Speenhamland

Although other societies in history had tried wealth distribution England in the late seventeen hundreds was the first with a well-documented case of true wealth distribution. The act has come to be known as the Speenhamland project, which was a direct result of poor laws known as the Elizabethan poor laws which also led to many other acts such as the Settlement act, Gilbert’s act, and the Roundsmen system. (Morales 87-91)

To understand the implementation of the Speenhamland project one must understand the history of England during the Elizabethan period. During that time most people were employed as servants or farmers. The number of people who were unemployed was growing at a substantial rate. It was estimated that in rural areas 10% of the population was

The Speenhamland system or any system that guarantees income is the complete opposite of what an economy needs. The system creates four class groups: the under working “beneficiary class”, the overworked “taxpaying class”, the overpaid “tax-avoiding class”, and a class of low income workers that see themselves as “independent” or “self-reliant” taxpayers, but who are in reality receiving significant “aid-in-wages” and “aid-in-life “ benefits. This is a very divisive formula, through which members of each group can point their fingers at one of the other groups. It is a system that encourages the wasteful and inhumane social exclusion of the under working group; a system that denies the economic sovereignty that is integral to citizenship. It is a system that is will lead to the self-destruction of any state.

In the 17th century an understanding came about that Society as a whole had a responsibility for the destitute and the disabled that led to the Poor Law Act in 1601. Overseers of the poor were appointed annually by each Parish Committee they were responsible to ensure the sick, needy poor and aged were assisted either in money or in kind, distribution of which took place in the Vestry of the Parish Church. All records were kept in the Parish Vestry book.(Singman85-98)

Even the author of our text book(Walter Trattner) is obviously a supporter of a guaranteed income system he states that as the system spread it seemed to bring with it higher tax rates, higher prices and caused workers to become lazy due to the fact that income was guaranteed. Trattner continues stating “In Short, Speenhamland was not responsible for the evils attributed to it. If any anything it was a forward-looking measure that provided financial aid to the destitute according to the need as determined by the cost of living and the size of their families.” (Trattner 48-49)

Douglas believes the first implementation was not as successful as it should have been because the system did not take into account all aspects of a workers life such as housing, clothing, healthcare, and even entertainment. Under Douglas’s new pla

Some topics in this essay:
Parish Vestry, Nelson Douglas, Short Speenhamland, , England Elizabethan, Supplement Rankin, Adams Smiths, Russia Cuba, Keith Rankin, Roger Douglas, speenhamland system, speenhamland project, guaranteed income, wealth distribution, tax rates, marginal tax rates, finance minister, compete global, poor laws, minister roger, zealand finance, minister roger douglas, zealand finance minister, finance minister roger,