The welfare trait by Adam Perkins

[dylanredefined]

I imagine it's something like "get rid of all the welfare and let the degenerate poors die in their own filth". They seem to forget that it's been done before, and yet for some reason their forebears didn't stick with it.

Take benefits off the poor so they work harder.
While the rich need tax breaks to encourage them to create more wealth

Which has turned out to be rubbish when ever it was tried.

 

[KittyJ]

I don't think the fact that there are unanswered questions is a meaningful distinction to make between hard and soft science, because all the sciences will have them, even ones that aren't politically contentious. It's a product of the fact that even theories supported by a wealth of evidence are necessarily incomplete and provisional. The definition of hard science involves rigour, not infallibility.

Okay, I'm inclined to agree. I'll go along with Karl Popper's "verisimilitude" notion. Yes, science isn't infallible, but it's the best we got.

 

[KittyJ]

Okay, I'm inclined to agree. I'll go along with Karl Popper's "verisimilitude" notion. Yes, science isn't infallible, but it's the best we got.

In social sciences, however, we use inferential testing, too, which lends validity and credibility to the quantitative studies. But I would argue that social sciences also needs to accommodate the qualitative accounts of social groups, too. Fact/meaning distinction and so forth.

 

[KittyJ]

So what is this loons idea of a cure and when will it be inflicted or is it too mad for the tories to even dare?

His "cure" is the dismantling of social security to stop poor people breeding. But the Tories are already onto it, tax credits only payable to two children, for example, and the wider welfare "reforms" = cuts, cuts cuts

 

[KittyJ]

Excellent group here, btw, good discussion

 

[NoXion]

His "cure" is the dismantling of social security to stop poor people breeding. But the Tories are already onto it, tax credits only payable to two children, for example, and the wider welfare "reforms" = cuts, cuts cuts

Cunts cunts cunts

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Excellent group here, btw, good discussion

I feel duty-bound to warn you to avoid any discussion on the cheese/beans beans/cheese baked potato ordering problem.

 

[KittyJ]

The different interpretations all produce the same predictions, which means it's not possible to distinguish between them experimentally, which in turn puts the choice of interpretation more in the domain of philosophy than of science.

It's not even the domain of philosophy: it's pure politics

 

[KittyJ]

Cunts cunts cunts

I nearly said that too. But you did it better ;-)

 

[KittyJ]

Take benefits off the poor so they work harder.
While the rich need tax breaks to encourage them to create more wealth

Which has turned out to be rubbish when ever it was tried.

It's the harsh and punitive regimes of the past - like the Poor Law Amendment act 1834 designed by the liberals and Tories - that taught us precisely why we NEED a welfare state

 

[KittyJ]

Reading the various articles and reviews around Perkins's book, I'm reminded of 2 well-written, well-argued books:

André Pichot's "The Pure Society - From Darwin to Hitler", and the effortless flair with which the author - from the perspective of a historian of science - demolishes the bases upon which "racial science" and eugenicist thinking are founded.
Kenan Malik's "Strange Fruit", which does similar from more of a philosophical perspective.

Both give the lie to Perkins's "science".

I've not read either, but will do so now

 

[butchersapron]

The different interpretations all produce the same predictions, which means it's not possible to distinguish between them experimentally, which in turn puts the choice of interpretation more in the domain of philosophy than of science.

Depends what you mean by philosophy. I can't see any use here other than a demotic everyday use meaning individual and subjective rather than technical. In which case, it's not needed - certainly not in a sort of border discussion.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The different interpretations all produce the same predictions, which means it's not possible to distinguish between them experimentally, which in turn puts the choice of interpretation more in the domain of philosophy than of science.

More in the domain of allowing your own preconceptions, prejudices and preferences (and we all have them, even the most non "value-laden" of us) to inform your choice.

 

[ViolentPanda]

His "cure" is the dismantling of social security to stop poor people breeding. But the Tories are already onto it, tax credits only payable to two children, for example, and the wider welfare "reforms" = cuts, cuts cuts

There are two main ways that states can "stop poor people breeding".
The first is coercion, as seen in the latter stages of India's sterilisation programme, and China's one child policy.
The second is to provide a generational brake through education and the ability to "get on" in life, something very obvious with regard to later post-war social democracy and the consequences it had for educational attainment.

One gets the feeling that the neoliberals - by which I mean the Tories and their rightist friends in the Labour Party - are preparing the ground for the former, even though so many of the fuck-knuckles benefited from the latter.

 

[KittyJ]

The different interpretations all produce the same predictions, which means it's not possible to distinguish between them experimentally, which in turn puts the choice of interpretation more in the domain of philosophy than of science.

That's a cop out, since the interpretations came from the realm of physics and were nowt to do with philosophers at the time

 

[NoXion]

That's a cop out, since the interpretations came from the realm of physics and were nowt to do with philosophers at the time

If they can't be experimentally distinguished, then how is it physics rather than metaphysics? Last time I checked, metaphysics was a branch of philosophy.

A more complete theory might be able to shed light on the matter, but we're still waiting on that one.

 

[two sheds]

Doesn't the Standard Model say that, if you can't experimentally verify a particular theory, there's no use in suggesting it?

 

[malatesta32]

so when i next go to sign on, shall i take a copy with me?
DWP: mr malatesta, what have you done to find work this week?
mal: i'm sorry, i am genetically predestined to be unemployed. i read it an article.

 

[KittyJ]

If they can't be experimentally distinguished, then how is it physics rather than metaphysics? Last time I checked, metaphysics was a branch of philosophy.

A more complete theory might be able to shed light on the matter, but we're still waiting on that one.

The physics community proposed the interpretations, not the metaphysics community

 

[KittyJ]

so when i next go to sign on, shall i take a copy with me?
DWP: mr malatesta, what have you done to find work this week?
mal: i'm sorry, i am genetically predestined to be unemployed. i read it an article.

Of course that's one major flaw in the antiwelfare rhetoric. How can we make people who are unemployed because of "flaws" responsible for being without work? We can't. Yet basically what is being proposed is behaviour modification

 

[KittyJ]

Doesn't the Standard Model say that, if you can't experimentally verify a particular theory, there's no use in suggesting it?

No, that was the old school positivist model. Nowadays we hav a critical realist model - see Einsten and relativity , for example

 

[KittyJ]

More in the domain of allowing your own preconceptions, prejudices and preferences (and we all have them, even the most non "value-laden" of us) to inform your choice.

WE are all value-laden. The best way of dealing with that is 1. to declare your values and research interests 2. ensure your methodology is as rigorous, objective and bias-free as possible

 

[nino_savatte]

WE are all value-laden. The best way of dealing with that is 1. to declare your values and research interests 2. ensure your methodology is as rigorous, objective and bias-free as possible

In the social sciences and humanities, this is called 'self-reflexivity' (qv. Bourdieu and Wacquant). In quantitative research (and polling), I don't see much evidence of self-reflexivity tbh. I may be wrong, but I'm basing that my personal experience.

 

[NoXion]

The physics community proposed the interpretations, not the metaphysics community

So physicists never do metaphysics?

 

[alcopop]

Of course that's one major flaw in the antiwelfare rhetoric. How can we make people who are unemployed because of "flaws" responsible for being without work? We can't. Yet basically what is being proposed is behaviour modification

What's wrong with behaviour modification?

 

[Libertad]

What's wrong with behaviour modification?

We could use you as a subject. You up for it?

 

[BigTom]

What's wrong with behaviour modification?

In the case of unemployment, the big issue is that there are not enough jobs, modifying jobseeker's behaviour doesn't affect how many jobs are available, so doesn't tackle the major problem.
Also this Perkins idiot appears to be saying that there is a genetic factor to unemployment, which again, behaviour modification doesn't affect. I think this is the point KittyJ was making, he proposes a problem, but the solutions he looks for don't solve that problem. They do however fit nicely with the current RW ideology on unemployed people, which is that it is their fault, a matter of personal failing, that they are unemployed.

 

[malatesta32]

The physics community proposed the interpretations, not the metaphysics community

can there be a metaphysical community? or are they only accessible through astral projection?

 

[ViolentPanda]

WE are all value-laden. The best way of dealing with that is 1. to declare your values and research interests 2. ensure your methodology is as rigorous, objective and bias-free as possible

Agreed!
Unfortunately, some people don't bother to do so, or actively seek to avoid doing so.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What's wrong with behaviour modification?

It depends on what form it takes. Behaviour modification embraces a broad spectrum from CBT to NLP to aversion therapy. I'm sure you'd be upset if the standard behaviour mod specs included wiring your soft bits to a truck battery...