel out that 'well you can always vote for somebody else.'

It is virtually a closed shop in Sheffield, and they're all the same anyway. 

A meaningless cross in a box for a preselected candidate once every few years is not real democracy.

I dont know Sheffield, but they seem to be different from other areas, in that they lack Conservatives. Why is that, better or worse than other cities?

I agree, our democracy is poor.

[El Cid 213]

As our world becomes more interconnected, this diversity of parenting approaches may dwindle. In fact, most countries have become more individualistic over the last 50 years – a shift that’s most pronounced in countries that have experienced the most economic development.

Nonetheless, there’s still a huge difference in parenting styles and childhood development across cultures – a testament to the enduring influence of societal values.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-where-you-re-born-influences-the-person-you-become?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB

[Lex Luthor 10]

On 16/10/2020 at 13:04, Anna B said:

I think everybody is a mixture of both, we are all capable of both good and evil. However we have been given freewill, and can choose how we behave and that's not always easy. The pitfalls are many;  doing the wrong thing for the right reasons, and vice versa, acting wrongly through fear of repercussions, self delusion and spite, judging others unfairly, following orders that are wrong, selfishness disguised with dodgy excuses, following the herd even though you know it's going in the wrong direction,  etc etc, - we're all guilty of some  of these at some time. We have a moral compass, we just have to be aware of it and strive to do the best we can. 

 

But people can also be incredibly kind and caring too. Love, sharing and altruism abounds. Much more so than we know, in all kinds of small ways that never hits the headlines. The human being is always a work in progress, and we should never forget that, and always aspire to be the best we can be.

:

Lovely post. 🌹

[Red Rum 62 0]

On 17/10/2020 at 05:21, Anna B said:

Ah, but do they work on our behalf though? It often doesn't seem like it.

 

It makes a big difference what is set up in your local area. Charities have many roles for people to volunteer in their shops, but there should also be local groups to keep the local area clean and the flowerbeds colourful.

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

1 hour ago, Red Rum 62 said:

It makes a big difference what is set up in your local area. Charities have many roles for people to volunteer in their shops, but there should also be local groups to keep the local area clean and the flowerbeds colourful.

Is that a part of what we are supposed to pay our council tax for? 

[Red Rum 62 0]

4 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Is that a part of what we are supposed to pay our council tax for? 

Things are getting worse for the councils, they are in debt and they need bailing out. There was an outcry over free school meals, may local parish council paid for some, in the same area the borough council paid for some and sure that should be down to the government.

What should government do vs what should people do for themselves?