Waffle here about anything and everything

[sastusbulbas]

If you worked on the industrial estate I work on, you'd understand why I dislike council estates (we're surrounded by one - they're all louts, menaces, criminals and vandals), and also why I choose to live in a damn nice and expensive area. It's called working hard, working smart, bettering oneself and not relying on government hand-outs.

Call me smug, but frankly I don't care, it's in everyone's capability to work and live to a decent standard but too many people think it's all about getting on a reality TV show and not enough believe in hard work.

Quite a pathetic attitude, and no doubt part of the reason such exists, but of course I understand the anger and resentment one can feel toward such.

I myself am fed up with the current goverment attitude which is helping narrow minded biggots divide classes again in britain.

Due to goverment policies and narrow minded attitudes IT IS NOT EVERYONES RIGHT OR WITHIN THEIR CAPABILITY TO WORK, as current middle class attitude hinders and handicaps anyone within the wrong postcode regardless of capability or education.

The goverment is currently succeeding in bastardising our society more by ensuring lower class citizens or those less financially secure are stuck with sending children to schools in catchment areas where that childs future prospects and personality and such can be handicapped, along with the parental abilities of their families.
The goverment is also cutting spending in these areas, regadless of what some families in these areas pay toward tax and such. I myself have paid all council tax since the poll tax was introduced, and see all the benefits going to single men and women who get discounts and areas around where they live kept tip top. I have to take my son a 20 minute walk to get to a park, with a bus journey to a half decent one where midle class kids dont take their drink and drugs.

A classic example of this countries mentality. I was unemployed once (or twice), and as such was signing on. I remember a discussion regarding the jobs I was looking for, and to my horror the job centre I attended said "this is Leith, we only advertise the low skill low wage jobs, if your after that sort of work you have to go elsewhere!". I got sent to that jobcentre due to the alphabetical order my name fell into, so anyone within a specific part of the alphabet got directed to those jobs LOL?

When I grew up further education was a privelige, reserved for those with money who could live cheap with help from parents, I had the opportunity (as I saw it) to starve and go homeless (or live in a poor area) while trying to further my education, or take on full time employment with the education I currently had (and still live in a poor area due to low wages). I still don't know many young "educated" people who are not up to their eyeballs in debt, nor many who paid for their own education, most are middle class free loaders, who come out of that education with a superiority complex and no work skills.
There are many students that used goverment hand outs to hide from responsabilities and work, and there are many in impoverished areas who cannot get out of their situation due to financial constraint, employers attitudes or their postcode.

I remember an angry responce from a well off parent once when discussing drug use and town centre crime, he didn't like the opinion of the majority of this crime, and soft drug use being carried out by middle classe children. Sadly it was a fact he did not recognise, but of course we all believe all crime drug dealing and such comes from these deprived areas, not at all by middle class children who can afford cannabis or cocain, or indeed find it an ego trip or cool to sell such at night clubs, to friends and such. Most casual crime when I was younger came from families with money. Poor kids in deprived areas cannot afford such things, habits don't just start out of sitting in a council flat with no money or electric. (I know for a fact that a certain local MP's son dealt drugs to middle class casuals and such)

Seriously though, do some case study on those environments, the people and the problems they face once in that situation. I myself work hard, but know what both sides of the coin are like, and I see first hand the postcode and upbringing snobbery which lead to idiots who breeze through studies paid for by others get into jobs they cannot do, chosen at the interview for being well spoken, or having the right postcode.

We as a community create these deprived areas, we put barriers up and make all effort to put those in it under a glass ceilling where they cannot rise above and better themselves, then at every opertunity where we create their reactions and frustration, we get the behaviour which leads us to "see I told you, they are ALL like that!"

I have seen more casual crime, and drug selling and organised crime through the middle and upper classes than in these "slums".

So yes, louts/criminals/vandals because they have nothng better nor no respect for themselves or from others, and know no better. They don't get social skills or education because those areas "do not" appreciate, or "benefit" from such, therefore those areas get sub standard education, in class rooms where all kids are subject to the lower standards and subjective low classe language and attitudes of those peers from such family backgrounds, who when older have even less to do, and less knowledge about what and why they can do anything, other than copy the big boys and "fit in".

I am in such a situation right now. My child attends an affluent nursery, but cannot go to the attached primary due to our postcode which is in between a nice and poor area. I know his attitude and mentality and personality will suffer at the "chosen" primary, therefore he is not getting the opertunity I think he will need to do better in life. I would have to move out this 3 bedroom house spend around roughly £350'000 to get a similar size or better in a suiatble area just to meet my catchment requirement for my childs education. Regardless of the school I want him to attend only being 10 minutes away.
Hell Domino's and Pizza Hut are next door to each other, yet Pizza Hut don't deliver due to "That Area" (again postcode relatated).

Sorry for the rant, but I myself am not from an affluent background, and know for a fact what happens in the real world, the choices are not there to be made by those in the wrong situation all the time, regardless of education, inteligence or upbringing.

Many peoples attitude toward these situations is akin to blaming the stone for breaking the window, not the person who threw it.

Steve

[Steve Toy]

The goverment is currently succeeding in bastardising our socioety more by ensuring lower class citizens or those less financially secure are stuck with sending children to schools in catchment areas where that childs future prospects and personality and such can be handicapped, along with the parental abilities of their families.

In actual fact this government is big into the kind of social engineering that forces people of different socio-economic backgrounds to mix with each other whether they like it or not. This is why we had the school places lottery in Brighton where children would be forced to attend a school the other side of the city away from their locality and existing friendship groups. All the extra travelling involved is certainly not good for local traffic and emissions.

For the same reason they are into the use of public transport and discouraging the use of the private car. It isn't for the environment, it's for reasons of social engineering again that the government would like you to share a bus or packed train carriage with all kinds of people you may normally avoid.

I do agree with you that scumbags come from all sections of society as do decent folk.

[sastusbulbas]

In actual fact this government is big into the kind of social engineering that forces people of different socio-economic backgrounds to mix with each other whether they like it or not. This is why we had the school places lottery in Brighton where children would be forced to attend a school the other side of the city away from their locality and existing friendship groups. All the extra travelling involved is certainly not good for local traffic and emissions.

For the same reason they are into the use of public transport and discouraging the use of the private car. It isn't for the environment, it's for reasons of social engineering again that the government would like you to share a bus or packed train carriage with all kinds of people you may normally avoid.

LOL,

My childs school choice is down to postcode, not travel. I don't own a car, I cycle, run or walk. My son can walk to the Nursery within 20 minutes, the Primary we chose is part and parcel of the education and teaching method we chose the nursery for. It resides next to the nursery.
My child will experience certain traits and attitude, swearing and bullying and such at the "allocated" school (10 minutes walk) and mix with certain types I don't want him to, he is four years old very bright and well spoken, certainly wont last long in the "cesspool" created by the local council to keep kids busy and uneducated, with segregation based on finacial affluence.

As for minimum wage, different education and school standards dependent on postcode, the cost of housing and fact that many parents will move or lie to get children into certain schools etc etc. We cannot choose our childs education unless we can afford the house move or private education.

As such poor families in poor areas suffer poorer education standards and gain lower qualifications, they endure and learn certain mannerisms, personalities and attitudes which do them no favours as they grow up, and many become socialy unacceptable outside thier own area, or suffer when older when looking for employment. Therefore keeping this class system rotating.

People from deprived areas are labeled. Their traits are forced upon them due to social circumstance from an early age, and it is directly related to financial and class circumstance.
Take such a family from such an area and put them in an affluent suburb, it will not work. They will not be accepted socially, they will be regarded with suspicion, and they will have no social skill within that environment.

Our goverment is not into social engineering, never has been. An examle of social engineering is taxes, education standards, and public expendature.

No doubt this may vary within certain areas, but still hold true. there are poor areas and expensive areas to live in, and the better off get more benefits than the poor, who in many cases are their NOT through choice, but due to the handicaps such an upbringing adheres. We still have lower middle and upper classes, and much of the poor suffer deplorable conditions due to local councils and the education, benefits and employement.

How can someone who has had no education due to his upbringing and social experience be expected to live and pay taxes with a job which pays less than benefit. We will no doubt say he should have tried harder, but did he have the opportunity or social circumstance to do so?, or is that all he can achieve. If so why does he have to live off such a low earning and pay the same taxes as someone better off?

There are a few nice areas around me who do not suffer such public mixes LOL, with money out taxes pay ensuring those areas are kept clean quite and free from such. We have a local cycle path which is regulary cleaned by the coucil up to a certain postcode.



Steve (considerably poorer than thou are)

[Filterlab]

...Due to goverment policies and narrow minded attitudes IT IS NOT EVERYONES RIGHT OR WITHIN THEIR CAPABILITY TO WORK, as current middle class attitude hinders and handicaps anyone within the wrong postcode regardless of capability or education.
...

Sorry Steve, that's complete and utter rubbish. The government are not to blame for anybody's inability to work.

At my company one of my responsibilities is recruitment, and I will employ anyone I feel is capable of doing the job required - they must have the right attitude, they must want to work and they must want to do a good job. They are all the requirements. We have several employees, one of them had a particularly difficult upbringing and poor education as a result, she struggles to fit everything in her around work but with some understanding from me and help from her mother she does a damn fine job, in fact she is my most reliable member of staff. Consequently she earns a very good wage and some fantastic fat four figure bonuses.

Because she lives in a 'not so nice' area hasn't hindered her at all, in fact it's her birthday on Monday and as well as the usual card, gifts and cake we do for all our employees, she'll receive a pay rise double the rate of inflation. Now I could have rejected her quite easily at the interview stage (using my bigotted middle class attitude - allegedly) but since I don't have that attitude and I see people for what they are, she got the job.

I don't care where potential employees live, their background, postcode or what class they feel they belong too. I don't care about their race, religion, political stance or what their parents do for a living. Can they do the job to the required standard? Yes - they are employed, No - no thanks then.

So are the government preventing people from working at my company, no - the individual's ability to work is.

As I said, think what you like, I have no shame in admitting that I thoroughly dislike work-shy dole scrounging hand-out grabbers whom when they are completely capable of doing work and contributing to the country, choose to waste their time and the hard-earned tax money of the folk who do work and contribute by lounging about.

If someone genuinely has an inability to work (through illness, disability etc etc) then the welfare state is a fine tool to take care of those less fortunate, but when the money goes to the pockets of the loafers, that annoys me.

Oh, you may want to discuss this with my MD who grew up in a very nasty part of Clapham in the sixties/seventies in a distinctly working class family and went to a terrible state school riddled with the hardest nastiest people in London, but he went on to become one of the most in demand finance directors, worked for several major international organisations, rarely earned less than £250,000 a year and then left it to start his own business (where I work) which has grown by 24% turnover a year every year since it started 10 years ago.


Man I love social situation based rants!

[Steve Toy]

It is actually a Tory government that would, as in the past, truly embrace a classless society with genuine equilty of opportunity. The current government needs to perpetuate the class struggle coupled with a notion of equality of outcome achieved through hideous social engineering in order to stay in business.

[Marco]

As I said, think what you like, I have no shame in admitting that I thoroughly dislike work-shy dole scrounging hand-out grabbers whom when they are completely capable of doing work and contributing to the country, choose to waste their time and the hard-earned tax money of the folk who do work and contribute by lounging about.

If someone genuinely has an inability to work (through illness, disability etc etc) then the welfare state is a fine tool to take care of those less fortunate, but when the money goes to the pockets of the loafers, that annoys me.

Hear, hear!

We need to round up this type of scum somehow and boot them up the arse off their sofas watching daytime TV to find a job - any job, not just something 'cushy' that they fancy doing. Get them earning, cleaning toilets or emptying bins - whatever, and off the benefits system.

There are too many fat lazy layabouts in this country and it's about time we started showing zero tolerance!

Marco.

[sastusbulbas]

Sorry Steve, that's complete and utter rubbish. The government are not to blame for anybody's inability to work.

Hi Rob, I do agree, thats why I said "Not everybody", but by offering poor education standards in impoverished areas, and having a benefit system based on minimum requirement to live which pays more than mimimum wage, the Goverment is not completely blameless.

At my company one of my responsibilities is recruitment, and I will employ anyone I feel is capable of doing the job required - they must have the right attitude, they must want to work and they must want to do a good job. They are all the requirements. We have several employees, one of them had a particularly difficult upbringing and poor education as a result, she struggles to fit everything in her around work but with some understanding from me and help from her mother she does a damn fine job, in fact she is my most reliable member of staff. Consequently she earns a very good wage and some fantastic fat four figure bonuses.

I myself have had to do recruitment for my work, and feel I do better than the previous gentleman in that position, I did sit through many an interview and have seen CV's get binned due to postcode and such.

Because she lives in a 'not so nice' area hasn't hindered her at all, in fact it's her birthday on Monday and as well as the usual card, gifts and cake we do for all our employees, she'll receive a pay rise double the rate of inflation. Now I could have rejected her quite easily at the interview stage (using my bigotted middle class attitude - allegedly) but since I don't have that attitude and I see people for what they are, she got the job.

That's nice to hear , my personal experience is that due to being brought up in Ferguslie Park, Barrhead and various other places, being in care, and choosing to live in a more affordable postcode, I have been hindered in certain areas of my life. (PS my apologies if I infered you had any sort of attitude earlier)

I don't care where potential employees live, their background, postcode or what class they feel they belong too. I don't care about their race, religion, political stance or what their parents do for a living. Can they do the job to the required standard? Yes - they are employed, No - no thanks then.

Again nice , and something I agree with, some people don't though.

So are the government preventing people from working at my company, no - the individual's ability to work is.

Ah, but my point is, IF an individual ends up in a poor education system due to social circumstance, and cannot better his own experiences and direction at those early stages, then this "ability" MAY not be due to the individual, but in some sense goverment or community or local council failing? MAYBE!

As I said, think what you like, I have no shame in admitting that I thoroughly dislike work-shy dole scrounging hand-out grabbers whom when they are completely capable of doing work and contributing to the country, choose to waste their time and the hard-earned tax money of the folk who do work and contribute by lounging about.

I agree that such exists, but on both sides of the fence, there are plenty of younger well off who hide behind studies paid for by the state, while living off hand outs too, this is not always clear cut. I don't disagree with your opinion there, but! for years, and still, benefits pay more than mimimum wage.

If someone genuinely has an inability to work (through illness, disability etc etc) then the welfare state is a fine tool to take care of those less fortunate, but when the money goes to the pockets of the loafers, that annoys me.

Well it can be, but is not perfect? People with MS and in a wheelchair hassled to look for work, while parents of spoilt children get unquestioned as to the childs aparent condition? Personal experience here, as my sisters partner is in the wheelchair, and a parent I know, who did not have any parental skill nor apply themselves to the childs well being now gets hundreds in benefits for a spoilt kid he never attended any social event such as school or nursery? (My wife baby sat that kid, and there was no mental disability or behavour problem whatsoever).

Oh, you may want to discuss this with my MD who grew up in a very nasty part of Clapham in the sixties/seventies in a distinctly working class family and went to a terrible state school riddled with the hardest nastiest people in London, but he went on to become one of the most in demand finance directors, worked for several major international organisations, rarely earned less than £250,000 a year and then left it to start his own business (where I work) which has grown by 24% turnover a year every year since it started 10 years ago.

Why would I want to discuss this with your MD? very well done to him but that is his business? Nor does an individual from a working class background attending state school back in those years change todays circumstances? I know of an ex soccer casual in similar circumstances, and of an ex-drug dealer doing well in a management position. These individual circumstances don't change the fact that many children do not get better opportunities, or indeed even know of anything better.

Man I love social situation based rants!

Me I'm not sure I enjoy them,as clearly opinion is tainted by experience and such LOL

In my opinion, the goverment have introduced a catchment scheme for education, which does segragate children from certain backgrounds from others.

It may seem fair on paper, but instead of parents getting to choose their childs education and influence, they now have to pay for the privelage of an acceptable standard, and an environment where they feel the child will gain the most benefit.
I am not to blame for the parents attitudes of the children attending the school which my child is expected to attend, nor the mentality of the children from that area, so why should I be expected to put my childs well being, upbringing and future in question?

The local school is an absolute cess pool, with many children from impoverished areas with the traits you described earlier. The children are not the ones who created the society that bred their attitudes and personalities. The standards of education are low, and no matter how much an effort a parent or child make, such an education in such an environment will adhere to that childs social and educational status. The goverment imposed this, so my child will suffer more bullying swearing and general unacceptable behavour along with a poor standard of education.

The difference in standard between this school and the one we wanted him to attend next to his nursery are night and day, he does not play with any children from the area which populates the local school, his friends are from elsewhere and some attend his nursery.
The difference which necessitates this change? 10minutes walking distance and a postcode!

Simply put, the goverment makes no effort to better education and standards in many impoverished areas, and has policy to ensure children from such impoverished areas have to attend schools which may have poor standards which the goverment does not improve or inforce. Many of these impoverished areas do not always get much in the way of public spending, and are usually where councils end up putting the "social missfits or less fortunate", there is not much for many to do in such areas, which can also be quite segragated by violence with gangs and such. But again I guess it will always be that individual who is to blame for his social circles since childhood, his family finances and the lack of local amenities.

So in my opinion the goverment is not blameless, and through their actions the goverment "may" well affect the abilities of an individual.

Quite clearly parents are forced to send children to certain schools, if you do not earn enough to live in that catchment area this deems your child not worthy of a higher standard of education.

Quite clearly I am unhappy that my child is now expected to mix with a large percentage of children who swear, piss on the street and are generally appalling. And feel that much of this social behaviour is due to the goverment ignoring such impoverished areas and using them for problem solving or such.

Maybe,

Rant

Rant

What was this all about again?

Oh yes, the goverment is rubbish, not all poor are poor through choice, impoverished areas are terrible, but who's to really blame.

I don't really know, but quite clearly have different experiences and opinion as such.

Still think it questionable that a single man living on his own earning £25k a year, gets a Council tax discount, when a working man earning less and supporting two children does not.

And tax credits are a joke.

I myself do not get tax credits, my wife doe not work (well at the moment as both kids are under 5) but chose to bring up our children, why work and give your complete earnings to a complete stranger to bring up your children for you?
We do not qualify for tax credits or any state help, though some time back I did, and recieved tax credits, but due to work bonuses ended up paying more back than I recieved.

Yet I know of someone in the same circumstance as me but without the job, who actually recieves more via the benefits system than I earn?

Got....to.........stop...........ranting............................................

[sastusbulbas]

Hear, hear!

We need to round up this type of scum somehow and boot them up the arse off their sofas watching daytime TV to find a job - any job, not just something 'cushy' that they fancy doing. Get them earning, cleaning toilets or emptying bins - whatever, and off the benefits system.

There are too many fat lazy layabouts in this country and it's about time we started showing zero tolerance!

Marco.

I've not been to work for three weeks LOL daytime TV sucks..

[Filterlab]

Good chatter, and some good points these Steve.

[Chris Frost]

These individual circumstances don't change the fact that many children do not get better opportunities, or indeed even know of anything better.

Does streaming still exist in schools for 11-16 year olds?

At the Secondary school I attended in the 80's the mix was perhaps 30% Benefits Class, 60% Working Class and 10% Middle Class. Kids had the opportunity to move up or down in streams depending on how they applied themselves. The opportunities were there for the taking.

What was very apparent was the differing work ethic between social classes. On the whole kids from Working and Middle Class backgrounds just tried harder. There were exceptions of course, but they were just that - exceptions.