OPINION

Are There No Workhouses?

Written by Dave Nalle
Published December 30, 2004

With the holiday season you're likely to have heard the line from Dickens' Christmas Carol at least once this month. You know, when the charity fundraisers come to Scrooge's office looking for a handout for the needy and Scrooge responds grufly with "Are there no prisons... and the Union workhouses, are they still in operation?" Referencing the way in which the early Victorians dealt with the problems of homelessness, debt and unemployment.

Dickens uses this as an example of Scrooge's miserly inhumanity and lack of charity. The fundraisers visiting him are embodiments of the liberal movement which was just catching on at that time, and Scrooge the symbol of the harsh old system liberalism would eventually do away with. And there's no question that the prisons, almshouses, poorhouses and other 'charitable' institutions of that era were horrible places which we're well rid of. No one has seriously considered returning to that sort of system because of the evil reputation which still lingers from that time, but perhaps it's sensible this Christmas season to look at the possibilities of a reinvention of the concept of the Victorian workhouse for the modern era.

Workhouses were the Victorian way of dealing with the poor, homeless and unemployed. Their equivalent of today's guys on street corners with signs saying "will work for food". If you were indigent and could not provide for yourself or get a job, you were taken care of by state-sponsored charities. They would clothe you (in a nice warm wool uniform), feed you three meals a day, and house you (in dormitories segregated by age and gender). To cover the expense of these services you were put to work in a Workhouse doing relatively unskilled and not terribly physical labor - basically the kind of work we're farming out to 12 year olds in Indonesia and Malaysia today. Under this system there was no tax burden for welfare, no problem with unemployment and no one starving or wandering homeless in the streets.

On paper it looks like a fantastic solution to the problems of social welfare. The catch was in the way that the system was administered. Because the standards set for workhouses were very basic and government oversight was minimal, they were a way for operators to take both government money and money earned from the labor of the workers and pocket as much of it as they could skim. By providing bare minimum sustenance and shelter and working the laborers as hard as possible there was real money to be made by those at the top. These abuses could have easily been resolved by a relatively modest increase in government oversight and enforcement, but by the time the government in England was willing to address these issues the system had already gotten such a bad reputation that they ended up doing away with it instead, and because of that reputation no one has been willing to look at the concept or anything even vaguely similar for more than a century.

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Dave Nalle has been a magazine editor, freelance writer, capitol hill staffer, game designer and taught college history for many years. He is a Liberty Republican and former Libertarian. He now designs fonts for a living and lives with his family and pets just outside Austin. You can find his writings on politics and culture at Republic of Dave and works on designs and fonts at The Scriptorium.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Are There No Workhouses?
Published: December 30, 2004
Type: Opinion
Section: Politics
Writer: Dave Nalle
Dave Nalle's BC Writer page
Dave Nalle's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Dave Nalle
All Politics Articles
Dave Nalle's personal weblog
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — August 17, 2005 @ 17:42PM — Fan of Gonzo [URL]

Hey, Gonzo Marx is right, this article is more relevant today than ever before. A real, humane solution to poverty and homelessness!

FOG

#2 — December 23, 2005 @ 23:13PM — Dave Nalle [URL]

Relevant in August and even more relevant today when it's a year old and still just as valid for this holiday season as it was for the last.

I actually went to a performance of Oliver today at a local theater and it reminded me of this article during the scene in the foundling home and with the street arabs working for Fagin.

The problems of poverty were so much greater in Dickens England than they were today, yet they managed to find solutions which required minimal government intrusion and were potentially humane - had they been managed less corruptly.

It may seem backwards, but perhaps we could learn something from that past culture.

Dave

#3 — December 24, 2005 @ 08:30AM — Christopher Rose [URL]

There's also the issue that most people simply wouldn't co-operate with such a scheme, especially in such an excessively individualised country as the USA. I doubt that would even work in Europe, Dave, where we still generally believe that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the individual.

#4 — December 24, 2005 @ 11:37AM — Dave Nalle [URL]

And I agree with the rights of the individual being paramount in a free society, but the workhouse concept can work within that context, if as I suggest in the article, participation is on an at will basis. You would always have the option to leave the system, receive no public assistance and sink or swim on your own.

Dave

#5 — December 24, 2005 @ 12:14PM — gonzo marx

until yer busted for "vagrancy" under your plan, eh Mr Nalle?

as long as Profit is involved for corporate structure you will have abuses....check the history of work programs in our prison system...many instances of abuse...not quite on the Dickensian scale, but still there

there are some possibilities in this Concept, i just cannot see it working as long as Corporate culture is allowed to be in charge...since Profit is their only motivation rather than the welfare of those Involved...far too easy for a "company store" type scam where these poor folks can never get themselves out of Debt to the "system" and essentially become indentured servants to "the Company"

does anyone else but me see the Irony of the same person writing this piece AND the Santa Claus piece at the same time?

could just be me

Excelsior!

#6 — December 24, 2005 @ 12:46PM — Dave Nalle [URL]

until yer busted for "vagrancy" under your plan, eh Mr Nalle?

At which point you'd be given three hots and a cot, medical care and a roof over your head for six months 'recovery' which would include drying out and detoxing, after which you'd be free to try again.

as long as Profit is involved for corporate structure you will have abuses....check the history of work programs in our prison system...many instances of abuse...not quite on the Dickensian scale, but still there

I'm certainly no fan of private prison management, which has a dismal record, but private charities have a much better record, and they'd be in the lead role here.

there are some possibilities in this Concept, i just cannot see it working as long as Corporate culture is allowed to be in charge...since Profit is their only motivation rather than the welfare of those Involved...far too easy for a "company store" type scam where these poor folks can never get themselves out of Debt to the "system" and essentially become indentured servants to "the Company"

This is only because you think that businesses are inherently evil, when that's really not the case.

does anyone else but me see the Irony of the same person writing this piece AND the Santa Claus piece at the same time?

You think Santa would not endorse a humane system to provide support for the most needy in society?

Dave

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/23757)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments