The Changes Introduced by the Labour Governments
Some of the changes that the labour government introduced between
1945-51 were very profound. For instance the changes that were made by
the government to tackle the five giant evils of society. The
Government wanted to tackle Squalor, want, illness, disease and
idleness. The introduction of the NHS was hugely profound. In 1945-6
Aneurin Bevan accepted the fundamental principle of a free and
universal medical service, directly financed by the state. This change
made by the labour government was revolutionary because it provided
medical help to all people that was not possible before. It enabled
the poor to be able to be treated for a disease that was not possible
before because they could not afford be privately treated.
There were other changes that the government had made that were seen
as very profound. After the war the British public had lost no fewer
then 700,000 homes and much of the existing stock was damaged as well.
In 1947 a higher standard of council houses had been provided for the
working class. Also a change made by labour was the introduction of
new towns in the countryside, such a Crawley and Basildon. With these
new towns created it relieved the pressure on great cities like
London. In total between 1945-51 labour built over one million new
houses, together with half a million temporary houses and as well as
this repairs on thousands of homes damaged in the war. These changes
made by labour on housing were reasonable but were not seen as hugely
profound.
Labour made less profound changes to education in Britain. Labour did
increase the budget for education considerably, and the school leaving
age was raised to 15. However no real debate on the aims and
organisation of education really took place. So the changes made in
education between 1945-51 suggest that the changes of the labour
government were not that profound.
However the national insurance act of 1946 was a hugely profound
change made by the labour government.
In recent times the in the UK we have seen the more frequent use of
The author also briefly demonstrates in Chapter 11 how healthcare programs fail the poor. She mentions the high medical costs of antirejection drugs and how Medicare refuses to cover costs after a year. This is not a main argument of the chapter but an important one. The goal of Chapters 10
Effectiveness of the Liberal Reforms Between 1900 and 1914 the British liberal government introduced the largest series of reforms ever completed by a government till that date. Prior to these reforms it was not considered the duty of the government to provide any form of relief for the poor and when the reforms were passed they were viewed as radical and amazing. Many conservatives considered them unenforceable and many radicals considered them far too small. Yet how effective were these reforms? Prior to the reforms the only relief for children was either from charities or the workhouse, and many liberals claimed that the workhouses were worse than the conditions that many children had previously lived in.
The Liberal Adoption of a Policy of Social Reform in the Period 1906-1914 There are many issues to examine when answering the question of what prompted the Social reforms of 1906-1914 such as the changing ideas of the British public and national efficiency which was decreasing. In the period of 1906-1914, the social reform acts were passed in parliament by the Liberal government under Herbert Asquith PM, Lloyd-George MP and Winston Churchill MP. These acts laid the foundations of a basic welfare state on which our current welfare state was built from. These acts provided basic support for mothers and children, the old, sick and the unemployed.
People may depict “The Change” by Tony Hoagland as a racist poem due to the authors’ choice of words he used to describe Serena Williams. Words like “big black girl” (line 10), and calling Serena “Vondella Aphrodite” as if “black” people have ridiculous or “outrageous” names as Tony Hoagland puts it (line 12). This poem has nothing to do with racism and every to do with culture, human nature, and the media. As humans of different backgrounds and cultures, we tend to root for our own kind. A great example would be the Olympics where people living in the United States of America like rooting for their nationality or race even if they are nowhere near their country. For instance, a European in the United States would
roots and is by no means as socialist as it was. But is it still
Why Labour lost in 1951 is a highly debated topic within the world of politics. To understand why Labour lost in 51 it is important to understand some of the issues Labour had to face during their time in government from 1945-51. One of the major issues Labour had to face was how to rebuild Britain following the end of the Second World War, it also had to face the decolonisation of the British Empire and the loss of key figures within the party due to age and illness by 1951. After researching the topic thoroughly, I Would argue the main reason Labour lost in 51 was because the government of the loss of a number of major political figures including the Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin.
How the U.K. Labour Market Has Changed Over The Last 20 Years The different types of Unemployment There are many different types of unemployment, these are: frictional unemployment, structural unemployment, seasonal unemployment, classical unemployment, and demand deficient unemployment. Frictional unemployment is unemployment for a short duration of time as workers move from one job to another. Over the last 20 years information has improved and people are more aware of the availability of better paid job, promotions etc and hence they may be moving form job to job more often hence increasing temporary frictional employment. Structural unemployment is caused by a lack of capital for goods and services in the economy or a particular sector.
She demonstrated the inaccuracies and restrictions that each individual program provided to individuals who were not always poor enough to have access to them. She also compared immunization rates among poor minorities in Chicago with immunization records in Third World nations, which illuminated the weaknesses and lack of effectiveness of preventive measures across our nation based on the daunting facts in the city of Chicago. Preventive health was the most severe thing she reported as more care and resources were provided to individuals in their deathbeds instead of simple proactive measures that could prevent diseases and reduce overall cost. Across each example she was able to demonstrate the four separate levels of inadequate health care that are major determinants of poor health for many African American
There are couple liberal reforms of 1960-1974 that succeeded and have endured to present day. There is the Medical Care Act of 1965 that provides Medicare and Medicaid, which we still have around today. The policies put into place by the Immigration and Nationality Act, with some modifications, are the same ones governing U.S. immigration in the early 21st century. There are a couple liberal reforms of 1960-1974 that failed to achieve their goals. Most of Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty programs failed to achieve their goals. There was not enough spending that lead to a claim of victory. The programs were not only inadequately funded but also hastily planned. They did not focus on reforms that would ensure adequately paying jobs for all.
Medicine and other health services are expensive without these important conveniences that many people lack. These people have been “falling through the cracks” in U.S.
Does every citizen have the right to have access to basic health care in the wealthiest country of the world? The current healthcare system in America has many inequalities in the access, quality, and cost of healthcare among different economic groups of people. In addition, it would be more beneficial to give citizens access to preventative care that could avoid health issues by addressing them early on, while they are still manageable. Siegfried Karsten (1995), professor of economics at West Georgia College, brings up a valid argument in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology when he questions whether “society really can afford not to cover all people…..is it economically and politically rational to continue to have millions of people develop serious health problems, at great costs to society……because they are financially unable to obtain the necessary medical care when it does them the most good?” (p.138). The cost of healthcare in America is a deterrent to lower income groups who cannot afford insurance, or even if they have insurance, hesitate to seek treatment due to deductibles and copays.
Through the years of 1875 to 1900, there was not much of a difference in successful organized labor, however the strikes and movements that occurred in this time period had a major impact on improvement of the future labor policies that was soon to come. The ideas that formed in these years eventually lead to the development of new and more successful labor movements of years to come.
In conclusion, the ultimate significance to this type of work is to improve the quality of healthcare in these extremely impoverished nations. This argument is represented in Tracy Kidder’s Mountains Beyond Mountains, Monte Leach’s “Ensuring Health Care as a Global Human Right”, and Darshark Sanghavi’s “Is it Cost Effective to Treat the World’s Poor.” The idea that universal healthcare is a human right is argued against in Michael F. Cannon’s “A “Right” to health care?” Cannon claims that it would not work, and fills the holes that the other authors leave in their arguments. All of these articles share the same ultimate goal, and that is to provide every individual with adequate health care, and to not let so many people die from things that could easily have been prevented or treated.
Those who are at the bottom 20 percent don’t have access to things like health care and proper education. Health care is a major issue in most cities in America. While watching the movie “Poor America” there was a scene when the people making the movie decided to film outside a center where doctors and dentists would be performing free services. The line was extremely long and people would be camped outside just so they could see a doctor. Many people who were there had serious injuries and sicknesses and hadn’t seen a doctor or a dentist in a very long time. One gentleman in particular was so sick that the doctors strongly suggested he go to the emergency room, that his sickens could be fatal. However at the end the gentlemen refused to go to the emergency because the medical bill would be extremely