Paid for by
whom? I know that businesses would have complained vocally if they were
expected to pay, so this must be akin to maternity leave and be refundable by
the state. I have a lot to say about the value of charity, and the basic
conclusion is that it is less valuable than state aid, which is universal and
better targeted at where there is real need. If the Conservatives really
understood the problems (there can be no doubt that this policy is motivated by
a genuine desire to help) they would be putting state money into helping the
poor, rather than dismantling universal state mechanisms.
Since
there’s so little to say directly about this policy, let’s consider why people
feel the need to volunteer. Is it because of such obvious deprivation and need
around them? Maybe it’s because so much work nowadays is mind-numbing and
soul-destroying. Perhaps the Conservatives should offer to remove the need to volunteer.
If you work all day just to make money for someone else, and your product is
pointless tat, you are going to need fulfilment elsewhere in life. A lot of the
modern economy is a merry-go-round of demand for products that only have value
because of advertising allowing people to make money to spend on products they
only want because of advertising. If this policy is about helping people to
feel fulfilled, there are far bigger issues to address.
Some estimates have put the
cost to the economy at £24bn, with a cost of more than
£1bn directly to government. If government is to fund all volunteering, it will
foot the full £24bn bill. I don’t believe that figure, but it shows the scale
of this promise.
No comments:
Post a Comment