Comments on: Workhouses Were Not So Bad After All

By: GuppyNblue

GuppyNblue — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 05:12:25 +0000

This does seem strange even if you give them benefit of the doubt.

“A dietetic analysis of Oliver Twist’s workhouse diet, as well as contemporaneous workhouse menus, allows us to answer the question—did Oliver really need more? …”

Are they kidding? So eating well covers the needs of an orphaned child? They seem to be saying a lot to support just that.

It’s a little a weird to hear modern liberals defend a Victorian institution. Read H. G. Wells’, The Outline of History. Written at the end of the Victorian age, it made a huge impact on progressive thinkers. The strictly secular and global way of viewing the world. Crediting only evolution for our existence. Now thats a time I would expect liberals to be defending, not some suspiciously picked Victorian era of workhouses.

But the whole thing is probably just meant to soften us up for change.

By: cjokry

cjokry — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 04:57:35 +0000

It’s good to know our children’s diets really won’t suffer too much while Obama gets the Greater Depression under way to justify his New New Deal.

I don’t think the report is intentionally pertinent to today’s happenings, coming out of a the British Medical Journal. It’s just another example of someone who makes stuff up for a living being caught having made some stuff up for reasons half personal, half political. Like Michael Moore.

By: Helena

Helena — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:01:07 +0000

“Still, we question the timing of this report.”

Really.

It looks like we are being prepared from all sides.

By: U NO HOO

U NO HOO — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:57:30 +0000

“If your government gives it to you, by definition,” the government can take it away.

By: proreason

proreason — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:50:50 +0000

If your government gives it to you, by definition, it’s a good thing.

At the very least, it’s free!!