We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Council evictions begin
Comments
-
When I was 18 I wouldn't have dreamt of smashing in some windows and stealing things, because I was brought up properly.
That is rather simplistic, are you saying for example Adolf smashed up Europe because his mum and dad didn't bring him up properly
Another Godwin star for me'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Not the best Godwin star, loads of historians blame hitlers parents. Apparently, his father beat him up, and his mother coddled him. Everyone seems to blame the parents these days... no one takes responsibilities for their own actions.
It's all moral decay and terrible parents... no one ever seems to admit there are people just born downright evil scrotes.“The ideas of debtor and creditor as to what constitutes a good time never coincide.”
― P.G. Wodehouse, Love Among the Chickens0 -
-
this is just wrong i know they wish to punish those involved but punish a young girl and her mother who were not involved is wrongReplies to posts are always welcome, If I have made a mistake in the post, I am human, tell me nicely and it will be corrected. If your reply cannot be nice, has an underlying issue, or you believe that you are God, please post in another forum. Thank you0
-
Graham, the rioters self evidently stopped rioting. Why do you think that was exactly?
But OK, let's take this to the end point and say we've just evicted say 500 families in London and they are now having to live on the streets without benefits. Do you think that makes the streets of London more or less dangerous? When the cold weather hits and some of them die, does that mean that it's justified because one of their family took an LCD TV and that it's now acceptable to kill people because they've scared us?
Incidentally I'm not saying that some families shouldn't be evicted in some circumstances, and habitual antisocial behaviour genuinely blights places other people live in council estates or anywhere else. But not as a knee jerk reaction to rioting please.
As I said, we want this not because it's right, and it's not justice. It's because we were scared and we want to crush the people who scared us. Understand that before demanding particular action.
That's so dramatic, Julieq. How about they get private accommodation, they seem to have a bit of money about them. Anyway, presumably it isn't a knee-jerk reaction by the Councils as they already have provision in place, and have rehoused people in the past.
The knee-jerk reaction is from the appalled people who sat quietly in their homes over the last week, watching London burning with an intensity that was reminiscent of the Blitz, and people watching as old buildings were set fire to, some with people shouting down that the buildings were occupied. And they were told to 'F off'. People are angry, not scared - although I was a bit on Saturday - but they are very, very angry. Hmmm, and I think I still am.
The British don't like injustice,, and they see people just breaking and grabbing things as the breakdown of fairness and law. And they are right.0 -
this is just wrong i know they wish to punish those involved but punish a young girl and her mother who were not involved is wrong
The young girl can re-housed with her mother into a smaller property.
There is no reason for her brother to be allowed to stay with them.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Not the best Godwin star, loads of historians blame hitlers parents. Apparently, his father beat him up, and his mother coddled him. Everyone seems to blame the parents these days... no one takes responsibilities for their own actions.
It's all moral decay and terrible parents... no one ever seems to admit there are people just born downright evil scrotes.
I thought that was de rigueur for the perfect way to bring up kids, you know when I was lad, 'clip round the ear' and what was it Jennifer wrote, aah yes, and I am sure she break windows when she was 18 eitherHa Ha! This takes me back to my childhood - I can imagine my father saying to me "You turn yourself in, or it's a thrashing from me". I think I'd have preferred the long arm of the Law, to the long arm of my father.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
You suspect on what basis? Knowledge or prejudice?Anyway if the rioting is being used as a pretext to rid estates of undesirables, it's just as well it happened I guess?I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Believe me, we're all much closer to this sort of behaviour than we care to believe. In fact the idea that we can form our own mob and mete out draconian punishments to those who have offended us isn't a bad piece of evidence in its own right. Acceptable behaviour is essentially measured against our peers, and if you isolate a group and allow extreme behaviour a feedback loop develops.
Speeding is an example. Speeding - in some circumstances - kills people. As a group many accept it. As a result, people die. More people die because some people speed than died in the riots, and it costs all of us a lot more money in terms of insurance costs than the entire costs of the rioting. But we discount its seriousness: why? Because it's widely done and people rationalised their own speeding as "safe speeding". There will probably be a queue of people lining up after this post to explain why Julie is being stupid by even mentioning it because it's "not the same thing as burning down a shop and taking a TV". Because that's how they rationalise it to themselves. In terms of absolute numbers of injuries and cost it is much more serious.
The evidence from studies is that most people could be induced to handle stolen goods eventually under a set of rationalisations and if supported by assurances. A surprising number of people would actually take actions they felt would kill someone if they were told to do so by an authority figure of some kind.
So I don't buy the argument that most of us are better behaved. In fact there are two checks to our behaviour, peer opinion and fear of consequences. If you take the fear of consequences away and you see peers supporting a behaviour, there is a very high chance you will behave in the same way, and in fact it's very easy for a feeding frenzy to develop.0 -
Jennifer_Jane wrote: »
The British don't like injustice,, and they see people just breaking and grabbing things as the breakdown of fairness and law. And they are right.
True, so I would like the penalties being handed out by the courts to the equal of what was being handed out two weeks ago, and six months into the future. It is not fair to mention burning building as a defence for sentences for people who (almost certainly) wouldn't dream of doing that.A mum-of-two who slept through the riots will spend the next five months behind bars – because she accepted a pair of looted shorts the morning after.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards