Laissez Faire Lifestyle

This sample essay on Laissez Faire Lifestyle reveals arguments and important aspects of this topic. Read this essay’s introduction, body paragraphs and the conclusion below.

100 years ago 3/4 of the population in Britain were merely working class, 1/3 were living in severe poverty. Life expectancy was short and infant mortality rates were absurd, in Scotland 13 out of every 100 babies would die before they reached the age of one. The government and many rich, prosperous people believed in ‘Self help not State help’, many possessed the saying of ‘heaven helps those who help themselves.

‘ Overall, in their opinion it was up to the individuals to look after themselves.

Many things contributed to the Government finally realising that Britain was at a stage where state intervention was greatly needed. The colossal divide in social classes in the 1800s to early 1900s resulting in many people falling in to great poverty highlighting the lack of efficiency in the Governments laissez-faire ideology. The findings of Booth and Rowntree lead to a national uproar at the high number of people in Britain living without a decent house and enough money to feed a family for a week.

By the year 1914, the British Government had abandoned the policy of laissez-faire to a certain extent. David Lloyd George, or otherwise known as ‘The Father of the Welfare State’ wanted to enforce state intervention to such an extent that it would provide the country with enough help to create a healthy Britain. His initial plan included a state funded National Health Service (NHS), state funded education, unemployment benefit and a state pension.

Get quality help now

writer-Charlotte

Verified

Proficient in: Economics

4.7 (348)

“ Amazing as always, gave her a week to finish a big assignment and came through way ahead of time. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

He called this ‘The Welfare State’.

Laissez Faire Lifestyle

So why did the British Government resort to abandoning the policy of laissez-faire? The Boer War of 1899-1902 proved the British National Efficiency to be extremely low. Over half of the applicants who seeked work in the army were rejected simply because they were not fit enough. Many people highlighted the fact that if there were no fit or healthy soldiers then there was no protection for Britain as a country or their colonies. Furthermore, if the British workforce were unhealthy then the trade and exports would decrease because of an insufficient output of goods.

In January 1906, the Liberal party won 400 seats in the House of Commons, thereby a majority and gaining power. The Liberals strongly believed in state intervention and with Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman in power till 1908 and thereafter Herbert Henry Asquith, they passed various reforms between 1906-1914, which did in a way remove the old laissez-faire ideology. These liberal reforms targeted many areas of society, but in particular one group that was helped a great deal were the children.

Between 1906-1914 the Government passed various policies that would help the growing concern in the deterioration of children’s health and education. In 1906 the School Meals Act was passed, this gave the local councils the opportunity to provide free school meals to children who were in need. However, parents able to afford to pay, were expected to do so. A lot of local authorities failed to undertake this idea, consequently in 1914 the government made the provision of school meals compulsory.

In regards to their health, the government passed the 1907 Medical Inspection in Schools Act allowing children’s health to be monitored in school, the dejected reports sent in by doctors thus allowed the local authorities to set up clinics in school in 1912, allowing doctors to regularly check on the health of children. These reforms helped the government to help the people and progress gradually from laissez-faire. However, the cost at times was extortionate- it was easy enough to identify the illnesses but providing the medicine needed was costly.

By 1908 various people had recognised that the major causes of poverty were low wages, unemployment or irregular earnings. Others recognised that there was a major damage to health through long working hours and the working conditions, and so after 1908 the government introduced various state intervention policies to help those who were employed to have improved standards and in 1908 the working day for a coal miner was cut to 8 hours, in certain sweated trades the trade board set up boards to control wages and working conditions.

And so, these acts passed to help the employed and unemployed were another sign of the British Government abandoning their laissez-faire policy and taking a step forward to state intervention. In 1908 the old age pension scheme was set up. This policy was yet again another policy that had been influenced by the ideas and findings of Charles Booth. He, alongside others had stressed the importance in the welfare of the elderly people of Britain for many years. When in 1908 the pensions were made available, they were only given to those over the age of 70 and to whom the government means testers felt were the most ‘deserving’.

Although this scheme was most definitely state intervention and not laissez-faire it was certainly not generous. It cost the British Government i? 8 million to provide for 668000 people, which helped to add to the budget crisis of 1909. it was not as successful as the other schemes introduced in other aspects of society as the budget was too low and the age limit too high in accordance to the lower life expectancy at that time. Hence, by gathering all of the policies and acts above, which targeted all areas and problems in British society at the time, the British Government had abandoned the policy of laissez-faire to a certain extent

However, the introduction of a welfare state and state intervention, with the abandonment of laissez-faire has not occurred wholly. A welfare state did not fully exist yet and the system was still showing signs of laissez-faire. There were still various problems that did not allow laissez-faire to be fully abandoned. The liberal reforms did not create a full Welfare State, this was because of various reasons. To start with although the government was providing health insurance for sick workers, it still did not provide the country with a National Health Service.

Secondly, the services provided to ill workers and unemployed workers did not cover their family and so left them without any benefit whatsoever. Furthermore, the pension scheme was insufficient and didn’t target the majority of elderly people in urgent help. Finally, another major problem was that the unemployment did not cover the bulk of problems raised by those in need. The failure to fully abandon the laissez-faire ideology was also partly because of the mixture of opinions within the House of Commons and also the general public.

Many people favoured the Liberal Reforms and the desertion of laissez-faire, for example the Labour Party, the working class and the middle class (who shared mixed views). However, there was also various opposition who were in favour, for obvious reasons of laissez-faire. This opposition was the Conservative Party and the upper class that didn’t see a problem with laissez-faire as the problem of poverty and ill health did not really ever involve them, and if it did they could afford the doctors bills.

The upper classes were also basically excluded from the liberal reforms because most of the policies introduced did not effect their lifestyle. To conclude, the British Government had only abandoned the laissez-faire policy by 1914 to a certain extent. By 1914, I feel that the Liberals had created a series of stepping-stones and foundations on which they could eventually build up a full welfare state. They had introduced various acts that brought state help along to the children, the elderly, the employed, the unemployed, the sick and the needy.

However the state help provided by the British Government did not cover everyone in the country, people were excluded from the benefits (the prosperous) and therefore were still living by the old laissez-faire policy. The acts and policies introduced although bringing along various good points and benefits did come with a variety of problems that needed to be solved along with budget problems. And so, overall the British government still had various problems and issues to resolve before they could fully abandon the laissez-faire policy and take on Lloyd George’s long needed ideological policy of ‘The Welfare State. ‘