oh but let me guess........"its more complicated than that"
it's never been (and never will be) 100% but you need to give the lowest percentile a chance to make it up the ladder. They haven't had the opportunity for a long while.lowing wrote:
Has your unemployment rate been high for 4 generations? Kinda runnin out of excuses for not getting a "FREE" college degree in 4 life times, dontcha think?AussieReaper wrote:
Yeah high unemployment rates just equate to laziness. Infact whenever you see a country with a higher unemployment rate than last years, it just means more people are lazy.lowing wrote:
fantastic, so in 4 life times, no one in the family can find a fuckin decent job? Sounds like a family problem and a personal problem NOT societies problem, and certainly not the problem of the people that actually DID do something with their lives.. Well until now, since their businesses are burnt to the ground.
Right?
There's nothing wrong with welfare, healthcare etc, it just needs to be managed.FEOS wrote:
Your arguments sound remarkably like those of an American arguing against the pitfalls of a welfare state and the current state of our inner city areas. Arguments I'm fairly certain you argued against...Dilbert_X wrote:
Britain now has a huge intractable underclass. They've been given too much, had it too easy, and learned they don't need to work, can do whatever they want without any consequence.
Also every chav thinks he's going to be a millionaire footballer or the next Noel Gallagher, without understanding those paths require work too.
That and scum have been imported as some kind of social project....
Weird.
Fuck Israel
4 GENERATIONS IS A CHANCE AUSSIE!!!... or how many more life times do you think is needed to accomplish a "FREE" education? You seem to keep avoiding the fact that you get university level education handed to you.AussieReaper wrote:
it's never been (and never will be) 100% but you need to give the lowest percentile a chance to make it up the ladder. They haven't had the opportunity for a long while.lowing wrote:
Has your unemployment rate been high for 4 generations? Kinda runnin out of excuses for not getting a "FREE" college degree in 4 life times, dontcha think?AussieReaper wrote:
Yeah high unemployment rates just equate to laziness. Infact whenever you see a country with a higher unemployment rate than last years, it just means more people are lazy.
Right?
Maybe you are missing the reason why I chose the title for this thread. Life isn't supposed to be what others do for you. It is supposed to be what YOU do in your life.
Last edited by lowing (2011-08-12 00:23:43)
If you call £9,000 a year free university then I guess so.lowing wrote:
how the fuck can you be down and out at 17 years old?. WHat kinda fuckin jobs do they expect at that age? their asses should be in school..You do boast of free fuckin university right?
Really kind of pisses me off to listen to you actually rationalize and justify burning down OTHER peoples lives because you are 17 and no one is handing you enough free shit in your eyes
Another enlightened contribution there.
No doubt. All I'm saying is that your arguments sound remarkably familiar to the very arguments you've railed against when they've been put forth by Americans for the exact same reasons.Dilbert_X wrote:
There's nothing wrong with welfare, healthcare etc, it just needs to be managed.FEOS wrote:
Your arguments sound remarkably like those of an American arguing against the pitfalls of a welfare state and the current state of our inner city areas. Arguments I'm fairly certain you argued against...Dilbert_X wrote:
Britain now has a huge intractable underclass. They've been given too much, had it too easy, and learned they don't need to work, can do whatever they want without any consequence.
Also every chav thinks he's going to be a millionaire footballer or the next Noel Gallagher, without understanding those paths require work too.
That and scum have been imported as some kind of social project....
Weird.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-14501282
Interesting article comparing LA riots of 92 with the London riots.
Interesting article comparing LA riots of 92 with the London riots.
Prime Minister David Cameron is to consult US "supercop" Bill Bratton on how to deal with city rioting. Mr Bratton, the former New York and Los Angeles police chief, is credited with dramatically reducing crime after the 1992 riots on LA.
"The beating of Rodney King was simply the catalyst," said Joe Hicks, a former civil rights leader who led a multi-cultural organisation to help repair communities in the aftermath of the riots.
It began in a black neighbourhood but, as was the case in the United Kingdom, many different people joined the riot.
"They were Latinos, poor whites, they were just hooligans of all sorts hit the streets along with black gang members and all sorts of people out doing burning and looting and rioting and general thuggery on the streets of LA," he said.
"You get a lot of clowns and fools and idiots in any society, who are just laying in wait for the chance to do what they do."
The LAPD learned tactics like bringing in large numbers of police officers, and the national guard, making a huge number of arrests to show their strength.
But the police also went through a long period of soul-searching after the riots.
"Across the board we made changes in our police department, adding more officers - more women, more minorities, a lot more Hispanic officers to match the community make up," said the LAPD's Commander Smith.
Last edited by Cheeky_Ninja06 (2011-08-12 06:49:50)
really? cuz i seem to remember a lot of posts on the topic of socialism where statements have been made that the govt. invests in its youth by paying for education and in return that youth was gunna become a productive tax paying member of society. Is that not true now?Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
If you call £9,000 a year free university then I guess so.lowing wrote:
how the fuck can you be down and out at 17 years old?. WHat kinda fuckin jobs do they expect at that age? their asses should be in school..You do boast of free fuckin university right?
Really kind of pisses me off to listen to you actually rationalize and justify burning down OTHER peoples lives because you are 17 and no one is handing you enough free shit in your eyes
Another enlightened contribution there.
So what you are saying is, these kids are pissed and justifiably destroy other peoples efforts because no one will hand hold their sorry asses through life?
Last edited by lowing (2011-08-13 07:28:06)
*facepalm.gif*lowing wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IjdhEvosC3I
this pretty much speaks for itself.
I wish people like that would change and stop being such irresponsible little entitlement queens.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
The thing is, welfare is fine. Poorly managed welfare, or welfare which is abused is a problem.FEOS wrote:
No doubt. All I'm saying is that your arguments sound remarkably familiar to the very arguments you've railed against when they've been put forth by Americans for the exact same reasons.
Right-wing loons seem to assume all welfare, healthcare etc is evil and doomed to mismanagement and abuse. It works fine in many countries, it has been thoroughly mismanaged in places like the UK though.
Just as military spending is OK, but not if it swallows a third of the govt budget and is mismanaged abused by, for example, govt contractors.
Fuck Israel
See, that is where you are wrong. Nobody on the right has ever argued against all forms of welfare, only against abuse of the system, and for welfare reform, as entitlements swallow two thirds of the govt budget and are mismanaged and abused by, for example, govt bureaucrats.Dilbert_X wrote:
The thing is, welfare is fine. Poorly managed welfare, or welfare which is abused is a problem.FEOS wrote:
No doubt. All I'm saying is that your arguments sound remarkably familiar to the very arguments you've railed against when they've been put forth by Americans for the exact same reasons.
Right-wing loons seem to assume all welfare, healthcare etc is evil and doomed to mismanagement and abuse. It works fine in many countries, it has been thoroughly mismanaged in places like the UK though.
Just as military spending is OK, but not if it swallows a third of the govt budget and is mismanaged abused by, for example, govt contractors.
And mismanagement of any government funds is not OK...neither side has ever argued that.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Thats not how I hear it.
"Welfare is the sign of the devil"
"Healthcare is the work of Stalin"
and so on.
Not
"We should think carefully about how social programs are implemented to ensure tax dollars are used effectively and go to those who need them"
"Welfare is the sign of the devil"
"Healthcare is the work of Stalin"
and so on.
Not
"We should think carefully about how social programs are implemented to ensure tax dollars are used effectively and go to those who need them"
Well obviously entitlements need to be cut, so the one third of the budget which goes to the military-industrial complex can be expanded - so it can be mismanaged and abused some more there.as entitlements swallow two thirds of the govt budget and are mismanaged and abused by, for example, govt bureaucrats
Fuck Israel
And where do you hear it? On Internet forums and opinion pages. Those do not make or reflect actual policy.Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats not how I hear it.
"Welfare is the sign of the devil"
"Healthcare is the work of Stalin"
and so on.
Not
"We should think carefully about how social programs are implemented to ensure tax dollars are used effectively and go to those who need them"Well obviously entitlements need to be cut, so the one third of the budget which goes to the military-industrial complex can be expanded - so it can be mismanaged and abused some more there.as entitlements swallow two thirds of the govt budget and are mismanaged and abused by, for example, govt bureaucrats
That last little bit is classic troll. I've stated repeatedly that the defense budget is too large and there is waste there (as with any government bureaucracy), and you come back with that nonsense?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Fox mostly.
Did you know most of your tax dollars go to bureaucrats who just push papers around?
Well you do now.
Did you know most of your tax dollars go to bureaucrats who just push papers around?
Well you do now.
Fuck Israel
I know far better than you the nature of our government's bureaucracy. By far better, I mean intimate knowledge compared to blips you've read in op-eds. This will not go well for you.Dilbert_X wrote:
Fox mostly.
Did you know most of your tax dollars go to bureaucrats who just push papers around?
Well you do now.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Do you not understand why people dislike bureaucrats? No, I think you understand it quite well, you just prefer to argue.Dilbert_X wrote:
Fox mostly.
Did you know most of your tax dollars go to bureaucrats who just push papers around?
Well you do now.
There's no profit motive behind the work they do. There's no boss standing over their shoulder trying to get more productivity out of them, because the boss isn't going to make any extra money for it. Bureaucrats are lazy by default. These are the people you want to entrust your life to? It took three months for my GI Bill paperwork to process through the VA every fall. Three months! To process one slip of paper!
So no, talk of decreasing the size of the government does not mean those dollars go into expanding the military. Only turds like John Bolton think that way. All I want is to take my life out of these incompetent, lazy, peoples hands. Is that really such an awful thing?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I actually got to witness the birth of two forms while I was in the Army! It was like spotting a unicorn! People swear they've witnessed it, but you can never tell if it's a myth.FEOS wrote:
I know far better than you the nature of our government's bureaucracy. By far better, I mean intimate knowledge compared to blips you've read in op-eds. This will not go well for you.Dilbert_X wrote:
Fox mostly.
Did you know most of your tax dollars go to bureaucrats who just push papers around?
Well you do now.
One was the creation of a form that you had to fill out before you filled out a form to ask your chain of command for permission to go on leave. The other one, well, that's on a need to know...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Well clearly they need to hire more bureaucrats, who can then sit around waiting for someone to submit a form.Jay wrote:
It took three months for my GI Bill paperwork to process through the VA every fall. Three months! To process one slip of paper!
Fuck Israel
Someone is missing the point...Dilbert_X wrote:
Well clearly they need to hire more bureaucrats, who can then sit around waiting for someone to submit a form.Jay wrote:
It took three months for my GI Bill paperwork to process through the VA every fall. Three months! To process one slip of paper!
The cuts are intended to streamline govt, not bloat it.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Tbh I'm not fussed what you remember somebody else posting. University in England is £9,000 per annum.lowing wrote:
really? cuz i seem to remember a lot of posts on the topic of socialism where statements have been made that the govt. invests in its youth by paying for education and in return that youth was gunna become a productive tax paying member of society. Is that not true now?Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
If you call £9,000 a year free university then I guess so.lowing wrote:
how the fuck can you be down and out at 17 years old?. WHat kinda fuckin jobs do they expect at that age? their asses should be in school..You do boast of free fuckin university right?
Really kind of pisses me off to listen to you actually rationalize and justify burning down OTHER peoples lives because you are 17 and no one is handing you enough free shit in your eyes
Another enlightened contribution there.
So what you are saying is, these kids are pissed and justifiably destroy other peoples efforts because no one will hand hold their sorry asses through life?
As for the last bit, are you taking the Piss? All I did was to correct your gross error that you are spouting as fact.
Russell Brand wrote:
I no longer live in London. I've been transplanted to Los Angeles by a combination of love and money; such good fortune and opportunity, in both cases, you might think disqualify me from commenting on matters in my homeland. Even the results of Britain's Got Ice-Factor may lay prettily glistening beyond my remit now that I am self-banished.
To be honest when I lived in England I didn't really care too much for the fabricated theatrics of reality TV. Except when I worked for Big Brother, then it was my job to slosh about in the amplified trivia of the housemates/inmates. Sometimes it was actually quite bloody interesting. Particularly the year that Nadia won. She was the Portuguese transsexual. Remember? No? Well, that's the nature of the medium; as it whizzes past the eyes it seems very relevant but the malady of reality TV stars is that their shelf life expires, like dog years, by the power of seven. To me it seems as if Nadia's triumph took place during the silver jubilee, we had a street party.
Early in that series there was an incident of excitement and high tension. The testosteronal, alpha figures of the house – a Scot called Jason and a Londoner called Victor – incited by the teasing conditions and a camp lad called Marco (wow, it's all coming back) kicked off in the house, smashed some crockery and a few doors. Police were called, tapes were edited and the carnival rolled on. When I was warned to be discreet on-air about the extent of the violence, I quoted a British first-world-war general who, reflecting on the inability of his returning troops to adapt to civilian life, said: "You cannot rouse the animal in man then expect it to be put aside at a moment's notice."
"Yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing we want you to say the opposite of," said the channel's representative.
This week's riots are sad and frightening and, if I have by virtue of my temporary displacement forgone the right to speak about the behaviour of my countrymen, then this is gonna be irksome. I mean even David Cameron came back from his holiday. Eventually. The Tuscan truffles lost their succulence when the breaking glass became too loud to ignore. Then dopey ol' Boris came cycling back into the London clutter with his spun gold hair and his spun shit logic as it became apparent that the holiday was over.
Russell Brand wrote:
In fact, it isn't my absence from the territory of London that bothers me; it's my absence from the economic class that is being affected that itches in my gut because, as I looked at the online incident maps, the boroughs that were suffering all, for me, had some resonance. I've lived in Dalston, Hackney, Elephant, Camden and Bethnal Green. I grew up round Dagenham and Romford and, whilst I could never claim to be from the demographic most obviously affected, I feel guilty that I'm not there now.
I feel proud to be English, proud to be a Londoner (all right, an Essex boy), never more so than since being in exile, and I naturally began to wonder what would make young people destroy their communities.
I have spoken to mates in London and Manchester and they sound genuinely frightened and hopeless, and the details of their stories place this outbreak beyond the realms of any political idealism or rationalisation. But I can't, from my ivory tower in the Hollywood Hills, compete with the understandable yet futile rhetoric, describing the rioters as mindless. Nor do I want to dwell on the sadness of our beautiful cities being tarnished and people's shops and livelihoods, sometimes generations old, being immolated. The tragic and inevitable deaths ought to be left for eulogies and grieving. Tariq Jahan has spoken so eloquently from his position of painful proximity, with such compassion, that nearly all else is redundant.
wrote:
The only question I can legitimately ask is: why is this happening? Mark Duggan's death has been badly handled but no one is contesting that is a reason for these conflagrations beyond the initial flash of activity in Tottenham. I've heard Theresa May and the Old Etonians whose hols have been curtailed (many would say they're the real victims) saying the behaviour is "unjustifiable" and "unacceptable". Wow! Thanks guys! What a wonderful use of the planet's fast-depleting oxygen resources. Now that's been dealt with can we move on to more taxing matters such as whether or not Jack The Ripper was a ladies' man. And what the hell do bears get up to in those woods?
However "unacceptable" and "unjustifiable" it might be, it has happened so we better accept it and, whilst we can't justify it, we should kick around a few neurons and work out why so many people feel utterly disconnected from the cities they live in.
Unless on the news tomorrow it's revealed that there's been a freaky "criminal creating" chemical leak in London and Manchester and Liverpool and Birmingham that's causing young people to spontaneously and simultaneously violate their environments – in which case we can park the ol' brainboxes, stop worrying and get on with the football season, but I suspect there hasn't – we have, as human beings, got a few things to consider together.
I should here admit that I have been arrested for criminal damage for my part in anti-capitalist protest earlier in this decade. I often attended protests and then, in my early 20s, and on drugs, I enjoyed it when the protests lost direction and became chaotic, hostile even. I was intrigued by the anarchist "Black bloc", hooded and masked, as, in retrospect, was their agenda, but was more viscerally affected by the football "casuals" who'd turn up because the veneer of the protest's idealistic objective gave them the perfect opportunity to wreck stuff and have a row with the Old Bill.
That was never my cup of tea though. For one thing, policemen are generally pretty good fighters and second, it registered that the accent they shouted at me with was closer to my own than that of some of those singing about the red flag making the wall of plastic shields between us seem thinner.
I found those protests exciting, yes, because I was young and a bit of a twerp but also, I suppose, because there was a void in me. A lack of direction, a sense that I was not invested in the dominant culture, that government existed not to look after the interests of the people it was elected to represent but the big businesses that they were in bed with.
I felt that, and I had a mum who loved me, a dad who told me that nothing was beyond my reach, an education, a grant from Essex council (to train as an actor of all things!!!) and several charities that gave me money for maintenance. I shudder to think how disenfranchised I would have felt if I had been deprived of that long list of privileges.
That state of deprivation though is, of course, the condition that many of those rioting endure as their unbending reality. No education, a weakened family unit, no money and no way of getting any. JD Sports is probably easier to desecrate if you can't afford what's in there and the few poorly paid jobs there are taken. Amidst the bleakness of this social landscape, squinting all the while in the glare of a culture that radiates ultraviolet consumerism and infrared celebrity. That daily, hourly, incessantly enforces the egregious, deceitful message that you are what you wear, what you drive, what you watch and what you watch it on, in livid, neon pixels. The only light in their lives comes from these luminous corporate messages. No wonder they have their fucking hoods up.
I hope the highlighting didn't mess with your reading flow. But i found those parts particularly interesting and on point.I remember Cameron saying "hug a hoodie" but I haven't seen him doing it. Why would he? Hoodies don't vote, they've realised it's pointless, that whoever gets elected will just be a different shade of the "we don't give a toss about you" party.
Politicians don't represent the interests of people who don't vote. They barely care about the people who do vote. They look after the corporations who get them elected. Cameron only spoke out against News International when it became evident to us, US, the people, not to him (like Rose West, "He must've known") that the newspapers Murdoch controlled were happy to desecrate the dead in the pursuit of another exploitative, distracting story.
Why am I surprised that these young people behave destructively, "mindlessly", motivated only by self-interest? How should we describe the actions of the city bankers who brought our economy to its knees in 2010? Altruistic? Mindful? Kind? But then again, they do wear suits, so they deserve to be bailed out, perhaps that's why not one of them has been imprisoned. And they got away with a lot more than a few fucking pairs of trainers.
These young people have no sense of community because they haven't been given one. They have no stake in society because Cameron's mentor Margaret Thatcher told us there's no such thing.
If we don't want our young people to tear apart our communities then don't let people in power tear apart the values that hold our communities together.
As you have by now surely noticed, I don't know enough about politics to ponder a solution and my hands are sticky with blood money from representing corporate interests through film, television and commercials, venerating, through my endorsements and celebrity, products and a lifestyle that contributes to the alienation of an increasingly dissatisfied underclass. But I know, as we all intuitively know, the solution is all around us and it isn't political, it is spiritual. Gandhi said: "Be the change you want to see in the world."
In this simple sentiment we can find hope, as we can in the efforts of those cleaning up the debris and ash in bonhomous, broom-wielding posses. If we want to live in a society where people feel included, we must include them, where they feel represented, we must represent them and where they feel love and compassion for their communities then we, the members of that community, must find love and compassion for them.
As we sweep away the mistakes made in the selfish, nocturnal darkness we must ensure that, amidst the broken glass and sadness, we don't sweep away the youth lost amongst the shards in the shadows cast by the new dawn.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
This.Politicians don't represent the interests of people who don't vote. They barely care about the people who do vote.
Ahh, well, he's fallen into the trap of thinking of politicians as Demigods. What exactly would 'representation' do for them? Is the politician going to wave his wand and create upper middle class jobs for every hoodie in the land? No. Just like our own 'forgotten people' living in dead towns here in America, people need to take responsibility for their own lives and move themselves out of their dead end communities to where they can actually create an opportunity of their own. It's scary, and it requires a courage most people seem to lack, but it's the only real solution. Politicians have no real power, they just want you to buy into the myth that they do, because it boosts their ego and gives them +dicksize.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat