London Riots
#181
Ok. I thought we were discussing political affiliations not alma maters. If those that post on this forum are truly representative, I agree with the allegation that those that attend those Universities are knobs of the highest calibre.
#182






Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,986











How does the blame lie with the conservatives? Every time they have been in power they (eventually) reduce unemployment. When Major left office the country's economy was in the best shape it had been in for decades, a fact which Brown tried to claim credit for. Then Labour came in, sold off the gold reserves for nothing, spent and spent without restraint, pouring huge amounts of this money into welfare, breaking the economy in the process and created a disgustingly unambitious benefit scrounging generation that since the beginning has created nothing but misery for respectable citizens who are trying to make a living. These riots are just that corrosive culture taken to a new height, the occasional band of chavs you saw on the street are now one giant angry gang with nothing better to do then smash shops and steal plasma TVs.
#183






Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,986











Does this mean it's open season on personal abuse? I don't mind, but as a "high calibre knob" I just want to check before joining in.
#184
Okay I'm in summer holiday mode. What I meant is how can you understand and problem-solve many of the inner-city issues that due to your background you have a lack of cultural empathy?
#189
Who is to blame then: the anti-social idiots whom, it would appear, you believe are responsible for the position they find themselves in; the Government that aren't providing jobs (how do they do that, surely the civil service is big enough); the rich people that, one assumes, own the businesses that provide the jobs?
What would you do to ensure that there were sufficient jobs for everyone? Would you stop your neighbours from purchasing cheap consumer items? Would you ensure that all workers have to be retained, even if they are not prepared to work in accordance with how their employer expects them to? Have you ever started a business, run it successfully and actually employed arms length workers?
Why aren't you the Prime Minister, after all, you make it sound so easy?
What would you do to ensure that there were sufficient jobs for everyone? Would you stop your neighbours from purchasing cheap consumer items? Would you ensure that all workers have to be retained, even if they are not prepared to work in accordance with how their employer expects them to? Have you ever started a business, run it successfully and actually employed arms length workers?
Why aren't you the Prime Minister, after all, you make it sound so easy?

Young people from deprived urban areas are disillusioned and disconnected. This has been 20/30 years in the making - it started under Thatcher when she destroyed the working class and Britain's manufacturing base - but Cameron has lifted the lid on it this past year. Labour for all their faults did put some welfare programs back in place for young people and those on low incomes but these have been stripped back. People are angry and lots and lots of young kids are on the streets at night. Most of the time they don't burn cars, but now they feel they have a purpose where before they had none at all. Many of these people have nothing to lose since many will be in gangs or involved in criminal activity already. What's to stop them? This is their "moment".
The violence is disgusting and I don't condone any of it. But just to explain it, in my own opinion, I think people look at the morals of the so-called authorities in society and think: if they're going to behave like that why shouldn't we? Government and opposition being in bed with Murdoch (the Church too!); Govnt still giving money to the banks in bonuses while people suffer economically; MPs expenses; the Met Police being questioned in terms of their propriety viz the NOTW scandal. Where's the moral light shining from in society. Who exactly is setting an example for some of these young people? Not community leaders. There aren't any anymore, these centers have been shut down. Thank god for decent parents and decent people. Otherwise, it would or could be much worse.
Cameron is an arsehole. He sits on beach for 3 days while Britain burns and only comes back ( in my view) because Clegg got out there meeting people taking the initiative.
Once again, this has been many years in the making but in my view Cameron is mostly to blame. But others too, I admit.
#191










Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 14,227











I bought a 'get angry and riot' t-shirt a few weeks ago from one of the classifieds in viz. I haven't worn it yet, but I think it's time.
#192
How does the blame lie with the conservatives? Every time they have been in power they (eventually) reduce unemployment. When Major left office the country's economy was in the best shape it had been in for decades, a fact which Brown tried to claim credit for. Then Labour came in, sold off the gold reserves for nothing, spent and spent without restraint, pouring huge amounts of this money into welfare, breaking the economy in the process and created a disgustingly unambitious benefit scrounging generation that since the beginning has created nothing but misery for respectable citizens who are trying to make a living. These riots are just that corrosive culture taken to a new height, the occasional band of chavs you saw on the street are now one giant angry gang with nothing better to do then smash shops and steal plasma TVs.
Some things NEVER change!
#195
What is wrong with the legal framework?
So why can't the disaffected work for themselves? Take for example, a carpenter. The tools he requires for his vocation belong to him. If he doesn't like the terms upon which his employer wishes to employ him, what is preventing him from competing with his employer?
I find these arguments the same that are used by, for example, women that have hit the "glass ceiling" and, but for their sex, would be the most powerful directors and business managers about. Assuming this is correct, why don't they run their own businesses and impose such ceilings upon others?
So why can't the disaffected work for themselves? Take for example, a carpenter. The tools he requires for his vocation belong to him. If he doesn't like the terms upon which his employer wishes to employ him, what is preventing him from competing with his employer?
I find these arguments the same that are used by, for example, women that have hit the "glass ceiling" and, but for their sex, would be the most powerful directors and business managers about. Assuming this is correct, why don't they run their own businesses and impose such ceilings upon others?
I almost cannot believe that you made this comment about women and the glass ceiling ... Except that it sort of makes sense that you did now.




