Talk:Poor Relief Act 1601

message: wiki is not real facts i wrote this to prove that you can write absolute untrue rubbish on here so never use wiki!!!!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.194.173 (talk) 12:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your comment. While it is true that random editors can add nonsense to articles they are often spotted and removed within a few minutes. You may note the time difference between your comment and mine. Road Wizard (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliability

message: This paritcular section reads oddly at the moment. It appears to relate to a short time-span (1819-20 or possibly the period c. 1810-early 1830s) in the period when the Old Poor Law was in operation, but doesn't say so explicitly and thus creates the impression that fear of unrest was the driving force behind changes in the Old Poor Law. Norvo (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section Headed 'Unrest' 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Act for the Relief of the Poor 1601. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100725021509/http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?poorlaws%2Fpoorlaws.shtml to http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?poorlaws%2Fpoorlaws.shtml
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5QZWT5l8U?url=http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/publicpolicy/introduction/historyf.htm to http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/publicpolicy/introduction/historyf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090504111530/http://institutions.org.uk/poor_law_unions/the_poor_law1.htm to http://www.institutions.org.uk/poor_law_unions/the_poor_law1.htm
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5QZWT5l8U?url=http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/publicpolicy/introduction/historyf.htm to http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/publicpolicy/introduction/historyf.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It should be mentioned that the first English poor law is often regarded as Statute of Cambridge 1388 (12 Rich.II c.7) for within it each county "Hundred" was made responsible for relieving its own "impotent poor" who because of age or infirmity were incapable of work. It was made necessary by the destabilising effect on the workforce by the Black Death (1348-9)
[www.workhouses.org.uk/poorlaws/oldpoorlaw.shtml Workhouses.org Old Poor Law] Kildwyke (talk) 06:25, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statute of Cambridge 1388 is often regarded as first English poor law 

message: The article contains this phrase:  "Mechanisation meant that unemployment was increasing."  That is a clear reference to the Luddite Fallacy.  The Luddite Fallacy is a staple of Marxist ideology, but it has no basis in facts or logic.  The notion is that improving technology/industrialization/mechanization leads to the obsolescence of labor and, therefore, to rising employment/ declining real wages.  In fact, improving technology increases the value of labor, leading to rising demand for labor, higher real wages and lower long-term unemployment in observed real economies.  Still, the Luddite Fallacy keeps showing up.  It is important to understand that it finds its basis in Marxist ideology, not logic or facts. 2603:6080:5340:AB:79E7:270:7076:EDB7 (talk) 15:18, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of the Luddite Fallacy