So in times such as these where people have less to give to charity and the charities can't afford to support these people you're fine with them starving?
You can't use that logic around here... the rich kids won't stand for it.
TSR certainly leans to the right... I thought students were usually left wing or was that left behind when they stopped giving grants to working class?
You want to abolish the welfare state? You want to reduce it? Than what system are you going to put in its place? What measures are you going to take to ensure that everyone gets a job? How will you ensure that workers get a pay packet that they can live on without help from the tax payer?
I think the best thing you could say about the welfare state is that it's treating the symptom, rather than the problem - which is state-capitalism. If you got rid of the economic privileges which create large concentrations of wealth then the poor wouldn't need hand outs to survive and the few who would would be able to get them from their friends and family, mutual aid organisations and charities.
I think the best thing you could say about the welfare state is that it's treating the symptom, rather than the problem - which is state-capitalism. If you got rid of the economic privileges which create large concentrations of wealth then the poor wouldn't need hand outs to survive and the few who would would be able to get them from their friends and family, mutual aid organisations and charities.
I believe it's billions. And it's more than what's lost in fraud and error.
Yep.
Taking all six income-related benefits together, there was between £7.52 billion and £12.31 billion left unclaimed in 2009-10; this compared to £40.56 billion that was claimed and represents take-up by expenditure of between about 77 per cent and 84 per cent.
Conflicting definitions. From the Wikipedia page for state capitalism:
Wikipedia page for state capitalism
State capitalism is usually described as an economic system in which commercial (i.e: for-profit) economic activity is undertaken by the state, with management and organization of the means of production in a capitalist manner - maintaining the conditions of wage labor arising from centralized ownership, even if the state is nominally socialist.
Alternatively, state capitalism may be used (sometimes interchangeably with state monopoly capitalism) to describe a system where the state intervenes in the economy to protect and advance the interests of large-scale businesses.
I'm using the second definition. Sorry for the confusion.
So in times such as these where people have less to give to charity and the charities can't afford to support these people you're fine with them starving?
The outcome is not relevant to me.
I don't think you can justify what I view to be an immoral means, regardless of the ends.