Riots in Tottenham

[The Infidel]

Thought this was a sad story...

London riots 2011: Croydon's House of Reeves razed to the ground | Mail Online


Guess owner Maurice Reeves was just one of those evil rich people



Heartbroken: Reeves furniture store owner Maurice Reeves arrives today at the store's ruined 140-year-old building in Croydon

Before and after: Reeves furniture store just a short while before the riots, and right, engulfed in flames

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-House-Reeves-razed-ground.html#ixzz1UZgtMYPq

 

[tigerbob]

London rioters: "Showing the rich we do what we want"

BBC News - London rioters: 'Showing the rich we do what we want'

Yep... its all about the police

Just heard a teenage girl say that she's having fun rioting. When asked why they were attacking people / places within their own community she opined "We're only targeting the rich. You know, people who own businesses".



Yep, because the poor bloke who owns a corner shop and works from 6am til 10pm 7 days a week is clearly getting rich quick and easy.

I'm not a violent person, but I'd love to slap that little bitch's face for the way she's attempting to justify being a scumbag. Then make her clean up the mess she's made. And work for the shop owner for free to get an idea of the financial cost of her night of fun.

Alternatively, find someone who's worse off than her and allow them to rip off her stuff because she's "rich" compared to them.

Army, water cannon, tear gas, curfew. Sooner the better.

Come on Theresa May you spineless cow, get with the program.

Water cannon is apparently inappopriate according to the police - wouldn't work. The army is not appropriate because this is criminality not civil war. A curfew could be considered and apparently the police have been given the right to use rubber bullets.

Watching the Turkish area of London on newsnight tonight. They are having none of it and chased the would be looters out and are now guarding their premises themselves but London has had 16,000 police on duty tonight and very little problems.

Manchester clearly just had a night of organised crime. Small gangs moving about even with leaders telling them time to move on as the police would soon be coming.

Watching newsnight they had a mixture of people who do believe there is a reason though also saw the rioting/looting as just that and people who just used words scum, no reason and so on. Everyone is agreed the first thing is law and order must be restored. Harriet Harman has just said on Newsnight she believes there are issues which do then need to be sorted.

Basically the right wing want to say there is nothing underneath this. They just can't bear to think that. I actually find that as frightening. This guy on the tv cannot even hear Harriet Harman say repeatedly she totally denounces what has happened. She finds it totally unacceptable

Now they want to know why there has been no rioting in Scotland

Guy from Ed University believes it is because we have not yet felt the full force of the cuts and our Politicians are seen as more caring of the people. At the same time we have the same gross social inequality, marginalised youth and the dispossessed and it was also suggested that because we have less racial diversity, we have not been challenged where it is perceived England's police have a history of being racist.

They spoke of how people are going nuts if anyone suggests it could be anything other than mindless violence and how anyone who suggests this is being condemned. The panel in Scotland believe this does have a base reason of youth seeing no future. This is a reflection of people who are marginalised in society. That's what they believe even if how this is being expressed is, as it is, through mindless violence.

They wait to see whether we get started but are hopeful it will not spread here.

Thanks for the info. God, I miss Newsnight. For some reason you can get BBC programming streamed pretty much everywhere in the world except the US.

Interestingly, I saw an interview this morning on BBC America (about noon London time) with a youth worker from Southeast London who had some very firm views on this, such as:

- British youth has, for the last 20 years, been told frequently about their rights but not about their responsibilities.
- It is quite revealing that someone has to suggest to parents that keeping their kids in during a riot might be a good idea. In other countries this request would not have to be made (which I guess agrees to an extent with the observations you posted regarding the Turkish community).
- The police, having spent many years being pilloried by the press have effectively been neutered to the point where they don't want to wade into rioters with truncheons for fear of appearing overly aggressive.
- Ask schoolteachers why it is so difficult to keep order in classrooms and you will hear them respond that disciplining students frequently leads to accusations, picked up in the press and often pursued through the courts, that it is the teachers who are at fault.

I found it very odd to hear this coming from a Youth Worker.

BTW, the term 'British Youth' was his description, not mine. I suspect he used it euphemistically.

 

[tigerbob]

Thought this was a sad story...

London riots 2011: Croydon's House of Reeves razed to the ground | Mail Online


Guess owner Maurice Reeves was just one of those evil rich people



Heartbroken: Reeves furniture store owner Maurice Reeves arrives today at the store's ruined 140-year-old building in Croydon

Before and after: Reeves furniture store just a short while before the riots, and right, engulfed in flames

Read more: London riots 2011: Croydon's House of Reeves razed to the ground | Mail Online

Yes, I saw the interview with him. Terribly sad.

 

[alexa]

Just heard a teenage girl say that she's having fun rioting. When asked why they were attacking people / places within their own community she opined "We're only targeting the rich. You know, people who own businesses".



Yep, because the poor bloke who owns a corner shop and works from 6am til 10pm 7 days a week is clearly getting rich quick and easy.

I'm not a violent person, but I'd love to slap that little bitch's face for the way she's attempting to justify being a scumbag. Then make her clean up the mess she's made. And work for the shop owner for free to get an idea of the financial cost of her night of fun.

Alternatively, find someone who's worse off than her and allow them to rip off her stuff because she's "rich" compared to them.

Army, water cannon, tear gas, curfew. Sooner the better.

Come on Theresa May you spineless cow, get with the program.

Water cannon is apparently inappopriate according to the police - wouldn't work. The army is not appropriate because this is criminality not civil war. A curfew could be considered and apparently the police have been given the right to use rubber bullets.

Watching the Turkish area of London on newsnight tonight. They are having none of it and chased the would be looters out and are now guarding their premises themselves but London has had 16,000 police on duty tonight and very little problems.

Manchester clearly just had a night of organised crime. Small gangs moving about even with leaders telling them time to move on as the police would soon be coming.

Watching newsnight they had a mixture of people who do believe there is a reason though also saw the rioting/looting as just that and people who just used words scum, no reason and so on. Everyone is agreed the first thing is law and order must be restored. Harriet Harman has just said on Newsnight she believes there are issues which do then need to be sorted.

Basically the right wing want to say there is nothing underneath this. They just can't bear to think that. I actually find that as frightening. This guy on the tv cannot even hear Harriet Harman say repeatedly she totally denounces what has happened. She finds it totally unacceptable

Now they want to know why there has been no rioting in Scotland

Guy from Ed University believes it is because we have not yet felt the full force of the cuts and our Politicians are seen as more caring of the people. At the same time we have the same gross social inequality, marginalised youth and the dispossessed and it was also suggested that because we have less racial diversity, we have not been challenged where it is perceived England's police have a history of being racist.

They spoke of how people are going nuts if anyone suggests it could be anything other than mindless violence and how anyone who suggests this is being condemned. The panel in Scotland believe this does have a base reason of youth seeing no future. This is a reflection of people who are marginalised in society. That's what they believe even if how this is being expressed is, as it is, through mindless violence.

They wait to see whether we get started but are hopeful it will not spread here.

Thanks for the info. God, I miss Newsnight. For some reason you can get BBC programming streamed pretty much everywhere in the world except the US.

Interestingly, I saw an interview this morning on BBC America (about noon London time) with a youth worker from Southeast London who had some very firm views on this, such as:

- British youth has, for the last 20 years, been told frequently about their rights but not about their responsibilities.

That is a very common objection and has validity. However the rights they, or the underclass this is referring to, are told about are rights to stand up for themselves and not take being put down. What is missed in this argument is that the tow-rags, and they usually are, who go around being a pain and talking of their rights, frequently have few opportunities. Like it or not since Thatcherism, this country has had an underclass.

- It is quite revealing that someone has to suggest to parents that keeping their kids in during a riot might be a good idea.

Yes. I don't know why. I only know what I have seen on documentaries on places where people are hemmed in with gangs. There it can be difficult for the parents to keep their kids under control because the kids can be more scared of the gang than the parents - even scared that their parents might be hurt and the parents themselves can be scared of the gangs but obviously there are a multiple of possible reasons for this which do need investigating because it kind of goes, as you said, against the natural way of things. People are being too quick to put things in boxes

In other countries this request would not have to be made (which I guess agrees to an extent with the observations you posted regarding the Turkish community).

It is more about area than country. The Turks live in the Turkish area not gang land. Basically what they did was 'wrong'. The police should have dealt with it. I had to admire them though.

- The police, having spent many years being pilloried by the press have effectively been neutered to the point where they don't want to wade into rioters with truncheons for fear of appearing overly aggressive.

The Scottish policeman on Newsnight said the police were restrained because if they had not been there almost certainly would have been more violence and deaths. More police tonight resolved that problem.

- Ask schoolteachers why it is so difficult to keep order in classrooms and you will hear them respond that disciplining students frequently leads to accusations, picked up in the press and often pursued through the courts, that it is the teachers who are at fault.

This is a gross generalisation and I am not sure there are grounds for it. Generally speaking a school is as good as it's head teacher.

I found it very odd to hear this coming from a Youth Worker.

Youth leaders come from all political spectrum's. They also vary in their ability. He seems to have presented a pretty stereotypical right wing damming of British society .

BTW, the term 'British Youth' was his description, not mine. I suspect he used it euphemistically.

and that is a clue that he is not to be trusted. Maybe a minority of our youth have problems. To present this as 'British Youth' shows he has no respect for them.

 

[California Girl]

Water cannon is apparently inappopriate according to the police - wouldn't work. The army is not appropriate because this is criminality not civil war. A curfew could be considered and apparently the police have been given the right to use rubber bullets.

Watching the Turkish area of London on newsnight tonight. They are having none of it and chased the would be looters out and are now guarding their premises themselves but London has had 16,000 police on duty tonight and very little problems.

Manchester clearly just had a night of organised crime. Small gangs moving about even with leaders telling them time to move on as the police would soon be coming.

Watching newsnight they had a mixture of people who do believe there is a reason though also saw the rioting/looting as just that and people who just used words scum, no reason and so on. Everyone is agreed the first thing is law and order must be restored. Harriet Harman has just said on Newsnight she believes there are issues which do then need to be sorted.

Basically the right wing want to say there is nothing underneath this. They just can't bear to think that. I actually find that as frightening. This guy on the tv cannot even hear Harriet Harman say repeatedly she totally denounces what has happened. She finds it totally unacceptable

Now they want to know why there has been no rioting in Scotland

Guy from Ed University believes it is because we have not yet felt the full force of the cuts and our Politicians are seen as more caring of the people. At the same time we have the same gross social inequality, marginalised youth and the dispossessed and it was also suggested that because we have less racial diversity, we have not been challenged where it is perceived England's police have a history of being racist.

They spoke of how people are going nuts if anyone suggests it could be anything other than mindless violence and how anyone who suggests this is being condemned. The panel in Scotland believe this does have a base reason of youth seeing no future. This is a reflection of people who are marginalised in society. That's what they believe even if how this is being expressed is, as it is, through mindless violence.

They wait to see whether we get started but are hopeful it will not spread here.

Thanks for the info. God, I miss Newsnight. For some reason you can get BBC programming streamed pretty much everywhere in the world except the US.

Interestingly, I saw an interview this morning on BBC America (about noon London time) with a youth worker from Southeast London who had some very firm views on this, such as:

- British youth has, for the last 20 years, been told frequently about their rights but not about their responsibilities.

That is a very common objection and has validity. However the rights they, or the underclass this is referring to, are told about are rights to stand up for themselves and not take being put down. What is missed in this argument is that the tow-rags, and they usually are, who go around being a pain and talking of their rights, frequently have few opportunities. Like it or not since Thatcherism, this country has had an underclass.



Yes. I don't know why. I only know what I have seen on documentaries on places where people are hemmed in with gangs. There it can be difficult for the parents to keep their kids under control because the kids can be more scared of the gang than the parents - even scared that their parents might be hurt and the parents themselves can be scared of the gangs but obviously there are a multiple of possible reasons for this which do need investigating because it kind of goes, as you said, against the natural way of things. People are being too quick to put things in boxes



It is more about area than country. The Turks live in the Turkish area not gang land. Basically what they did was 'wrong'. The police should have dealt with it. I had to admire them though.



The Scottish policeman on Newsnight said the police were restrained because if they had not been there almost certainly would have been more violence and deaths. More police tonight resolved that problem.



This is a gross generalisation and I am not sure there are grounds for it. Generally speaking a school is as good as it's head teacher.

I found it very odd to hear this coming from a Youth Worker.

Youth leaders come from all political spectrum's. They also vary in their ability. He seems to have presented a pretty stereotypical damming of British society .

BTW, the term 'British Youth' was his description, not mine. I suspect he used it euphemistically.

and that is a clue that he is not to be trusted. Maybe a minority of our youth have problems. To present this as 'British Youth' shows he has no respect for them.

For a 'social scientist', you don't seem overly well informed about your own society. Your country has had an underclass long before Thatcher.... in fact, you can go back centuries and find an underclass in Britain.

Had you paid any attention to what I've said about this situation.... I've said this country needs to stop trying to force kids into a higher education system that they cannot succeed in and give them apprenticeships and vocational courses... and you all need to respect tradespeople as much as the 'educated' graduates. You need to give these kids the opportunity to earn some self respect. I blame people like you - not liberals but social scientists for advising governments to force square pegs into round wholes.

And.... you need to teach kids that with rights come responsibilities. Hundreds if not thousands of people have lost their jobs, and their homes because of these brats.

 

[tigerbob]

Water cannon is apparently inappopriate according to the police - wouldn't work. The army is not appropriate because this is criminality not civil war. A curfew could be considered and apparently the police have been given the right to use rubber bullets.

Watching the Turkish area of London on newsnight tonight. They are having none of it and chased the would be looters out and are now guarding their premises themselves but London has had 16,000 police on duty tonight and very little problems.

Manchester clearly just had a night of organised crime. Small gangs moving about even with leaders telling them time to move on as the police would soon be coming.

Watching newsnight they had a mixture of people who do believe there is a reason though also saw the rioting/looting as just that and people who just used words scum, no reason and so on. Everyone is agreed the first thing is law and order must be restored. Harriet Harman has just said on Newsnight she believes there are issues which do then need to be sorted.

Basically the right wing want to say there is nothing underneath this. They just can't bear to think that. I actually find that as frightening. This guy on the tv cannot even hear Harriet Harman say repeatedly she totally denounces what has happened. She finds it totally unacceptable

Now they want to know why there has been no rioting in Scotland

Guy from Ed University believes it is because we have not yet felt the full force of the cuts and our Politicians are seen as more caring of the people. At the same time we have the same gross social inequality, marginalised youth and the dispossessed and it was also suggested that because we have less racial diversity, we have not been challenged where it is perceived England's police have a history of being racist.

They spoke of how people are going nuts if anyone suggests it could be anything other than mindless violence and how anyone who suggests this is being condemned. The panel in Scotland believe this does have a base reason of youth seeing no future. This is a reflection of people who are marginalised in society. That's what they believe even if how this is being expressed is, as it is, through mindless violence.

They wait to see whether we get started but are hopeful it will not spread here.

Thanks for the info. God, I miss Newsnight. For some reason you can get BBC programming streamed pretty much everywhere in the world except the US.

Interestingly, I saw an interview this morning on BBC America (about noon London time) with a youth worker from Southeast London who had some very firm views on this, such as:

- British youth has, for the last 20 years, been told frequently about their rights but not about their responsibilities.

That is a very common objection and has validity. However the rights they, or the underclass this is referring to, are told about are rights to stand up for themselves and not take being put down. What is missed in this argument is that the tow-rags, and they usually are, who go around being a pain and talking of their rights, frequently have few opportunities. Like it or not since Thatcherism, this country has had an underclass.



Yes. I don't know why. I only know what I have seen on documentaries on places where people are hemmed in with gangs. There it can be difficult for the parents to keep their kids under control because the kids can be more scared of the gang than the parents - even scared that their parents might be hurt and the parents themselves can be scared of the gangs but obviously there are a multiple of possible reasons for this which do need investigating because it kind of goes, as you said, against the natural way of things. People are being too quick to put things in boxes



It is more about area than country. The Turks live in the Turkish area not gang land. Basically what they did was 'wrong'. The police should have dealt with it. I had to admire them though.



The Scottish policeman on Newsnight said the police were restrained because if they had not been there almost certainly would have been more violence and deaths. More police tonight resolved that problem.



This is a gross generalisation and I am not sure there are grounds for it. Generally speaking a school is as good as it's head teacher.

I found it very odd to hear this coming from a Youth Worker.

Youth leaders come from all political spectrum's. They also vary in their ability. He seems to have presented a pretty stereotypical right wing damming of British society .

BTW, the term 'British Youth' was his description, not mine. I suspect he used it euphemistically.

and that is a clue that he is not to be trusted. Maybe a minority of our youth have problems. To present this as 'British Youth' shows he has no respect for them.

I agree that Britain has an underclass, but cannot agree with the inference that it didn't exist before Thatcherism.

It existed before the formation of the NHS, over 50 years ago. It existed before national insurance was established, which I believe was over 100 years ago. Blaming the existence of an underclass on Mrs Thatcher is facile.

And despite the existence of an underclass, Britain as a whole still provides its youth with better healthcare, benefits, education and opportunity that almost any other country in the world.

As to the political motivations of the youth leader I mentioned, it was not so much the fact that he said what he did as the fact that he was about 25 years old and black that surprised me. Young black males are generally not core bedrock for the right. I accept that this is a generalization, but that doesn't make it untrue.

 

[waltky]

Granny says shame on `em, shame, shame on dem hooligans...

Riots: Manchester and Salford disorder brings 'shame on streets'
9 August 2011 - Tony Lloyd, Labour MP for Manchester Central: "I deplore this appalling criminal activity"

Hundreds of rioters have brought "shame on the streets of Salford and Manchester", Greater Manchester's assistant chief constable has said. Fire bombs have been thrown at shops and looters have stolen clothes, electrical items and alcohol. ACC Garry Shewan said: "This has been senseless violence and senseless criminality of a scale I have never experienced in my career before." Police have arrested 47 people and Mr Shewan said more would follow.

Councillor Pat Karney, of Manchester City Council, said the violence marked "one of the worst days that Manchester has ever seen". He said youths aged from nine had been on the rampage through the city centre. Council workers were already starting on the clean-up operation in the city, he said. Mr Shewan added: "Over the past few hours, Greater Manchester Police has been faced with extraordinary levels of violence from groups of criminals intent on committing widespread disorder.

"This is nothing more than senseless violence with no absolutely no regard for people, their property or livelihoods. "These criminals have also attacked some of my officers and other emergency services who are simply trying to do their job to keep the public safe and restore order. "These people have nothing to protest against - there is no sense of injustice or any spark that has led to this. "I would ask all members of the communities across Greater Manchester to think very carefully and seriously about who they support and who they want to bring to justice for those acts which have ripped the heart out of two great cities."

Mr Karney said "true Mancunians" had a duty to report what they knew to police. When the BBC asked two youths why they were rioting, one responded: "Right, why are you going to miss the opportunity to get free stuff that's worth like loads of money?" But they said it was not just about that, adding that it was in response to the government cuts. One added: "How many people have they arrested really, though, 10? I'm not really bothered. I'll keep doing this every day until I get caught." He said he might be shouted at or grounded when he returned home but he would "live with that". He added that it would be his first offence "so I'm not really bothered".

More BBC News - Riots: Manchester and Salford disorder brings 'shame on streets'

See also:

UK riots: Trouble erupts in English cities
9 August 2011 - Police try to manage masked youths in Manchester

Sporadic violence has broken out in several cities around England, although London remained largely quiet with a heavy police presence on the streets. With 16,000 police officers deployed in London, the streets remained calm after three previous nights of rioting.

But there was unrest in Manchester, Salford, Liverpool, Wolverhampton, Nottingham, Leicester and Birmingham with shops being looted and set alight. The PM is recalling Parliament over Monday night's "sickening scenes".

Forty seven people have been arrested so far over trouble in Manchester and Salford where crowds of youths have set fire to buildings and cars while 87 have been arrested over disorder which has broken out across the West Midlands.

More BBC News - UK riots: Trouble erupts in English cities

 

[alexa]

Thanks for the info. God, I miss Newsnight. For some reason you can get BBC programming streamed pretty much everywhere in the world except the US.

Interestingly, I saw an interview this morning on BBC America (about noon London time) with a youth worker from Southeast London who had some very firm views on this, such as:

- British youth has, for the last 20 years, been told frequently about their rights but not about their responsibilities.

That is a very common objection and has validity. However the rights they, or the underclass this is referring to, are told about are rights to stand up for themselves and not take being put down. What is missed in this argument is that the tow-rags, and they usually are, who go around being a pain and talking of their rights, frequently have few opportunities. Like it or not since Thatcherism, this country has had an underclass.



Yes. I don't know why. I only know what I have seen on documentaries on places where people are hemmed in with gangs. There it can be difficult for the parents to keep their kids under control because the kids can be more scared of the gang than the parents - even scared that their parents might be hurt and the parents themselves can be scared of the gangs but obviously there are a multiple of possible reasons for this which do need investigating because it kind of goes, as you said, against the natural way of things. People are being too quick to put things in boxes



It is more about area than country. The Turks live in the Turkish area not gang land. Basically what they did was 'wrong'. The police should have dealt with it. I had to admire them though.



The Scottish policeman on Newsnight said the police were restrained because if they had not been there almost certainly would have been more violence and deaths. More police tonight resolved that problem.



This is a gross generalisation and I am not sure there are grounds for it. Generally speaking a school is as good as it's head teacher.



Youth leaders come from all political spectrum's. They also vary in their ability. He seems to have presented a pretty stereotypical right wing damming of British society .

BTW, the term 'British Youth' was his description, not mine. I suspect he used it euphemistically.

and that is a clue that he is not to be trusted. Maybe a minority of our youth have problems. To present this as 'British Youth' shows he has no respect for them.

I agree that Britain has an underclass, but cannot agree with the inference that it didn't exist before Thatcherism.

It existed before the formation of the NHS, over 50 years ago. It existed before national insurance was established, which I believe was over 100 years ago. Blaming the existence of an underclass on Mrs Thatcher is facile.

Well before the formation of the 'welfare state' which was actually about 66 years ago we had the Working class and some who fell beneath that, the destitute. Workhouses were erected to stop people needing to look at the dying in the street and people could enter them, be separated from their families and be put to hard work in return for the most basic food. It would however be wrong to consider the destitute as a particular underclass as they were out of work people belonging to the working class.

Life was indeed very hard and for many reasons, not least fear of revolution which we came very near to after WW1, after WW2 the Welfare State was created with the intention of offering equal opportunities to all as well as free health services, a commitment to full employment and certain benefits as a right.

The period from 1945 to 1980 saw the biggest change in British society ever. For the first time people whose parents had always worked down the mine or similar got themselves a University education and a job in the professions. Social mobility was a possibility if you worked for it. Not any more

Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining

* In a comparison of eight European and North American countries, Britain and the United States have the lowest social mobility
* Social mobility in Britain has declined whereas in the US it is stable
* Part of the reason for Britain's decline has been that the better off have benefited disproportionately from increased educational opportunity

Researchers from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) have compared the life chances of British children with those in other advanced countries for a study sponsored by the Sutton Trust, and the results are disturbing.

Jo Blanden, Paul Gregg and Steve Machin found that social mobility in Britain - the way in which someone's adult outcomes are related to their circumstances as a child - is lower than in Canada, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland. And while the gap in opportunities between the rich and poor is similar in Britain and the US, in the US it is at least static, while in Britain it is getting wider.

A careful comparison reveals that the USA and Britain are at the bottom with the lowest social mobility. Norway has the greatest social mobility, followed by Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Germany is around the middle of the two extremes, and Canada was found to be much more mobile than the UK.

Comparing surveys of children born in the 1950s and the 1970s, the researchers went on to examine the reason for Britain's low, and declining, mobility. They found that it is in part due to the strong and increasing relationship between family income and educational attainment.

Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

Here is another report by the Guardian

OECD: UK has worse social mobility record than other developed countries | Business | guardian.co.uk

Now that is the situation which comes from Thatcherism. An end to social responsibility, ruthless destruction of jobs without seeing the need to replace them, cutting of benefits so that those who found themselves stuck with no job or possibility of a job were advised by their Unions to claim incapacity because that was the only way they could survive. Once on the incapacity people did not want to come off it for a little work because that would show they were not sick. Areas with no hope develop where people get used to no hope for the future.

concept of the underclass is put forward by British Labour MP Frank Field. He claimed that poverty is increasing in Britain, and that there is a growing underclass made up of (1) the long-term unemployed, (2) single-parent families; (3) elderly pensioners. This group is characterized by being reliant on state benefits that are too low to give them an acceptable living standard, and have no chance of escaping from reliance on state-benefits. The causes of the development of this "underclass" are rising levels of unemployment, changes in government policy under Thatcher, which have widened the gap between the rich and the poor, and changes in the public attitude to poverty, with an increase in the tendency to blame the poor for their poverty. In general he argues that Thatcher reversed the long-term trend in British social history towards the development of rights, and that the underclass are trapped by the lack of rights. The Thatcher regime (1979 - 1990) removed the link between pensions and average wages; sick pay was phased out in 1980; child benefit was frozen in 1987 and 1988. The increase in means-tested benefits under Margaret Thatcher's successor as Prime Minister, John Major increased dependency and created a poverty trap. All in all, the gap between the rich and the poor increased during the period of Conservative government (1979 - 1997). Thus Field blames government policy for the creation of an underclass, and therefore argues that changes in government policy will reverse the trend. (1)

Theories of Poverty: The Underclass, Frank Field - Losing Out

People are stuck in this because of no social mobility and no economic regeneration put into the areas needed.


When you add to that that Unions no longer provide the social networking they once did we have an underclass not properly addressed by anyone. Negative consequences of this are ganglands arising in some estates and rise in the popularity of the BNP and EDL among others.

Prior to Thatcher, the Conservative Party was a patriarchal party who believed we were One Nation and we had a responsibility to each other. Thatcher following Friedman believed we were all psychotic Robinson Cruseos caring only for ourself with no responsibility for others. Is it particularly surprising that this appears to have created a society with little social cohesion? Something Cameron himself has noticed.

And despite the existence of an underclass, Britain as a whole still provides its youth with better healthcare, benefits, education and opportunity that almost any other country in the world.

No you are wrong. Without social mobility you cannot say people have opportunity. Regarding education

The researchers concluded: 'The strength of the relationship between educational attainment and family income, especially for access to higher education, is at the heart of Britain's low mobility culture and what sets us apart from other European and North American countries.'

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2005/LSE_SuttonTrust_report.aspx

As to the political motivations of the youth leader I mentioned, it was not so much the fact that he said what he did as the fact that he was about 25 years old and black that surprised me. Young black males are generally not core bedrock for the right. I accept that this is a generalization, but that doesn't make it untrue.

You are expecting a particular stereotype because he was black. He did not fit your perceived stereotype. Plenty of black men here are right wing. More importantly you are wrong if you believe the people stuck in this underclass are all black. It does not have anything to do with race.

 

[sparky]

For a 'social scientist', you don't seem overly well informed about your own society. Your country has had an underclass long before Thatcher.... in fact, you can go back centuries and find an underclass in Britain.

Had you paid any attention to what I've said about this situation.... I've said this country needs to stop trying to force kids into a higher education system that they cannot succeed in and give them apprenticeships and vocational courses... and you all need to respect tradespeople as much as the 'educated' graduates. You need to give these kids the opportunity to earn some self respect. I blame people like you - not liberals but social scientists for advising governments to force square pegs into round wholes.

And.... you need to teach kids that with rights come responsibilities. Hundreds if not thousands of people have lost their jobs, and their homes because of these brats.

well whadda ya know, we've a bona fide RW classist here

my my, maybe i should buy a lotto tix today?
~S~

 

[tigerbob]

That is a very common objection and has validity. However the rights they, or the underclass this is referring to, are told about are rights to stand up for themselves and not take being put down. What is missed in this argument is that the tow-rags, and they usually are, who go around being a pain and talking of their rights, frequently have few opportunities. Like it or not since Thatcherism, this country has had an underclass.



Yes. I don't know why. I only know what I have seen on documentaries on places where people are hemmed in with gangs. There it can be difficult for the parents to keep their kids under control because the kids can be more scared of the gang than the parents - even scared that their parents might be hurt and the parents themselves can be scared of the gangs but obviously there are a multiple of possible reasons for this which do need investigating because it kind of goes, as you said, against the natural way of things. People are being too quick to put things in boxes



It is more about area than country. The Turks live in the Turkish area not gang land. Basically what they did was 'wrong'. The police should have dealt with it. I had to admire them though.



The Scottish policeman on Newsnight said the police were restrained because if they had not been there almost certainly would have been more violence and deaths. More police tonight resolved that problem.



This is a gross generalisation and I am not sure there are grounds for it. Generally speaking a school is as good as it's head teacher.



Youth leaders come from all political spectrum's. They also vary in their ability. He seems to have presented a pretty stereotypical right wing damming of British society .



and that is a clue that he is not to be trusted. Maybe a minority of our youth have problems. To present this as 'British Youth' shows he has no respect for them.

I agree that Britain has an underclass, but cannot agree with the inference that it didn't exist before Thatcherism.

It existed before the formation of the NHS, over 50 years ago. It existed before national insurance was established, which I believe was over 100 years ago. Blaming the existence of an underclass on Mrs Thatcher is facile.

Well before the formation of the 'welfare state' which was actually about 66 years ago we had the Working class and some who fell beneath that, the destitute. Workhouses were erected to stop people needing to look at the dying in the street and people could enter them, be separated from their families and be put to hard work in return for the most basic food. It would however be wrong to consider the destitute as a particular underclass as they were out of work people belonging to the working class.

Life was indeed very hard and for many reasons, not least fear of revolution which we came very near to after WW1, after WW2 the Welfare State was created with the intention of offering equal opportunities to all as well as free health services, a commitment to full employment and certain benefits as a right.

The period from 1945 to 1980 saw the biggest change in British society ever. For the first time people whose parents had always worked down the mine or similar got themselves a University education and a job in the professions. Social mobility was a possibility if you worked for it. Not any more




Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

Here is another report by the Guardian

OECD: UK has worse social mobility record than other developed countries | Business | guardian.co.uk

Now that is the situation which comes from Thatcherism. An end to social responsibility, ruthless destruction of jobs without seeing the need to replace them, cutting of benefits so that those who found themselves stuck with no job or possibility of a job were advised by their Unions to claim incapacity because that was the only way they could survive. Once on the incapacity people did not want to come off it for a little work because that would show they were not sick. Areas with no hope develop where people get used to no hope for the future.

[/B]

Theories of Poverty: The Underclass, Frank Field - Losing Out

People are stuck in this because of no social mobility and no economic regeneration put into the areas needed.


When you add to that that Unions no longer provide the social networking they once did we have an underclass not properly addressed by anyone. Negative consequences of this are ganglands arising in some estates and rise in the popularity of the BNP and EDL among others.

Prior to Thatcher, the Conservative Party was a patriarchal party who believed we were One Nation and we had a responsibility to each other. Thatcher following Friedman believed we were all psychotic Robinson Cruseos caring only for ourself with no responsibility for others. Is it particularly surprising that this appears to have created a society with little social cohesion? Something Cameron himself has noticed.




No you are wrong. Without social mobility you cannot say people have opportunity. Regarding education

The researchers concluded: 'The strength of the relationship between educational attainment and family income, especially for access to higher education, is at the heart of Britain's low mobility culture and what sets us apart from other European and North American countries.'

Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

As to the political motivations of the youth leader I mentioned, it was not so much the fact that he said what he did as the fact that he was about 25 years old and black that surprised me. Young black males are generally not core bedrock for the right. I accept that this is a generalization, but that doesn't make it untrue.

You are expecting a particular stereotype because he was black. He did not fit your perceived stereotype. Plenty of black men here are right wing. More importantly you are wrong if you believe the people stuck in this underclass are all black. It does not have anything to do with race.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on most of these.

1. I know plenty of people from disadvantaged backgrounds who by hard work and flexibility have greatly improved their standard of living and their prospects. The term 'social mobility' is a unicorn, a mythical creature used to try and turn statistical observation into socio-scientific fact. It is the classic lamp post for drunks that Andrew Lang first described so many years ago.

2. The correlation between family income and educational attainment is an issue everywhere. Those who live in lower income areas generally have lower quality schooling. That's a global thing not a British thing. On the other hand, when I look at the costs of higher education in the US compared to the costs in Britain, there is no comparison. You can get a BA in Britain for £10k. Try that in America and see how far it gets you. My wife worked 2 jobs while putting herself through college and it took her 10 years more to pay off her college loans. Now she wonders why it is that people today, who get so much more opportunity than she ever did for so much less effort, still complain about not getting enough help and want to blame 'society' for not giving them enough opportunity, as though opportunity should come in a personally addressed, gilt-edged envelope.

3. You're extrapolating my observation about the youth leader into a supposed position that I believe that all people in the underclass are black. That's neither what I said nor what I meant, and I assume you are aware of that.

4. There is a big difference between the Thatcherite mantra of 'self-reliance', and the darker, more sinister description of 'not caring for anyone else' that you ascribe to it. In effect, you are throwing away all the positive elements of such a worldview (self-sacrifice, hard work, motivation) and focusing only on the negative (self-satisfaction, selfishness). I believe both exist, and the extent to which one dominates the other depends entirely on the individual.

It seems clear we're not going to agree on this. That's OK. It's actually refreshing to be able to have a conversation and disagree with somebody without it turning into a food fight.

 

[alexa]

I agree that Britain has an underclass, but cannot agree with the inference that it didn't exist before Thatcherism.

It existed before the formation of the NHS, over 50 years ago. It existed before national insurance was established, which I believe was over 100 years ago. Blaming the existence of an underclass on Mrs Thatcher is facile.

Well before the formation of the 'welfare state' which was actually about 66 years ago we had the Working class and some who fell beneath that, the destitute. Workhouses were erected to stop people needing to look at the dying in the street and people could enter them, be separated from their families and be put to hard work in return for the most basic food. It would however be wrong to consider the destitute as a particular underclass as they were out of work people belonging to the working class.

Life was indeed very hard and for many reasons, not least fear of revolution which we came very near to after WW1, after WW2 the Welfare State was created with the intention of offering equal opportunities to all as well as free health services, a commitment to full employment and certain benefits as a right.

The period from 1945 to 1980 saw the biggest change in British society ever. For the first time people whose parents had always worked down the mine or similar got themselves a University education and a job in the professions. Social mobility was a possibility if you worked for it. Not any more




Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

Here is another report by the Guardian

OECD: UK has worse social mobility record than other developed countries | Business | guardian.co.uk

Now that is the situation which comes from Thatcherism. An end to social responsibility, ruthless destruction of jobs without seeing the need to replace them, cutting of benefits so that those who found themselves stuck with no job or possibility of a job were advised by their Unions to claim incapacity because that was the only way they could survive. Once on the incapacity people did not want to come off it for a little work because that would show they were not sick. Areas with no hope develop where people get used to no hope for the future.

[/B]

Theories of Poverty: The Underclass, Frank Field - Losing Out

People are stuck in this because of no social mobility and no economic regeneration put into the areas needed.


When you add to that that Unions no longer provide the social networking they once did we have an underclass not properly addressed by anyone. Negative consequences of this are ganglands arising in some estates and rise in the popularity of the BNP and EDL among others.

Prior to Thatcher, the Conservative Party was a patriarchal party who believed we were One Nation and we had a responsibility to each other. Thatcher following Friedman believed we were all psychotic Robinson Cruseos caring only for ourself with no responsibility for others. Is it particularly surprising that this appears to have created a society with little social cohesion? Something Cameron himself has noticed.




No you are wrong. Without social mobility you cannot say people have opportunity. Regarding education



Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

As to the political motivations of the youth leader I mentioned, it was not so much the fact that he said what he did as the fact that he was about 25 years old and black that surprised me. Young black males are generally not core bedrock for the right. I accept that this is a generalization, but that doesn't make it untrue.

You are expecting a particular stereotype because he was black. He did not fit your perceived stereotype. Plenty of black men here are right wing. More importantly you are wrong if you believe the people stuck in this underclass are all black. It does not have anything to do with race.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on most of these.

yes

1. I know plenty of people from disadvantaged backgrounds who by hard work and flexibility have greatly improved their standard of living and their prospects.

That's just a throw away, not to do with research

The term 'social mobility' is a unicorn, a mythical creature used to try and turn statistical observation into socio-scientific fact. It is the classic lamp post for drunks that Andrew Lang first described so many years ago.

I don't know Andrew Lang so I cannot comment on him but social mobility is a real thing and it is to do with the ability of people to be have equality of opportunity. Research is real and anyone wishing to pretend it is a fairy tale is deceiving for ulterior motives.

2. The correlation between family income and educational attainment is an issue everywhere. Those who live in lower income areas generally have lower quality schooling. That's a global thing not a British thing. On the other hand, when I look at the costs of higher education in the US compared to the costs in Britain, there is no comparison. You can get a BA in Britain for £10k. Try that in America and see how far it gets you. My wife worked 2 jobs while putting herself through college and it took her 10 years more to pay off her college loans. Now she wonders why it is that people today, who get so much more opportunity than she ever did for so much less effort, still complain about not getting enough help and want to blame 'society' for not giving them enough opportunity, as though opportunity should come in a personally addressed, gilt-edged envelope.

All that is irrelevance though glad your wife did well.

Research shows that the lack of mobility in the UK is linked to family income. Indeed this has become worse because of the need to 'network'. It used to be that someone could for instance get themselves an education at a state school, work, learn politics in a trade Union and be accepted to stand for Parliament. Now it is necessary to go to an elite school, get to Oxford, study PPE, Politics, Philosophy and Economics, go and do some voluntary work at the house of commons (which clearly also demands money) and then after a while you may get accepted as a candidate.

3. You're extrapolating my observation about the youth leader into a supposed position that I believe that all people in the underclass are black. That's neither what I said nor what I meant, and I assume you are aware of that.

Possibly. I'm not that impressed by him. He said a lot of stereotypes. I wonder what his agenda was.

4. There is a big difference between the Thatcherite mantra of 'self-reliance', and the darker, more sinister description of 'not caring for anyone else' that you ascribe to it. In effect, you are throwing away all the positive elements of such a worldview (self-sacrifice, hard work, motivation) and focusing only on the negative (self-satisfaction, selfishness). I believe both exist, and the extent to which one dominates the other depends entirely on the individual.

Nah, that is not true. The UK has always had The Protestant Work ethic. However we have also taken responsibility for community. Even in the old feudal times, those who were not able would be looked after.

It has long been recognised that if you leave sections of the population with no hope, there is a response and that response effects all society.

I explained what I was talking about and you are just ignoring it and giving your previous opinion but not addressing the issues I brought presented.

It seems clear we're not going to agree on this. That's OK. It's actually refreshing to be able to have a conversation and disagree with somebody without it turning into a food fight.

Well, I have replied to you so hope that remains the same but I agree.

 

[Toro]

Spurs won't be selling Modric now!

 

[Swagger]

Spurs won't be selling Modric now!

No, indeed they won't. Instead they'll be signing the new Italian striker, Grabatelli.

 

[tigerbob]

Well before the formation of the 'welfare state' which was actually about 66 years ago we had the Working class and some who fell beneath that, the destitute. Workhouses were erected to stop people needing to look at the dying in the street and people could enter them, be separated from their families and be put to hard work in return for the most basic food. It would however be wrong to consider the destitute as a particular underclass as they were out of work people belonging to the working class.

Life was indeed very hard and for many reasons, not least fear of revolution which we came very near to after WW1, after WW2 the Welfare State was created with the intention of offering equal opportunities to all as well as free health services, a commitment to full employment and certain benefits as a right.

The period from 1945 to 1980 saw the biggest change in British society ever. For the first time people whose parents had always worked down the mine or similar got themselves a University education and a job in the professions. Social mobility was a possibility if you worked for it. Not any more




Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home

Here is another report by the Guardian

OECD: UK has worse social mobility record than other developed countries | Business | guardian.co.uk

Now that is the situation which comes from Thatcherism. An end to social responsibility, ruthless destruction of jobs without seeing the need to replace them, cutting of benefits so that those who found themselves stuck with no job or possibility of a job were advised by their Unions to claim incapacity because that was the only way they could survive. Once on the incapacity people did not want to come off it for a little work because that would show they were not sick. Areas with no hope develop where people get used to no hope for the future.

[/B]

Theories of Poverty: The Underclass, Frank Field - Losing Out

People are stuck in this because of no social mobility and no economic regeneration put into the areas needed.


When you add to that that Unions no longer provide the social networking they once did we have an underclass not properly addressed by anyone. Negative consequences of this are ganglands arising in some estates and rise in the popularity of the BNP and EDL among others.

Prior to Thatcher, the Conservative Party was a patriarchal party who believed we were One Nation and we had a responsibility to each other. Thatcher following Friedman believed we were all psychotic Robinson Cruseos caring only for ourself with no responsibility for others. Is it particularly surprising that this appears to have created a society with little social cohesion? Something Cameron himself has noticed.




No you are wrong. Without social mobility you cannot say people have opportunity. Regarding education



Disturbing finding from LSE study - social mobility in Britain lower than other advanced countries and declining - 2005 - News archive - News - News and media - Home



You are expecting a particular stereotype because he was black. He did not fit your perceived stereotype. Plenty of black men here are right wing. More importantly you are wrong if you believe the people stuck in this underclass are all black. It does not have anything to do with race.

yes


That's just a throw away, not to do with research




I don't know Andrew Lang so I cannot comment on him but social mobility is a real thing and it is to do with the ability of people to be have equality of opportunity. Research is real and anyone wishing to pretend it is a fairy tale is deceiving for ulterior motives.



All that is irrelevance though glad your wife did well.

Research shows that the lack of mobility in the UK is linked to family income. Indeed this has become worse because of the need to 'network'. It used to be that someone could for instance get themselves an education at a state school, work, learn politics in a trade Union and be accepted to stand for Parliament. Now it is necessary to go to an elite school, get to Oxford, study PPE, Politics, Philosophy and Economics, go and do some voluntary work at the house of commons (which clearly also demands money) and then after a while you may get accepted as a candidate.




Possibly. I'm not that impressed by him. He said a lot of stereotypes. I wonder what his agenda was.



Nah, that is not true. The UK has always had The Protestant Work ethic. However we have also taken responsibility for community. Even in the old feudal times, those who were not able would be looked after.

It has long been recognised that if you leave sections of the population with no hope, there is a response and that response effects all society.

I explained what I was talking about and you are just ignoring it and giving your previous opinion but not addressing the issues I brought presented.

It seems clear we're not going to agree on this. That's OK. It's actually refreshing to be able to have a conversation and disagree with somebody without it turning into a food fight.

Well, I have replied to you so hope that remains the same but I agree.

Not a problem. They are just my opinions. Doesn't mean I'm right.