tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post7909853771153409943..comments2024-03-08T15:43:20.236+00:00Comments on Keynesian Liberal: Social Security: reversal needed, not just a halt.Peter Wrigleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16481117156930677255noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post-21669447933521401302016-03-26T16:20:22.100+00:002016-03-26T16:20:22.100+00:00No, I think the question of whether to aim for equ...No, I think the question of whether to aim for equality of opportunity or equality of outcome is another debate, one in which I'm very happy to engage with you at some other appropriate time. <br /><br />This issue is one of our attitude to the social security safety-net: whether it is provided relatively generously and as of right to those who, for whatever reason, cannot without help, engage in the norms of society, or whether it is grudgingly provided by self-styled "strivers" to the undeserving they contemptuously regards as "skivers."<br /><br />In my view the Beveridge Report took the former view: that the state should take the lead in attacking the Five Giants of social evil which he identified as ignorance, idleness, squalor, want and illness. These were tackled (in order) by:<br /><br />i) the state provision of free primary and secondary education;<br />ii) the responsibility of the state to try to regulate the economy to achieve full employment;<br />iii) private and social housing;<br />iv) pensions and social security payments;<br />v) a national health service free at the point of use.<br /><br />I think Williams's point is that, especially since 1979 and the Thatcher era, we have concentrated too much on creating a competitive society in which the able and well endowed can prosper, and not enough on "one in which the least economically productive still live in comfort and dignity."<br /><br />Indeed, we have created an atmosphere in which many people believe , mistakenly in my view, that the provision of a generous social security safety-net actually inhibits thrusting endeavour.<br /><br />Peter Wrigleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481117156930677255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post-22199675292150726602016-03-23T12:22:30.523+00:002016-03-23T12:22:30.523+00:00This is really just a question of whether to aim f...This is really just a question of whether to aim for equality to opportunity or equality of outcome, isn't it?<br /><br />(Or rather of which to prioritise, as clearly neither is perfectly attainable).<br /><br />And as such it's one of those fundamental political questions where your answer will depend on your whole world-view. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com