Welfare - are you for or against it and why?

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Those who really truly need it, ought to get it. Those who just want it because they are very lazy, ought not to.

OK. Who decides who is deserving, you?

The notion of "the deserving poor" was very popular amongst the bourgeois of the Victorian era. It is based largely on the protestant work ethic,which came mainly from the Calvinist notion of predestination.IE being prosperous shows you are saved. Being poor shows you are damned. Hence only bad/lazy/ feckless people are poor.

I worked in welfare for over 25 years. I dealt mainly with the unemployed, the sick, homeless youth and refugees. I have never seen any evidence to support the stereotypes of welfare recipients.

The Australian Social Security Act has some very draconian punitive sections. It was part of my job to make decisions under the terms of the act and to impose penalties (Eg no welfare for 6 weeks) I hated being put in the position of judging people's "deservedness".Managed to avoid imposing penalties mostly, by a combination of lateral thinking and creative report writing .


Within my moral sensibilities,my position was and remains; there is one and only one criterium for welfare:NEED.

My attitude and modus was one of the dichotomy commonly found in welfare: one is either a bleeding heart or a complete arsehole.I did not notice any middle ground.Eventually I burnt out, and began turning into an arsehole. That's when I retired.


I guess Void and I disagree yet again.