I am overcome by simultaneous confusions of bafflement, disgust and anger at the news that as a result of the recession there are now families struggling even to afford basic necessities.
The reason for my bafflement arises from how this can be allowed to even happen, in this supposedly more enlightened modern age in which we are supposedly living in. It is clear that the current levels of social provision for those out of work are simply not enough for those with families to care for. Hell, it’s stressful enough managing my own budget and I only have my own mouth to worry about.
Of course people should not be dependent upon benefits and hand-outs, but in the current economic condition there is simply no other option for many people. The job market has now become so stunted that it is beyond a joke; as more businesses go under and more people are laid-off from their work, the competition becomes fiercer and fiercer. It is clear that there is no longer sufficient available work to go around and employers are either unable themselves to recruit any more, or in some cases are happy to sit back and enjoy their own new found prosperity in being able to be even more picky than normal in their selections.
For all of its promises, it is doubtful as to how much is going to change after the recent G20 summit in London. They may have pledged $1trillion to the IMF and world bank, but there is little said in the way of where this money is going to be coming from. Why was the provision of work not discussed in greater detail? Government provided work would give people the means to support themselves with the two-fold effect that the government itself would be generating extra income for itself in order to manage its own rising debts. Would not nationalisation of key industires – public services, utilities, the banks, etc. be an effective means to this end? This was the tactic used during the Great Depression, and I see no reason why it should not be employed now.