This article was published on the goodenoughcaring.com homepage on March 5th, 2010
Forgive this crude play on a tired old headline. It is a reaction to the BBC's broadcasting on February 15th,
( http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/2/hi/uk_news/education/8513340.stm )
of a report about a research study carried out by the Sutton Trust which found after looking at the results of vocabulary tests given to 12.500 British children that those from the poorest homes are almost a year behind middle class pupils by the time they start school. Whatever all this means – after all such studies are loaded towards the cultural values of the “haves” rather than the “have nots” - we wonder how many more research studies are needed to tell us that children who live in poverty are bequeathed failure at school, defeat in what is called the “world of work”, and life long poor physical and psychological health. All this is known, so why spend money on more research about it ? Let’s spend time on working out how we go about redistributing wealth. This is easier said than done, but no human being is worth, let’s say 10 times as much as the poorest. Should any person be worth any more than another ? If as adults we conscientiously address our responsibility to protect and nurture all children then surely each of us would be prepared to give up income she or he does not require in order to make sure that all children have what they need to flourish. When fair minded people who are not rich, but who know they could exist quite adequately on less than they have, think about such a commitment they may feel a moral compunction towards it but they may also be fearful of it. "What if," they ask, "we do this and then we fall upon hard times ? Who will protect and look after us ?" Such a poignantly ironic question. We know the answer we ought to be able to give.Other than those who suffer so wretchedly from poverty in all or any of its aspects, the people we should perhaps worry most for, and about, are the excessively avariciously powerful and wealthy. Surely it is not healthy to be the way they are. These people need help. Thought needs to be given as to how we can best support them in addressing their problems. Still, even if we knew how to redistribute wealth effectively, we may have to accept that those with no experience of having anything will need a period of adjustment to spend as unwisely as we, “the haves” did in recent years. This jumbled collection of thoughts and statements is not altogether naïve, yet it would be easy to become cynical about its chances of being taken up seriously, and so, decide to do nothing. The redistribution of wealth is not a simple exercise but someone – perhaps one or more of us - needs to start to consider it seriously if we are to do the very best we can to make sure all children grow up healthily. This is not an argument for an absolute answer. Every human being is unique but we are left with the pluralism and the conflict of freedom and equality. How long can we wait before we begin to confront this problem? What do we wish for our children ? We may have to acknowledge that freedom and equality are not necessarily harmonious, but somewhere along their continuum a choice should be made. As one kind of start we would truly welcome comments and ideas about this. (Posted, 5th March, 2010).
Comments
Jeremy Millar comments, “ I concur completely. I have a regular rant against 'research into the bleeding obvious' and encourage the students to spot it. my grandfather was a mill owner but ran a workers cooperative so i have been raised in the knowledge that other forms of capitalist endeavour can work. there was an interesting prog on radio 4 regarding john lewis in this respect. also I have an alternative solution to the bank meltdown. sadly too late to impliment as the government bailed the banks out. Anyway what the government could have done was bought off the population’s credit card and personal loan debt. They could have included mortgage for those facing repossession and the debt would have been repaid by individuals over 20 years at a 1% rate of interest. This could have been done through income tax. The government would have then been able to do future investment planning on a secured additional income. The banks would have got their money back. The populace would be solvent and able to start consuming again. Obviously this is just like raising income tax but at least it would make the people feel better rather than disillusioned and angry with the whole system.”
Iain Sharpe writes that “it may be true that studies are loaded towards the cultural values of the haves rather than the have nots, but one step towards giving the have nots a better chance is to make sure they have the knowledge, language and understanding, including vocabulary to challenge the haves.”
Mark Smith comments "I'm not going to disagree with a word of that. I regularly get a niggling voice of conscience questioning whether I should do a Bob Holman (and just as regularly come up with reasons/excuses as to why I don't). Are you aware of Wilkinson and Pickett's book, 'The Spirit Level'? Have a look at www.equalitytrust.org.uk/ “
No comments:
Post a Comment