Yellow jacket freedom fighters spreading to London

John_G_Jones

Moby wrote: »

Very smug! Just because the system worked for you, you think it's the same for everyone and if it's not they're the problem. The worlds not as simple as that though. 'Your life is 99% of your own making' ..really! If you are black and brought up by drug using parents in Tottenham your life chances are a thousand times less than if your raised by middle class parents a couple of miles away in Muswell Hill, no matter how hard you strive! Also your life can change in a minute, a car crash, a serious illness etc, can change everything and then you'll regret judging others. That child the parents shouldn't have had because they couldn't afford it might be the person looking after you if you had a stroke.

It worked for everyone that I know, too, all of whom grew up in relatively poor households in a mining village as the local industry was collapsing.

One of my trading staff used to be from Tottenham. Ran with gangs when younger, black, poor, but decided to do the right thing, stuck in at school, and is doing very well now, so the system worked for him, too.

You are right, those people in Tottenham estates who grow up without a father present have many fewer chances, but that’s nothing to do with the state, it’s !!!!less parents blighting their future. Trying to blame the government is just stupid.

As above, the government educates, protects, and looks after the health of these children. They provide free school meals, social workers, subsidised housing, tax credits, child benefit, and a host of other things.

And still people like you seem able to believe that the state is holding people back.

Edited to add, I see that the idea of personal responsibility is one that you fundamentally disagree with, as shown by you trying to get compo for your parents having used up your inheritance early through equity release.

I promise you, take responsibility for yourself and you can do exactly what I have done.

It takes planning, and effort, but I’m not an outlier in the graduates from my rubbish comp, my friends who understood the importance of taking responsibility are generally very well off too.

Those who preferred a smoke behind the bike sheds are in some cases in crushing poverty, as they probably ought to be.

Moby

John_G_Jones wrote: »

It worked for everyone that I know, too, all of whom grew up in relatively poor households in a mining village as the local industry was collapsing.

One of my trading staff used to be from Tottenham. Ran with gangs when younger, black, poor, but decided to do the right thing, stuck in at school, and is doing very well now, so the system worked for him, too.

You are right, those people in Tottenham estates who grow up without a father present have many fewer chances, but that’s nothing to do with the state, it’s !!!!less parents blighting their future. Trying to blame the government is just stupid.

Errant nonsense through rose tinted glasses. Because you describe one person 'who decided to do the right thing', that's how it should always be. You know nothing of other peoples lives and shouldn't judge them. Just because one person was able to escape their situation doesn't mean everyone can.

As above, the government educates, protects, and looks after the health of these children. They provide free school meals, social workers, subsidised housing, tax credits, child benefit, and a host of other things.

And still people like you seem able to believe that the state is holding people back.

True but services have been run down due to austerity. Never said anything about the state holding people back. I'm saying the state has been deliberately run down for idealogical reasons.

Edited to add, I see that the idea of personal responsibility is one that you fundamentally disagree with, as shown by you trying to get compo for your parents having used up your inheritance early through equity release

.
Now this is creepy....going through my posting history to find something to insult me over. That says a lot about you and what you are.:)

I promise you, take responsibility for yourself and you can do exactly what I have done.

It takes planning, and effort, but I’m not an outlier in the graduates from my rubbish comp, my friends who understood the importance of taking responsibility are generally very well off too.

Your personal history has no interest for me. What you post says enough but since you seem to be checking out my posting history for your own weird reasons...you can't have failed to notice I've done alright for myself and was educated at Oxford, achieving a scholarship from a Welsh mining village. However after a career in law which made me feel a bit dirty I decided to take a wage cut and do something to help those in similar situations to what I grew up in instead.;)

csgohan4

'Arklight' another blame the upper/middle class armchair keyboard warrior.

Why not direct your anger at the government and their handling of the Universal credit fiasco e.t.c than at people who moved up in life with hard graft.

You generally don't walk into well paid jobs, but you actually need to work at it and go to University where applicable

zagfles

Moby wrote: »

Agree with some of this but what you are describing are the inevitable consequences of free market capitalism.

What better system did you have in mind? Give an example of one that's actually worked somewhere, rather than some theoretical nonsense.

Capitalism depends on the line between 'need' and 'want' being distorted. That's how it thrives. Greed is good.

If "greed" is wanting more than you need, then virtually everyone is greedy. Or has a warped definition of "need". The free market offering you what you don't "need" doesn't create greed, it satisfies the greed which already exists.

That is why tories are such hypocrites. They lecture the poor about personal responsibility and how they are the cause of own poor situation when they worship at the altar of the very forces which encourage excess because after all buying things drives the market!

Oh I see, so people shouldn't be offered a choice of lots different things because they are too stupid to work out for themselves that they can't afford everything? And that they need to make choices?

The whole point of business is to sell, expand and make a profit. Advertising, marketing etc is there to tell you to buy something you don't really need by pretending it will make you feel better.

Do you realise that if an advert "tells you to buy something", you can actually say no? You don't have to buy it! I know, it's radical isn't it, even subversive. You can refuse to buy to buy stuff that's advertised!! That'll show the greedy capitalist pigs :rotfl:

This idea that just because a product is advertised, people feel they must have it and are too stupid to work out for themselves whether they really need it, or even want it, and how buying it may affect their ability to buy other stuff they might need or want more is just patronising rubbish. It basically saying people are incapable of making any choices in life. Maybe everyone should be told what to wear, what to eat, drink, what to watch on TV, what to do in their spare time. Maybe that's what you'd prefer.

JimmyChanga

Who are these 'protestors'? People who like rioting and then when asked what their demands are....."Err..we'll think of something"

Moby

zagfles wrote: »

What better system did you have in mind? Give an example of one that's actually worked somewhere, rather than some theoretical nonsense. If "greed" is wanting more than you need, then virtually everyone is greedy.

I never said that. Don't judge everyone by your own standards.

Or has a warped definition of "need". The free market offering you what you don't "need" doesn't create greed, it satisfies the greed which already exists.

Yes that's what I was saying, the market encourages greed!

Oh I see, so people shouldn't be offered a choice of lots different things because they are too stupid to work out for themselves that they can't afford everything? And that they need to make choices?Do you realise that if an advert "tells you to buy something", you can actually say no? You don't have to buy it! I know, it's radical isn't it, even subversive. You can refuse to buy to buy stuff that's advertised!! That'll show the greedy capitalist pigs :rotfl:

Complete abrogation of responsibility I'm afraid. McDonalds selling 'orrible food to kids. Manufacturers sticking sugar in all their products to sell them. Targeted advertising etc etc. Choice is not so simple. They target kids often. Advertising can be very sophisticated.

This idea that just because a product is advertised, people feel they must have it and are too stupid to work out for themselves whether they really need it, or even want it, and how buying it may affect their ability to buy other stuff they might need or want more is just patronising rubbish.

No it's not. It describes the world we are in. You are in denial. People can be conned and they are every day. Why do you think advertising and marketing are multi million dollar industries. Why do you think they saturate us with gambling adverts voiced by that screaming tory Ray Winstone, during big games telling us in his common cockney twang that its cool to bet. Such hypocrisy....but if you point it out ....the response is.....so you think communism is better do you? How facile and a complete diversion from taking responsibility imo!

zagubov

Sounds like that old Private Eye spoof - I think they were called the Radical Liberals

On a march, they're chanting:
What do we want? --GRADUAL CHANGE!
When do we want it? -- IN DUE COURSE!

zagfles

Moby wrote: »

zagfles wrote: »

I never said that. Don't judge everyone by your own standards.

Nice dodge of the question...you've not described how it should be changed

Yes that's what I was saying, the market encourages greed!

So what's your solution?

Complete abrogation of responsibility I'm afraid. McDonalds selling 'orrible food to kids.

So don't go there !!!!!!! We never, ever, took our kids to McDonalds. It's not compulsory. People have the choice.

Manufacturers sticking sugar in all their products to sell them. Targeted advertising etc etc. Choice is not so simple. They target kids often. Advertising can be very sophisticated.

I wouldn't argue against banning adverts of unhealthy food to kids. Or having a sugar tax. Governments can and do make tax/regulatory changes to tweak behaviour, the question is the extent to which they should do it.

No it's not. It describes the world we are in. You are in denial. People can be conned and they are every day. Why do you think advertising and marketing are multi million dollar industries.

Duh...because there's lots of money to be made for getting people to change what they spend their money on

Why do you think they saturate us with gambling adverts voiced by that screaming tory Ray Winstone, during big games telling us in his common cockney twang that its cool to bet. Such hypocrisy....but if you point it out ....the response is.....so you think communism is better do you? How facile and a complete diversion from taking responsibility imo!

So come on, describe how you would change things instead of just whining about how things are now. Preferably using an example of something that has worked in practice somewhere.

JimmyChanga

No it's not. It describes the world we are in. You are in denial. People can be conned and they are every day. Why do you think advertising and marketing are multi million dollar industries. Why do you think they saturate us with gambling adverts voiced by that screaming tory Ray Winstone, during big games telling us in his common cockney twang that its cool to bet. Such hypocrisy....but if you point it out ....the response is.....so you think communism is better do you? How facile and a complete diversion from taking responsibility imo!

So what do you do, ban all advertising? The same people have the capacity to think for themselves to protest but not to resist crap sold to them? No, they're just saying we love capitalism but we want a bigger cut. Just because someone cries that they want something that doesn't make their protest valid.

I used to be Labour and believe in all the jargon til I saw what it's created. People so mollycoddled that they have virtually no life skills. They've been told so long that the state will sort everything out for them and that nothing is their own responsibility, that is how they end up behaving. If you say anything you get shouted at as being 'uncaring'.

Moby

zagfles wrote: »

Moby wrote: »

Nice dodge of the question...you've not described how it should be changedSo what's your solution? So don't go there !!!!!!! We never, ever, took our kids to McDonalds. It's not compulsory. People have the choice. I wouldn't argue against banning adverts of unhealthy food to kids. Or having a sugar tax. Governments can and do make tax/regulatory changes to tweak behaviour, the question is the extent to which they should do it. Duh...because there's lots of money to be made for getting people to change what they spend their money on So come on, describe how you would change things instead of just whining about how things are now. Preferably using an example of something that has worked in practice somewhere.

Those tweaks that Govmt make are not working are they.... duh! and just because I have a viewpoint that differs from yours does not mean I'm 'whining'. Greater restrictions are part of the answer. I think the Scottish Govmt is doing a lot of good work on the advertising of alcohol, especially in increasing the pricing of the strong lagers. I also think a sugar tax should have come in years ago. Facebook and other social media need much greater regulation. Gambling legislation needs to be tightened. Generally the chaos in financial markets and the economic downturn has cast a new light on Government’s role in markets. Public trust in the ability of markets to deliver efficiency and stability is being challenged I'm glad to say! What we need is much greater intervention and international co-operation. Capitalism needs to show it works for the benefit of people and has a responsibility to contribute towards the fabric of society and provide social capital. In other words a whole change in culture and a different emphasis as to what is valued.....e.g......those who care for your relatives when they are old are valued more highly than some scumbag parasite banker or accountant whose job is to shelter your money from the taxman!