7 December 2008
10:3010526It is good to hear about the youngsters who behave well - I hope we continue to cherish them! (Sadly, too often the poorly behaved garner all the resources and the well behaved are overlooked - sometimes it feels as if we can't win!) But I have serious concerns about those very young children reported to be out in the early hours without supervision, and about the older ones who may be losing their way through poor parenting. If they are so young, and are out so late, they must be at risk - I hope we don't wait for a tragedy before something is done. There are voluntary organisations as well as social services who might help.
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
7 December 2008
10:4610528Thank everyone for your postings,Roger that man called Dominic,is Dominic Castle an old footalling mate? of mine I spoke to him last weekend at the light turn on,there is funding for him to come to Tower Hamlets.I tour Tower Hamlets quite regularly day and night on my bike,obviously not at 3am and haven't seen yougsters hanging around.These youngsters are in groups and they are bored,they want something to do.All they want to do is hang around together and with people thier own age.Although I said they were Eastern European there were many there who were not.Now before someone says I am racist I am not and never have been this is fact.Many years ago I was a parent governor of Priory Fields were I am now a Community Governor,and the School was asked to start a refugee class.Now I had phone calls from Parents saying not in the school I send my children.
So I spent the next week at the School helping the Children and it was great and so rewarding and I had a great time helping them count it was great fun.
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
7 December 2008
23:5110544Thanks John - that's very interesting. Good luck with progress.
DT1 - There's no benefit in me labouring the point again, but as I said before, you can make us, or call us society, but our society is made up of individuals and individuals have responsibilities - yes and rights to of course; a balance is what is lacking.
Roger
8 December 2008
07:4410547And on that note, I hear that several houses near to me, including my neighbours next door, have been burgled in the past couple of weeks - and we have heard nothing from the police, not a note through the door, nothing warning us that the area is being targetted. These scum have stolen our neighbours kids Christmas presents as wll as everything else and there appears little the police can or will do to warn us or to protect us. If there have been a spate of burglaries in one place, where are the extra patrols, the bobbies on the beat, the reassuring presence of blue serge? There has been zip. And just to make us all feel that little bit scabbier, two young boys (can only be 7/8 and 10/11) have decided in the last few days to use the cars in our road as football goalposts - in the middle of a busy road next to a crossroad junction - and bash footballs into the cars, despite polite requests (becoming less polite...!) to use the park instead. The older one telling me I can't tell him what to do and "I ain't moving". He ran across the road with his football yesterday and a car turned fast into the road almost running him down - his only response was to yell at the driver and make hand gestures. These kids are at risk - from cars, from others. My car is at risk!! Ditto my blood pressure! Oh, and the police have told us that the CCTV notice we have recently seen installed doesn't actually mean we have CCTV (my neighbour thought a CCTV camera might have captured the burglars) - it just means we might have one day if the mobile CCTV van visits. What the **** is that about?
If my car is damaged I will sue the a*** off the kids parents, I know where they live - if my house is burgled I will expect an apology from the police for not protecting me. Not forgetting that the blame actually lies with the burglars and the kids parents. I may seem a little angry - it is because I am.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
8 December 2008
12:2610559Bern that is awful, these people are the lowest of the low. A friend of mine was burgled last week and it really is so destructive, especially at a time when things seem hard anyway!
You don't need to labour the point Roger; I understand everything you are saying. I'd also like to say that I know you are a thoroughly nice chap whose actions and activities, I feel, contradict the Thatcher mentality. You promote the idea of people working together because you understand that we can achieve more together rather than thinking about ourselves first, and buying from the internet or out of town, your work is outstanding.
My point is that the Thatcher years were a direct negative influence on our present state. I could never deny the existence of individuals and that these individuals make up society, by the fact that you acknowledge this shows that you are not aligning with the far right line that Mrs T took (People who take this view usually use absurd terminology such as 'a group of individuals' as opposed to accepting society). Margaret Thatcher subscribed to the notion that if you sort out yourself first then all will be well (enlightened self-interest...or selfishness as I would call it). This is what Thatcher promoted, if you work hard, you can have loads of cash, in fact more cash than you need and if this is at the expense of others (albeit legal) then fair play (this of course is a lie, because some people work hard all their life and still have very little). This is the problem Roger; this mentality is about placing the emphasis the individual parts as opposed to the whole, this is "individualism'. The fundamental flaw with this mentality is that responsibilities are set out by the 'whole' (society), righteousness is the result of consensus of belief. So if you have responsibilities to society (such as to raise your children in the way we decide is 'right' or pay taxes to provide for infrastructure and health care) then society should provide for you when this falls apart through no fault of your own. (and I'm not talking about the people ripping the system off, who are also acting in 'self interest')
If you have responsibilities to society then you have certain rights within that system (Newton's 3rd law of motion and all that). This is what Mrs.T attempted to remove and she would make no excuses for! If you don't like this model then perhaps you should question whether you like her so much!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
9 December 2008
08:3810621I am so sorry to hear this Bern, so very sorry.
I know the Police are stretched, but this is disgraceful; someone should be asking questions of the local police - all those you put in your posting.
I can't understand how we have - with our eyes wide open, let it come to the point where children rule the streets and with impunity too.
Isn't it time the ordinary law-abiding adults reclaimed the streets, our homes and possessions, so we can walk along the streets with the assurance that we won't get mugged, live in our homes without being burgled and our cars etc. won't get vandalised.
DT1 - I do have decent standards and morals, but I do not agree with your interpretation
of Mrs T's philosophy.
Roger
9 December 2008
19:2610664We agree again Roger - let's just pause and get our breath!!! It's true that, whatever our politics, decent law abiding behaviour is fairly consistent and across the board, and red, yellow or blue we can agree that responsible and hard working people deserve a better break than the one they usually get. It's always the middle classes, the hard workers who strive to own their own homes, educate their children, take little back from a state that takes so much from them, that get the pointy end when the chips are down. I know "life isn't fair", but it seems a bit harsh when we work so hard and pay so much that we get so little and are taken for granted.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
9 December 2008
20:0410668Thanks Bern - good posting, and not just because we agree !
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
9 December 2008
20:5110687i am confused here, is it only the middle classes that know how to behave correctly??????
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
9 December 2008
21:0210689Yes, Howard I was going to metion that one. What is this ridiculous definition of a middle and working class person, after all they all work, why is one by definition better than the other.
The so-called middle classes commit crime and are prone to anti-socialbehaviour like everybody else. Look at Cameron and his uni mates, they used to get blind drunk, smash up a restaurant and then go back and pay for the damage. If that isn't anti-social perhaps somebody could tell me what is.
9 December 2008
22:1410693Of course it isn't just the middle classes who know how to behave well - duh!! But they are the ones who are so often clobbered by Governments of all shades just because they do just get on with it, and fall into all those middle-brackets that are too well off to have "entitlements" but not well off enough to be able to do without them!!!! Middle class crime tends to be different in that it is often concealed (domestic abuse), covered up by the PTB (fraud) or colluded with for the greater good (reduce punishment and increase co-operation). Neither "class" is better than the other, they all still exist but have morphed a bit into different forms from the ones they used to be, and they are still different to each other - different, not better. And working or middle class is definitely not the same as the work-shy, substance mis-using stereotype (that sadly is often accurate) that drains my salary for benefits. I am not being judgmental (before my hard-won leftie Kudos evaporates) - I am non-judgmental, socialist, equality-friendly, etc etc - but that doesn't mean I have to also be blind to reality. In my previous incarnations I have worked with a challenging bunch of people, and I would have been no use to them if I were sentimental, bigoted or woolly.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
9 December 2008
23:1810699bern
the fact is that non socialist people like me that are working class pay a large proportion of income in taxes(direct and indirect) and suffer the most from crime and naughty behaviour.
you intimate that you have never recieved anything back from the state, i thought that you had 3 children!!
10 December 2008
07:4610706I have 4 children Howard, and i wouldn't dream of saying I had nothing back from the state (although we have never claimed unemployment benefits or not worked because of the children - we always sorted ourselves out so that we worked and cared for the children and brought them up to understand that they need to be self sufficient and work hard. I have always been there for them, they have been our priority, but we have managed that in tandem with work and careers, and done it well, I think!!! Hard work but worth it!) But it is people like you and I who bear a large brunt, disproportionately, of the costs for our society in lots of ways including financial and the effects of crime. People who work less or earn less pay less back (obviously!) and people who earn more/have more pay accountants to hide it so they pay less than they need to!! It is you and I, firmly in the middle, who proportionatley pay more of our incomes and experience more challenges.
I also have to say: whatever we have had from the state - child benefit, schooling, whatever - has been earned and some.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
10 December 2008
07:4710707Forgive me if I'm wrong, but maybe Bern was talking about "Middle-England, who are different from "Middle-Class.
Middle-England people are also working class people who have perhaps worked that bit harder, maybe had a better education, but also had a good dose of good-luck too, so now they are not on the bones of their arses - other than being over taxed.
Howard - what do you mean non-socialist people like you ?? come off it !!
Roger
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
10 December 2008
08:4910713I'd be careful applying that definition of 'Middle-England' if I were you. Middle england in academic terms refers to Daily Mail reading types, that moan about immigrants and love church fetes.
Class descriptors are phenominally hard to define in this time. I would hate to be middle class!
10 December 2008
14:4510728It's a minefield trying to define the diverse strands of our society - but it is important to try even if we fail, because if we don't, people manipulate things and take advantage of a less than cohesed group. I probably did mean Middle England, but not in the Little Britain sort of way!!! But "class" still exists, in a new form, so I think it matters that we acknowledge it......from the "underclass" mentioned by Howard - very real, and in a non-judgmental way I think the issues thrown up by that need to be addresed - to the Camerons and their ilk who chuck food at waitresses and think it is funny: the descendents of the whinnying classes who sent brave men to their certain deaths in WWI. Yes, I do think about the Wars a lot, they matter.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
10 December 2008
15:4210730When one talks about class only 60% are working,middle or upper class the remaining 40% of the adult pop are retired,unemployed,disabled,sick or on long term incapacity allowance (soon to be scrapped)or benefits.These are normally referred to as the lower class,rightly or wrongly,and its this section of society which requires the most help in order to bring them into the work force.Some families are now third generation of never having worked and therefore accept benefits as the norm.Its up to middle England as Bern refers to them or the backbone of Britain as I call them to assist this 'lower class' back into society.Regardless of whether Maggie said there is no such thing as society,well there wasn't under her term in office.
The Camerons come from a long line of wealth,it's not his fault,but his family have never experienced hardship so his concept of poverty or the lower working class has been gleaned from 'visits' to deprived areas.Where he is met with outstretched shaking hands and sycophantic smiles.
Cameron ,if, as BarryW predicts, will be our next PM (God forbid) , his first changes will be to cut public spending on(a) health where it has recently been proved that the lower classes due to poor diets and poor health advice suffer the worst health.So there will be no help there from the Tories for them (b) Cuts in education the very tool that the lower classes need to lift them up from the trenches,off the dole and back into work so again the Tories who wish to be seen as the Caring Party will again be slashing the education fund and firmly kicking the lower classes in the goolies.It won't affect their hardcore voters as most of them can afford to send little Rupert or Cordelia to private schools but it will affect the comp's ,the colleges running the NVQ courses,sure start and the apprentice schemes and finally there will be sweeping cuts in house building,an employment stronghold of the working classes,cuts in road building and maintenance,so you can kiss goodbye to the navvies and unskilled labour job opportunities,cuts in the civil service and police closing yet another door on the job opportunities of the working classes but they will try and strengthen the pound and invisible investments and earnings therefore fuelling jobs in the city and creating 21st century yuppies for the hurrah henrys and henriettas.Outside investors will swoop on the UK market looking for companies they can asset strip or make aquick buck from as the tory govt continues to squeeze every last penny out of the working classes.The rich will become richer and the rest of us will become unemployed.
Only this time their will be no Falkland War to save the Tory party..as it did Maggie.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
10 December 2008
16:1410731Hurrah for Marek!! Right on!! (And don't forget the little Tristrams, whose hedge funds may be affected).
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
10 December 2008
16:3910732Wonderful Marek!
That pretty much sums it up.
Nice point about the Falklands War too, very handy!
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
10 December 2008
16:5010733Great stuff Marek sums the Tories up nicely.