The end of the New Lie?

[John Galt]

society has a responsibility to provide for all it's members

Why? Don't the individual members of society have a responsibility for themselves?

[NickIT]

Dunno about educting the masses here ... I think socialism is a pretty broad catchesim which people who's politics are too the left fall under. I'd consider myself socialist in most areas of my politics, to me the most simple definition is having a social conscious and a belief that society has a responsibility to provide for all it's members - where that provision lies lies and how it's achieved are open to debate, and probably where it's evolved.

Histrorically socialism is all about state ownership of industries and some form of welfare state, but I don't know many people who'd you'd call socialist these days who advocating a return to state ownership (Alhtough personally I'd be all for re-nationlalising some of the railways), or who think the welfare system as we have it isn't in need of major rehaul or that capatalism is somehow bad (Though I would argue and say that occasionally it needs some checks and balances, America is a great example of a country for me that's just a touch too far in the other direction).

Social Conscience Driven Libertarians?

[snaw]

society has a responsibility to provide for all it's members

Why? Don't the individual members of society have a responsibility for themselves?

Of course they do, but there whas to be a minimim level for everyone in society. You disagree with this I assume (Doesn't surprise me) and would prefer to see our streets teeming with the starving poor, rampant disease and increased infant mortality I guess?

[hyperD]

Of course they do, but there whas to be a minimim level for everyone in society. You disagree with this I assume (Doesn't surprise me) and would prefer to see our streets teeming with the starving poor, rampant disease and increased infant mortality I guess?

Welfare was an admirable socialist ideal that said society should pay to provide basic requirements for those that didn't have an income, mainly at that time, to cater for post war widows.

Now it has become a lifestyle choice which is wrong. People have now associated the types of people portrayed in the tabloid press with welfare and say welfare is wrong. It's not. But how the hell has it morphed into this abortion when its original intentions were to support the widows of the men lost in a war that were defending our rights and our freedom?

[John Galt]

Of course they do, but there whas to be a minimim level for everyone in society. You disagree with this I assume (Doesn't surprise me) and would prefer to see our streets teeming with the starving poor, rampant disease and increased infant mortality I guess?

Please refer HyperD's post

[snaw]

Please refer HyperD's post

Referenced, now please reference mine. I totally agree that system as it stands is way out of whack, and you won't ever find me defending it as it stands.

[John Galt]

Referenced, now please reference mine. I totally agree that system as it stands is way out of whack, and you won't ever find me defending it as it stands.

Fair point - so how would you put it right?

[AlfredJPruffock]

Welfare was an admirable socialist ideal that said society should pay to provide basic requirements for those that didn't have an income, mainly at that time, to cater for post war widows.

Now it has become a lifestyle choice which is wrong. People have now associated the types of people portrayed in the tabloid press with welfare and say welfare is wrong. It's not. But how the hell has it morphed into this abortion when its original intentions were to support the widows of the men lost in a war that were defending our rights and our freedom?

Excellent points.

What is required is what Ronald Reagan described as being Workfare rather then Welfare.

Provided you are able bodied and without income then you must work for Welfare.

Welfare breeds dependency and demotivates,it must never be a lifestyle.

[Phoenix]

Ecellemt points.

What is required is what Ronald Reagan described as being Workfare rather then Welfare.

Provided you are able bodied and without income then you must work for Welfare.

Isn't that how civilisation started?

[snaw]

Fair point - so how would you put it right?

That's a million dollar question ... but implement a system which basically incentivises people to find work, who are capable of doing some, and correctly identifies those who aren't capable and cares for them(Clearly this is being abused as it stands) while providing a minimal level of support while out of work, and which provides everyone an equal opportunity to achieve this.

Plus I'd change the laws on immigrants so you have to have lived here for a reasonable period of time before you're entitled to any of the above.

How we do that is the much tougher question.