The competition with other countries like America and Germany influenced our politicians to look deeper into the society and solve the social and economic issues that weakened our nation. First the government was concerned about the healthy workforce and better educated future generation therefore, the Liberals passed Acts for children. The first Act that was passed, was the School Meals Act in 1906 which allowed local authorities to provide needy children with a free daily meal. Local authorities were allowed to raise local tax by half a penny to help fund this scheme. This act was passed to improve health and ensure children were sufficiently educated.
These factors led to a fragile liberal government, with the main threat in my opinion being posed not by the nationalists but the socialists. The PSI was founded in 1895 and soon became a strong threat to the liberal government. They were fiercely opposed to the liberal regime, saying it was a cover for the capitalist exploitation of Italian working classes, and used evidence that wages were still low and hours were still long in comparison to the rest of Western Europe. Also welfare benefits compared unfavourably. This led to strong support of the socialists from working classes, so much so that a relatively new party was winning over 20% of the vote by 1913.
Effectively the act benefited the middle classes, who were now given an electoral voice in parliament, while the working classes were largely ignored, causing widespread anger and resentment for the act, and all those it benefited. The huge number of working classes wanted to be represented, and the act was yet more salt in the wound. If you were to gather up dates for the most widespread Chartist appreciation in Britain and put this on a graph alongside the economies peaks and troughs, the results would no doubt roughly mirror each other. For Chartism excelled during times of economic disturbance, particularly the late 30’s. This ran alongside the blossoming industrialisation of Britain, areas such as Stockport and Cheshire undergoing radical change were often the strongest supports of Chartism.
Before the Liberal Reforms of 1905, poverty was an ever present endemic within the working-class of Britain. The general attitude towards those who suffered from poverty, as defined by ideas of Victorian Liberalism, gave the government little imperative to take any real action against poverty. However, after two major studies on the conditions of England had been conducted by Seebohm Rowntree and Charles Booth, the Liberal government introduced a series reforms aimed at improving the lives of the poor. Naturally there is a degree of importance to these two studies concerning how they led to government awareness of poverty; however a series of events around this era also served as possible catalysts for the introduction of social reforms, for example, the Boer War displayed the impact of poverty on war, which compromised the British concept of imperialism at the time. The main question is to what extent were the social reforms of the Liberal Government between 1905 and 1914 a response to more in depth knowledge about the extent and impact of poverty in British affairs.
Another economic issue that American families face today is being underemployed. Being underemployed is when you only a have part time job(s) or you take positions that only pay minimum wage. In order to feed their families some people are turning to the use of government assistance such as food stamps (SNAP). The United States Department of Agriculture (2012), states that all people who are already receiving food assistance (food stamps) will automatically qualify for free school meals for their children. The school meals help aid the families with
Liberals; 1906-1914 The Liberal Reforms – Points to Note ~ They were an impressive legislative achievement ~ The Liberals were seen to be responding to specifically identified social problems ~ For the first time the state was interfering in matters previously considered to be the duty and responsibility of the individual; the diet and health of children, the standard of living of the aged poor, the levels of wages and hours of adult workers, unemployment. ~ The poor were no longer to be considered as inferior, but were accepted as unfortunate but equal citizens ~ The roles of Asquith, Lloyd George and Churchill need to be noted. Liberal Timeline 1905. December; Balfour’s Govt resigns. 1906.
Not only are there added benefits academically, but the children in full-day kindergarten work better independently which builds good study habits for the future. Although Grace Chen provides may positive points she also gives detail about the negative points too. With the cost of full-day kindergarten being so expensive many schools do not offer this to families as an option. The second article describes how spending money in a child’s early years of education is cheaper then helping a child in later years. Nicholas Johnson examines all the pros and cons of full-day kindergartens.
Do you agree with the view that the Boer war advanced the cause of social reform in Britain? The important factor of this argument is the impact that the Boer war has on social reform. Therefore there is the Boer war, social reform and how they link together. Within source 6, it shows that the “Recruitment for the Second Boer war drew attention to the problem of poverty” as even though the army was most likely desperate for volunteers “almost half the men who volunteered for the army were physically unfit for military service” this links the Boer war and social reform as the physically unfit soldiers drew the governments attention “to help the poor” which was social reform in itself, otherwise “Britain might be unable to defend her Empire adequately in the event of a major war.”. this statement, albeit made almost a century after the events actually happened – but would’ve most likely done research with hindsight added to it- does coincide with source 5, which was fresh information of the time, namely when the reforms were in action.
How successful was the Nazi economic policy? The Nazis had 4 aims/ problems once in power which the economic policy was supposed to be a solution for- the unemployment problem left from the Weimar era and the great depression, the lack of military forces and equipment available after the restrictions of Versailles, the lack of self-sufficiency of Germany as a country and they needed to provide a better quality of life for all Germans to ensure full support for the Fuhrer. I will be arguing that the economic policy was an overall success, but with areas of no improvement. Unemployment was tackled first, in a variety of different ways. Public expenditure and investments were increased in order to renew an industrial and business confidence in the economy.
Between the years of 1906-1914 many Liberal Social reforms were introduced to try and improve the lives of the poor. In the late 19th century and early 20th century there were high levels of poverty due to malnutrition and disease. Previous to the reforms the Government had taken a ‘laissez faire’ approach in the running of the country. There are many factors to be examined when trying to understand why there was sudden change of view from the government on the poor of society and why these Liberal Social Reforms were introduced. One of the possible factors was the genuine concern that they felt towards the poor.