mbassoc2003 wrote:Are you guys honestly trying to say that people who work hard in life do not succeed?

No, we (some of us) are saying that working hard is not always a guarantee of success. We're also saying that some people who don't work hard also succeed, or have success handed to them.

Believe you me, if it were possible to push a button and reward everyone with a strong work ethic with financial success and take away the unearned wealth from those who don't do diddly squat except wait for the checks (welfare or dividend) to roll in, I'd be the first in line to do it.

My solution for this? Free top-notch education for everyone, and tax inheritance at 90%. Make everybody start near the bottom. But then, I'm a different kind of loon than you are.

People are unemployed because they are too proud to get off their arses and work for a living.

Not all of them. Some, certainly, but not all.

Scum breeds scum, be that in the environment they grow up in, or be that because they are kids with no morals because they have their parents moral code.

This is where you completely lose me. Yeah, sometimes scumbags have scumbag children, but sometimes scumbags have children who reject their parents' way of life. And sometimes, privilege breeds scum. I've met more people than I care to count that are richer than Croesus, and are total wastes of skin.

The difference between me and the socialist hoodie huggers is, I don't give a F about the ar5eholes. I'd sooner see them them in jail instead of sponging off the taxpayer and breading.

Yes, by all means let's reintroduce the debtor's prison. That'd solve everything   .

But then, I do everything I can to ensure that very little of my money goes to central government for them to waste in my name.

See my comments above .

mbassoc2003 wrote:Are you guys honestly trying to say that people who work hard in life do not succeed?

No.  I'm pretty sure no one here thinks that.  Although it may depend on what your definition of success is.

mbassoc2003 wrote:People are unemployed because they are too proud to get off their arses and work for a living.

Not everyone.  More on this later.

mbassoc2003 wrote:I may have a reasonably edicated and skilled job

Hmmm....

mbassoc2003 wrote:And if I lost my job or I'd get off my f"cking arse and get another job doing anything anyone would pay money for.

Within reason I'm assuming.  I just dont see you being a fluffer in a gay porn flick no matter how good the pay is.

MetamorphosisSigma wrote:This is where you completely lose me.

Ah damn....MS got ahead of me there.  Scum come from all walks of life.  Some from good parenting and good environments as well.  And there are good people that come from the worst possible upbringings.

There was a story in the Dallas Morning News around a year ago about a middle-aged white guy who had lost his job and was looking for another one.  He had looked and looked in his field of expertise and found no one hiring.  So he went out of his field of expertise and was told he didnt have enough education or experience.  Running out of options, he started looking for jobs in fast-food restaurants, hardware stores, retail outlets, etc.  He was turned down time after time because either he had too much experience and the employer didnt want him to take off as soon as something better came along, or they only hired minorities (a lot of these companies have quotas they have to meet or the minority support groups jump all over them), college kids or people under a certain age .  Now I'm sure this doesnt happen everywhere, but something similar also happened to me about 12 years ago and I've worked some pretty shitty jobs in my time and I have no problems doing so.  So when someone says that unemployed people are too proud to work anywhere, that's just grossly incorrect.  Use some of that "edication" and stop painting such broad, generalized strokes when you rant.

MetamorphosisSigma wrote:It's nice to know not everyone here is a jackass.

So what is your estimate of jackasses on this forum anyway?  

hmmm, to live in a world where everything is black and white.

For what its worth, probably pointlessly, not every unemployed person in the UK is a lazy good for nothing. As my post clearly stated gone are the days where work was available to everyone who wanted it - unemployment is a fact of life for many, and a vicious circle thats tough to get out of. Although, of course, everones experience will vary the facts are undeniable. Put certain postal addresses on an application form and its going straight in the bin - some might say you deserve it because your parents are complete scum because they clearly can only afford, nay even choose, to live in a shit area, and clearly their feckless offspring are only applying for work so that their benefit stays intact.

Good news is though the prisons are mainly full so the scum won't be incarcerated anytime soon just for underachieving - Though I'd sooner my tax pound go on their welfare benefit, rather than their prison bill (which would cost me more anyway!!)

Insert your own irony or sarcasm into the above!

For better or worse the UK is a welfare state, and it pretty much works - bear in mind the 55 plus million people in the UK there are always going to be those that do better or worse out of it. Anyone who doesn't like it can feel free to move to whichever Utopia floats their boat - but remember, don't come back in your old age when you need the free healthcare

This is a very interesting discussion.  I don't doubt that there are problem policemen in England and some of their activity is racist.  I don't doubt there is a lot of irrational anger lashing out at anyone and everything. I do not feel like looting, arson or violence against another person is ever justified. There is plenty of blame to go all around.

However, I hope authorities will do what is necessary to stop the fires and violence.  I get the impression that this craziness has not been handled well at all as the police have not wanted to hurt anyone.  I don't like people getting hurt, but it will take more firepower than has been used so far.  I hope authorities figure this out soon.

Furthermore, there are obviously underlying causes to how this came about, and I hope authorities will also attempt to address these issues soon.  Listening groups, or committees, or panel discussions are all possible beginnings.  I don't think the answers are going to be easy and will take work, and for people to come up with solutions without listening (real or perceived), I doubt there will be much improvement.  If there is nothing done on this front, this kind of problem is sure to pop up sooner rather than later.

I'm not saying anything new, but an ordered society is dependent on a significant majority of the population having morals, a work ethic, and education.  What appears to be happening more and more in the US and the UK is an erosion of this moral base.  All the riot police or listening groups in the world aren't going to fix a city or a country who is rotting from the inside out.  

Rome was ultimately destroyed from within as with other great civilizations, and I don't know if this is reversible.  I am not predicting gloom and doom in the near future, but I do believe many societies are moving in that direction.  

benjoshua wrote:All the riot police or listening groups in the world aren't going to fix a city or a country who is rotting from the inside out.

All right, I have to ask... What in the world is a "listening group"? Seriously, that's a new term for me.

MetamorphosisSigma wrote:
All right, I have to ask... What in the world is a "listening group"? Seriously, that's a new term for me.

It's a group of people who talk and listen to each other.  The United States Congress, by contrast, is currently a group of people who talk to and about each other, but there does not appear to be much, or any, listening.  

benjoshua wrote: Listening groups, or committees, or panel discussions are all possible beginnings.

I was trying to say that the government needs to find out what's going on by communicating with people involved(ie listening).  How they do that or how that looks can take on different forms.  I simply find that people not only feel better about whatever solutions are chosen, but I believe you usually get better solutions.

benjoshua wrote:
I was trying to say that the government needs to find out what's going on by communicating with people involved(ie listening).  How they do that or how that looks can take on different forms.  I simply find that people not only feel better about whatever solutions are chosen, but I believe you usually get better solutions.

Sounds a little like governing by focus group, or possibly polls (don't we do that already )? But increased understanding couldn't hurt, that's for sure.

JasonZavoda wrote:I liked the commercial between the UK riot coverage that said, "Coming Soon to a Major American City Near You!|"

No doubt. It's happened before, it'll happen again.

mbassoc2003 wrote:But the underlying cause of this poverty is not racism or lack of opportunity, it is socialism undermining a society's moral fabric, and bone idleness among those on welfare.

Yeah, 'cause British society was so very moral and poverty was unheard of prior to its (semi-)socialism phase    (ever read Dickens?).

In my opinion, the problem is more that the overall economic pie is not growing, or not growing at the rate economists and other financial mystics think it should be. Since the wealth (yes, even in Britain) has been gravitating upwards steadily since at least the '70s, this leaves governments trying to placate their underclasses with handouts, which as you point out creates a culture of entitlement that is unhealthy and demoralizing. What we need to do (in the US as well) is stop allowing big corporations and the rich to continue raping society's resources (human, natural, and otherwise) without contributing back a commensurate share. Example: Exxon did a whole hell of a lot more damage to our road system last year than I did (even with two cars), yet they pay virtually nothing in taxes versus my 30-odd percent. There is no rational reason to think economies will always grow.. sometimes they shrink, sometimes they stagnate for a while--allowing hoarding just makes this more painful for those at the bottom.

Hey everyone -- thanks for the messages of support over the last few days.

Happily things have calmed down quite a bit now -- and the courts are working 24 hours to prosecute everyone who has been or is being charged.  And fortunately no-one I know was harmed (although quite a few were pretty scared).

As you can imagine, there is a lot of discussion in the press, well in fact actually amongst basically everyone in London and elsewhere, over here, along similar lines to this discussion.  That is, alternating between on the one hand: the role of individual moral character (i.e. greedy, lazy, morally-bankrupt, lacking discipline, or evil) and on the other hand, reasons based upon social/economic factors (i.e. no jobs, breakdown of the family, welfare-culture, the example displayed by a consumer society). One thing that is I think more interesting is why did this suddenly happen?

The original flashpoint was a protest about a police shooting in Tottenham (north London) which was handled badly and escalated into a minor riot.  Uncommon and unpleasant but not that unexpected. But why a few hours later did large scale looting start up in Wood Green (two miles away)?  And why did the rioting and looting continue over the next few days to pop up again and again and spread to different regions all across London and again spread again (e.g. to parts of Manchester, Birmingham  etc…)?  

In part the answer lies in a clash between technology and the policing structure in the UK.  There isn't actually a ‘british police' there are 40+ regional police forces, and further, within each region policing resources are allocated on a detailed local analysis of the area and crime patterns.  A few years ago if there was a civil disturbance some distance away from you it would be several hours (or even the next day) before you became aware of it on the TV news. But now people can spread that kind of news in minutes - and more importantly they can get their friends involved just as fast.  There have been a couple of amusing instances in the press in the last two or three years where a teenager has accidentally invited a thousand+ people to a party in their parents house -- trashing the place -- because facebook, twitter, and texts mean that an invitation for 50 or so spirals way out of control. This is a similar kind of thing.  When the kids were looting a particular high street they could tell their mates to come because the police hadn't enough officers there (yet) and when the police chased them away, they could arrange where next to go within minutes.  But riot police move around London streets (relatively) slowly because they are set up to protect areas not to chase down mobile groups.  And they were suddenly stretched so thin -- because the rioters weren't staying in one area, like they used to, but moving quickly and other groups were springing up because they could see through news on the web, through twitter, facebook and through their mates' messages that this tactic meant they could get away with it. Even if the police had used water cannon or baton rounds it probably would not have made any difference -- as with a few exceptions -- most of the looters weren't that interested in direct confrontation, but in getting stuff from shops.  New social media has empowered the potential looter to know very quickly where to go in a group, where looting will likely take place, and also where not to go (as it has jsut been been looted already, or there are too many police etc..)

In urban areas where small groups can move quickly and coordinate using smartphones my suspicion is that this may well happen again, so in response the police here will probably have to adopt some new tactics specifically to address it.  There may also be a move to modernise the police here which is probably a good idea.