We are all in this together.

darkpool

the top 1% of the UK pay 25% of total income tax. surely they should be thanked for doing so much? perhaps the poor could do their bit and stop claiming benefit?

Spartacus_Mills

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

The complete failure to realise that having to work for a living is different to doing so as a career choice is what is so annoying about the whole "Big Society" agenda I think. Certainly, in my experience from Oxford is that a lot of people from a rich background simply do not realise how 95% of people live.

No-one, but no-one, knows how 95% of people in this country live. Toff or not.

All of this talk about Toffs is nonsense. Labours Toffs do not know how 95% of people live in this country either.

All that matters is their competence.

I want a government of the most able people. I do not care what their background or their wealth is.

ninky_2

bendix wrote: »

could you point us to a healthy democracy please ninky?

A healthy democracy is only possible where the subjects of that democracy are prepared to engage in that democracy in an enlightened, informed and engaged way. When they care more about the issues than they do about Katie Price's latest heartache?

Sadly, that's not Britain.

Our people get the political system their sophistication ultimately deserves.

We have a Coronation Street democracy.

that is such a depressingly superior than thou attitude.

i don't know if there is an entirely healthy democracy although my impression of new zealand was that it was better than here. perhaps because of the lack of historical burden (other than the slight issue of stealing the country from the maoris). the population generally seemed more equal in terms of wealth distribution, attitudes to women less antiquated and not the massive obsession with celebrity culture (unless you count adoration of lord of the rings / rugby).


i think we could do worse than we do now. at least you don't get thrown in prison for being a member of an opposition party. however we could also do a lot better. much of that has to do with improving equality of opportunity. it's certainly not been a linear advancement and social mobility seems less possible now than in recent decades.

ninky_2

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

I want a government of the most able people. I do not care what their background or their wealth is.

i think we all want that. however when that background and wealth reflected in that government all seems to come from quite a narrow section of society it makes you ask whether we do actually have a government of the most able (or at least potentially able) or whether we have a government of the most privileged.

unless of course you subscribe to the view that class/wealth/privilege are merely a generational reflection of merit. i happen not to subscribe to that view. no surprise there.

Spartacus_Mills

ninky wrote: »

i think we all want that. however when that background and wealth reflected in that government all seems to come from quite a narrow section of society it makes you ask whether we do actually have a government of the most able (or at least potentially able) or whether we have a government of the most privileged.

Such is the nature of politics and governance in the UK whatever party is in charge.

ninky wrote: »

unless of course you subscribe to the view that class/wealth/privilege are merely a generational reflection of merit. i happen not to subscribe to that view. no surprise there.

You are simply making up a point to deconstrust.

Thrugelmir

ninky wrote: »

the population generally seemed more equal in terms of wealth distribution,

How did you determine this? Manual labour is badly paid the world over. There's no minimum wage there either.

Maybe your "middle class" than you realise.....

Sir_Humphrey

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

No-one, but no-one, knows how 95% of people in this country live. Toff or not.

All of this talk about Toffs is nonsense. Labours Toffs do not know how 95% of people live in this country either.

All that matters is their competence.

I want a government of the most able people. I do not care what their background or their wealth is.

I never mentioned Toffs.

If they do not understand the country, then they are not the best people.

Spartacus_Mills

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I never mentioned Toffs.

If they do not understand the country, then they are not the best people.

Toffs is a theme running through this thread.

I would agree with the principle if people do not understand the country then they are not the best people to run it. However there is a difference between understanding the country and understanding the lives of "95%" of the inhabitants which is a big ask of anyone.

bendix

ninky wrote: »

i don't know if there is an entirely healthy democracy although my impression of new zealand was that it was better than here. perhaps because of the lack of historical burden (other than the slight issue of stealing the country from the maoris). the population generally seemed more equal in terms of wealth distribution, attitudes to women less antiquated and not the massive obsession with celebrity culture (unless you count adoration of lord of the rings / rugby).


.

As a New Zealand citizen, could I politely suggest you don't know what you're talking about. They not only have a celebrity culture, they have a celebrity political culture where entire governments have been shaped by a cult of personality around politicians like Winston Peters being adored by the pseudo racist greying population.

More equal? Utter nonsense. It has the same income inequalities as here. Try driving from Ponsonby to Panmure in Auckland. Talk to the pacific islanders who live in crumbling houses next to the yuppies who have done up the houses next to them in Grey Lynn.

It's as xenophobic, racists and elitist as any other advanced country. And why? Because like everyone in western democracies, the general population have lost the ability to adopt independent thought, have got lazy or detracted by the pursuit of objects and - as such - have become completely dumbed down.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Not sure that Cameron will like the way the Big Society is manifesting itself. Communities and volunteers are organising to protest against library and youth club closures. They're mobilising to put extreme pressure on councils like Oxford who've been forced to think again about their cuts programme. They created a mass movement against selling forests to Tory donors, a policy now dropped.

Yes, there is a big society. Nothing like wanton acts of destruction by government to mobile people.