VG247 Forum » Topic: #LondonRiots

VG247 Forum » Topic: #LondonRiots http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914 Just another bbPress community en-US Sun, 26 May 2013 05:07:52 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 <![CDATA[Search]]> q http://www.vg247.com/forum/search.php DSB on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25809 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:39:58 +0000 DSB 25809@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ The point Steph is making is really invaluable for a lot of the more "meritorious" Europeans. Again, I can't speak for the UK, but I have spent some time in the poorer areas of the southern US. The fact is that we were in the exact same spot that the US is still in today, no more than 100 years ago. In the US it's perfectly possible for people go to work 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, and still be living below several of the poverty lines. It's completely absurd. All it takes is a recession, a child, some unfortunate debt, or a long term illness, which could be something as common as depression, and you're essentially fucked for many, many years of your life. The labor movements essentailly risked their lives, took countless beatings and put in everything they had to ensure that people wouldn't have the most miserable lives in Europe, no matter where they might be in the social ladder. It seems to me that the only mistake they made, was doing slightly too good a job, since people have essentially turned into ungrateful scum, who don't see any kind of benefit in helping eachother, and spends most of their time complaining about taxes and levies on their 5 bedroom homes or their 4 door sedans. That's when it becomes obvious that people genuinely have been so far removed from the concept of poverty. Like I say in a previous post, sure, you'll always get a lower class, and in a socially conscious society, that lower class will get money from the state, and some of those won't do anything for it, and some of those will be compulsive underachievers. That's a bitter pill to swallow for people who try harder, or who may feel like they're worth so much more than those people based on their heroic contribution towards the GDP, but when I look at how it is for some people in the US, I'll gladly pay my taxes, and I really don't care who they go to or what they spend it on, as long as they don't have to live as badly as the lowest classes in places like the US, because that's simply undignified, and unfair beyond anything that I can accept. If people want those kinds of rotten slums where kids are 20% more likely to die within their first year of birth, then my hats off to you. You're certainly an admirable and driven human being, with an eye for what "really" matters. I don't mind the alternative we've built for ourselves in the old world, no matter how many middleclass salt-o-the-earth asses it may hurt. Christopher Jack on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25806 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:57:48 +0000 Christopher Jack 25806@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ That's exactly my point. There will always be wankers who exploit everything, but that's only a minority(in most cases), regardless, it's still needed by genuine people, the other route is to end up bankrupt, living on the streets & after that's happened, there's no way of coming back without any help. Stephany Nunneley on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25805 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:51:41 +0000 Stephany Nunneley 25805@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ I was lucky growing up. My Dad worked 3rd shift at OSRAM because that shift paid more, and he hated every minute of it there for 30 years (which is probably why he was and still is a bitter bastard) - but it had great benefits, and my Mom worked part-time in order to pay for my schooling. When I was in fourth grade, my grandparents moved in with us, which helped split things down the middle and my parents could then afford to buy better cars, take actual vacations, and continue sending me to private school. Mom got a full time job at a bank since my grandmother was home during the day (babysitting other kids mind you) when I got off the bus. She used this money to give us "extras" like name brand jeans so I would not be made fun of by the "popular" girls in school, and so she could go see AC/DC every damn time they came to town. :D Until I moved out of the house, I never really knew what "true" hardship was to be honest. We weren't rich my any means, but I never went without - within reason. Sometimes, government benefits can really help you out when you are in a rough patch. I have been on unemployment before - but in fairness, the company I worked for who laid us all off encouraged us to file for it, saying it was why they paid into it in the first place. Most companies will fight you tooth and nail in order not to allow it. It was meager, and while it helped me pay the rent while I found another job, I was told by the office I did not qualify for any other form of aide because my 12 year old car was worth too much money and I didn't have any kids to support. So, while the system is broken, and needs repaired, it is there for a reason and just because some people choose to take advantage of it you can't get rid of it all together. What about the poor elderly lady whose husband's retirement or SS only pays a pittance so she needs to skip out on buying oil for her furnace this winter? Granted, I know of at least 2 women with three or more kids by different men living in government housing, getting foodstamps, and using the health dept because it's "pay what you can afford" - while accepting cash for child support under the table and driving around in a 2010 car and wearing designer clothes. These are not everyone on the welfare system. They are just the ones who stand out the most. Getting rid of it just because there are a few bad apples in the bunch is no reason to toss the good ones out along with the basket. Sorry for rambling. EDIT: Also - Military retirement is not a "entitlement", because it is earned. Congress seems to these it's some kind of charity or handout. Talk about handouts: Congressional members get free health care, massive retirement packages, 67 paid "holidays" off a year, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days, ad nausea. Yet Congress has the nerve to call military retirement an entitlement. Christopher Jack on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25804 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:24:50 +0000 Christopher Jack 25804@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ @Steph, I would imagine that it would be very similar, I wouldn't believe that the UK government would let a huge employers die unless it's inevitable & there's no chance of a comeback. Recently the Aussie government had to bailout Holden (GM's arm in Australia) & I'd assume that our political system is near identical to England's, although I'd like our country to become an independent republic but not in the same way as the US- the politicians there have far more power than they should. I think it's incredibly ignorant to assume that everyone on the dole or receiving government support is just scum leeching of society, my dad's 50 & living by himself, paying off a mortgage & can no longer work full time & can't live on his part time wage, not to mention the several thousand dollars he's been screwed out of during the past few years. Stephany Nunneley on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25803 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:56:15 +0000 Stephany Nunneley 25803@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ I have a question to those with comments related to people "on the dole" and not working in the UK. See, here, the poor and middle-class sometimes (not always, but it's growing) have to depend upon food stamps, tuition grants, medicare, SS, veteran's benefits, etc in order to get healthcare, an education or put food on the table - and a lot of people in this country complain about it. And I am not talking about those who take advantage of the system. Pretend they don't exist for a minute. Those complaining should look at the larger corporations as well. You could argue that they are " on the dole" as well, because they get subsidies, tax breaks, benefits of incorporation and even bailouts - such as with the oil companies, banks, and auto industry. Those of the latter, at least in the automotive sector who received bailouts - my understanding is GM was the only one to pay back the bailout money it received from the government. I may be wrong, and I could research it, but I don't have the inclination atm. So, my question is this: do big corporations in the UK get to be on the dole as well like are over here? And could this also have something to do with people feeling disenfranchised over there? I am curious. Honestly, because I have no idea how your system works over there. G1GAHURTZ on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25802 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:59:07 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 25802@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ A very interesting article that somehow manages to reflect this thread: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/10/uk-riots-political-classes" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/10/uk-riots-political-classes</a> sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25801 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:32:20 +0000 sg1974 25801@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Oldergamer said: "In one post you talk about gov getting out of markets/economy and in the next one you talk about sensible regulation. That seems to conterdict itself to me." It doesn't at all, but I need to explain myself better. Let me put the points out separately (not because I don't think you can understand me, but I'm obviously failing to get my views across clearly). - There is no such thing as an entirely free market (that is, it doesn't exist, not it cannot exist). Only nutters call for one and believe it will work, and in my own view they're as silly as the poeple who call for collectivism. (Many liberals and socialists do however often like to claim capitalists mean a genuinely free market.) When 99.99% of real (not imaginary) capitalists people speak of it, what they actually mean is a free market that operates within national and international regulatory frameworks - for example, in developed economies you can trade and communicate information freely but cannot insider deal (an extreme example I grant you, but it makes the point). In the same way that you are not allowed to rob, rape or murder in the USA, but that doesn't mean you are not living in a free society over there. - A free market works best when that necessary regulation is intelligent and effective and allows for competition, enterprise and innovation, but prevents fraud, market manipulation and market distortion. That regulation needs to come initially from economists, not politicians. (In 1997 Gordon Brown gave inflation policy to the economists in the Bank of England, but he fixed how inflation would be calculated so that it would serve his policies. It was a political con trick which ended in an enormous personal debt mountain and massive house price bubble - both of which he could blame on the economists.) - Beyond providing the necessary regulatory framework and monitoring it, making changes where necessary, the state should then restrict its involvement to the macro-economic picture. It should allow peaks and troughs and hiccups and bumps. Governments should focus on the long-term trends and performance, not react to short term events which may have no effect on the long term picture but look bad on the evening news. A previous UK Chancellor said governments spend too much time looking at next week instead of next year, making repeated microscopic changes in course as they headed for a canyon. These principles do not apply solely to economics, they also work well for social policy. Conservatism isn't about removing the state from all aspects of public life, it's about giving people the freedoms and responsibilities to make their own choices and it's about getting involved only when it is necessary. I've often heard people say that the first duty of government is to protect its people. I think this is utter hyperbolic bullshit. Protect them from what and for what purpose? You could use that logic to prove the government of North Korea is good. No. The first duty of government is to leave people alone. Let them live their lives, make their own choices, succeed and fail, win or lose, whatever. The government is responsible for providing appropriate criminal laws, discrimination legislation and regulatory frameworks that provide as level a playing field as possible so that everyone has the same rights and opportunities in life. And it should think carefully about how and when it intervenes, instead of jumping up and poking its nose in whenever it wants to. And governments have no business dealing with relative poverty while absolute poverty gets worse. As Margaret Thatcher once said, "It is your tax which pays for public spending. The government has no money of its own. There is only taxpayers' money." She could have added that when a government "borrows for the future" (there's an oxymoron) it is borrowing from the next generation not even born yet who, one day, will have to work harder and pay more taxes to pay it back. A point lost on many who call for increased state spending during the Second Depression. Christopher Jack on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25800 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:56:06 +0000 Christopher Jack 25800@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ I think Communism could work given the right leadership, it would be perfect in developing countries but the fact of the matter is, there are very few people genuine enough to stand up to that much power & responsibility without falling into corruption, they always seem to think that they deserve more. Maybe if there was no supreme power & everything was decided by specific committees but yet again, the problem is assigning genuine people. I don't get why these politicians have trouble designing a system that benefits everybody from the rich to the poor, a simply designed tax that escalates depending on wages would solve that problem, all these taxes & levies are just slaps in the faces to the poor/middle classes. sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25798 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:31:27 +0000 sg1974 25798@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ @Christopher Jack, As usual, both extremes are at fault. The extremists on the right want to withdraw all state support and control and leave people to a genuinely free market whereas the extremists on the left want to susbtitute state control and manipulation for personal responsibility and freedom. BOTH create poverty, but history has shown that the latter creates poverty in greater numbers. Would we rather a system which creates inequality but opportunity, or a system which makes everyone equal in poverty? It's a fact that many want the latter; few of them are wealthy and successful (and many know that no 'Western' government will do it so their bank accounts and property portfolios are safe while they get the street-cred in the Guardian - I'm looking at you, Polly Toynbee and Alan Rusbridger). As for the rich, Treasuries worked out a long time ago that the more you tax the rich, the harder they work to evade or avoid tax. Labour's 50p rate (introduced six weeks before the election they knew they were going to lose, after 13 years of letting the rich get richer and abuse lots of new loopholes) are purely political tools, not economic. A good economy needs no more than two income tax rates with the highest no greater than 40%, with no taxes on employment (e.g. the UK's employers' NI contributions) and a generous personal allowance to protect the lowest paid. (Years of experiencing across developed economies suggests that a higher rate of around 40% attracts the most tax - higher, and it is evaded/avoided; lower, and you get the tax but at a smaller amount than you could otherwise get.) Labour will keep on the cuts meme (ignoring that most haven't actually happened yet) but two things they did were far more damaging. Firstly it abolished the 10p rate for the lowest paid to pay for a cut of 1p in the standard rate, but did not raise the tax threshold. This meant that millions of the lowest paid ended up paying MORE in tax, while millions of middle-earners ended up paying less. Secondly, it changed Capital Gains Tax so it was no longer paid at the rate you pay income tax, but instead had its own rating at about 20%, maybe less (I can't remember the exact figure). Result? Rich people (including millionaires and billionaires) changed the way they took their income so instead of paying higher rate tax, they paid CGT at a lower rate than their housecleaner pays income tax. Now Labour, if you want us to believe that the riots were caused by inequalities between rich people and the average citizen and the poor, why are you starting to blame the Tories and the Right? OlderGamer on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25796 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:03:20 +0000 OlderGamer 25796@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ SG, your posts are well thought out and well written. I just don't really feel where your point of view is coming from. In one post you talk about gov getting out of markets/economy and in the next one you talk about sensible regulation. That seems to conterdict itself to me. As for the UK riots, I know my posts have been a bit off topic. But I feel that underneath all of the trouble in the UK there is a layer of manipulation and desciete. Its hard to see the facts for what they are through the US media. So I am not going to comment too heavily on them. I don't have first hand knowledge, and won't pretend to. I just get the feeling that there is more to situation then just thugs or poor. I get the sense this is really about race and religion. And I get the sense that someone is pushing buttons to get a result. But like I said hard to get a clear picture, all our media wants to do is sell sensationilism. sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25795 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:42:35 +0000 sg1974 25795@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Another problem which has arisen over the last decade is the refusal of many young British people to take jobs when they are available. There was a special Newsnight episode on youth unemployment about two years ago, in which a group of about twenty 18-25 year olds from across the UK were brought together to discuss the issue. All of them said they wanted work and had no job because there were no vacancies out there. There was no other reason for their unemployment and inactivity - the journalist pushed this very hard, just to check (as he was actually setting them up for a embarrassing fall). All spoke of their right to this, that and the other - the right to claim benefits, the right to get social housing, the right to get a well-paid job. None admitted to any responsibilities. And all complained about immigrants taking "their" jobs. Then the interviewer started showing them plenty of jobs which were advertised in their home-town's job centres, jobs they could do and were eligible for. Immediately came the responses: doesn't pay enough, better off on benefits/I'd have to start paying rent and council tax (bingo!), don't want to do crap jobs like cleaning or labouring or serving. Gone were the "there's no work out there" claims they had used earlier. When the interviewer said that they could start low and work/earn their way to promotion or into better jobs and enhanced prospects, all he got was blank stares and shrugged shoulders. Then they were asked what they would do if the government said that if you refused two jobs you'd lose your benefits: "take a job then get myself sacked after a few weeks". The programme ended with a clear message: this particular group of young people had no intention of working and expected the state to support them indefinitely. And the state had made unemployment pay better than many jobs. At the height of the 2000-2007 boom, youth unempoyment went up - which is frightening for two reasons. 1) the growth in the economy and increase in jobs at that time, and 2) more young people were going to college and university which took plenty of pressure off employment for the young anyway. And the only reasonable explanations we have for this phenomenom were provided by that Newsnight investigation. Liberals and the left can cite Chief Executive pay and bankers bonuses and the Eton club all it wants, none of them stop people working hard to improve their own circumstances, none of them stop people bettering themselves. And cuts which have barely started do not explain the deep-rooted problems we saw this week (cuts which actually only take spending back to the levels last seen when Brown moved into No10 in 2007, and which are only a single percentage point of public spending greater than Labour had planned to make - a fact the left doesn't want you to be reminded of). There's a reason why we saw a big wave of immigration into the UK: plenty of jobs that the natives wouldn't stoop to doing. Why did so many Polish plumbers come over to the UK? Because British people didn't want to take plumbing courses, spending a couple of years in training and apprenticeships to do blue-collar work which actually ends up paying quite well. In my experience, most immigrants work longer and harder than most of the natives anyway. Keep them coming. G1GAHURTZ on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25794 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:17:09 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 25794@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <blockquote>"And yet you claim to know the circumstances and personal histories of other people based on a few opinions on a forum which dare contradict yours." </blockquote> Listen, I admitted that I overreacted to your initial post. Of course, I was clearly wrong in judging your, or anyone elses background here, in exactly the same way as you're wrong in claiming that the rioters were all "spoilt bastards" and "scum". I'm not in the UK at the moment, but I've been in constant contact with people who live or were in many of the affected areas at the time when the rioting happened. Brixton, Hackney, Walthamstow, etc. Even Birmingham. From every single first hand account, none of them have mentioned that the groups of rioters were made up of anything other than the local underprivileged kids. Now, of course, these are first hand accounts from local people who have no interest in looking for any source of sensationalist headlines, so that might explain things a bit... Note that today's photo opportunity in Pimlico, that went out at the same time as Cameron's "We're fighting back!" speech clearly showed raids on council estates, where piles of laptops, etc, were recovered. Now, I don't personally know those council estates in Pimlico (wrong side of the river), but I do know the ones in Stockwell, Vauxhall, Oval, Brixton, etc, and they're certainly no pleasant places to live by any means. Christopher Jack on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25793 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:10:40 +0000 Christopher Jack 25793@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ @sg1974, I 100% agree with you, if only our governments shared these thoughts. I think the biggest problem is the conservatives who only care about the right here & now, not the next 5-10+ years, but we all need to take some of the blame. These conservatives are more interested in blaming 3rd world countries for their personal problems than actually helping them join the modern world making foreign labour redundant. @DSB, I agree with you too but your comment is more on topic, no one willingly throws their fist at an innocent person because of some irrelevant economical crisis. sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25792 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:41:58 +0000 sg1974 25792@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ "There are a huge amount of factors to consider before passing judgement on the social circumstance of a person." And yet you claim to know the circumstances and personal histories of other people based on a few opinions on a forum which dare contradict yours. How convenient. Anyone questioning the social circumstances of rioters must be a right-wing nut, eh? You sound like a British university student. DSB on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25791 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:37:45 +0000 DSB 25791@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ What does globalism and market economy have to do with the riots in Britain? It seems to me like they're being used as an excuse to take potshots at some phantom enemy, that isn't even a player in this case. Those people aren't concerned with where their sneakers and clothes are made, and they don't give a fuck about the stock markets. It's about entirely different things. Talking about macro systems when you're dealing with a crisis in a micro system is ridiculous, although obviously a lot of people tend to have choice words for things like globalization and capitalism on the slightest excuse. It's just the witchhunt of another age. If all of Taiwan or China was rebelling against the US, then it might make sense, but that's not even close to being the case. sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25790 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:30:05 +0000 sg1974 25790@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ With respect Oldergamer, in trying to tell me I'm wrong you've helped prove my point and shown you largely agree with me. I basically said there is no such thing as a free market - only a system controlled and constrained by regulation (in the same way as there is no such thing as a genuinely free society - you have freedoms within appropriate laws). America's free market system for example was strongest when its regulation was strongest (Glass-Steagall etc). And I clearly suggested that the system is broken because the regulation is poor or non-existant. You may think I hanker for a genuinely free market but nothing is further from the truth. I want a return of intelligent regulation which gives boundaries to a system where people are free to better themselves and allow private enterprise to flourish with as little state interference as possible. That includes a return of Glass-Steagall, that includes strong employment rights, that includes a return to tighter rules on money lending and stronger penalties for default, that includes reformed tax laws, and that includes state spending and intervention targetted only where it is needed (whereas in the UK Labour bought the votes of greedy people by increasing state benefits for families who earn way above average earnings and refused to scrap child benefit, winter fuel payments and free bus passes to millionaires, and stigmatised people who chose to use private education and healthcare). No-one who complains about Capitalism can come up with any alternative which hasn't already been shown to be an utter failure. Let's make the system we've got work again, instead of demand a system which has never worked apart from in the minds of the liberal intelligentsia (sic). I would rather have a system which creates a depression once every 80 years and a recession once every 15 to 20 years than one which creates a perpetual depression. I would rather a system which allows some - including the poor and uneducated - to become rich than a system which makes everyone poor. Globalism is an entirely different Vietnam. The irony on that issue is that the biggest calls for an open international market and free movement of goods came from the left as a way to increase opportunities for the Third World to trade and build their economies. I remember hearing liberals in the 1980s complain vociderously about the "closed club of first world economies" which prevented cheaper economies from entering the game! Problems in China aren't caused by the West, they are caused by a government which treats its people as slaves. Ask Beijing to increase a minimum wage in line with the West, and watch as whiney Westerners stamp their feet when an iPod goes up in price. As for Giga, the so-called "progressive" views you hold have been at the forefront of British politics for the last fifteen years. They have broken down the family, emasculated the police, substituted state edict for personal responsibility, brought in millions of immigrants to do low-paid jobs thus disenfranchising indigenous working class people with no qualifications, churned out school-leavers who can barely read or write but demand a well-paid job immediately, and created state dependencies on those who in the large do not need it (instead of focussing on those who desperately need it, those in absolute poverty, which has been largely ignored for decades). How's all that worked out for you then? How has it worked for all of us? You've already lost the argument. Kids in expensive jeans and trainers holding Blackberrys and iPhones raiding shops and burning down homes prove liberals and socialists are talking bollocks today. Not one rioter has mentioned tuition fees, or the EMA, or youth clubs, only journalists and politicians sitting in their ivory towers. Look at those in court today: teachers (!), a soldier, a postman, a graphics designer, civil servants, students, a legal clerk, the daughter of a millionaire businessman. I haven't seen a single "unemployed" or "of no fixed address" yet. Funny that. Quote: "When I listen to these, born-with-the-proverbial-silver-spoon-in-mouth, self righteous, lost touch with reality, people speak, I really do pity them." Your favourite technique: put up a strawman and slap it down, then fake pity (it's not pity, it's arrogant condascension). Only you know reality do you? What do you know of the circumstances of those commenting thusly? (I'm reminded of the time Harriet Harman once slagged off David Davis MP as a "privileged member of the establishment detached from society", to which he pointed out to the stupid hysterical woman that he was a bankbench opposition MP who grew up in poverty on a council estate in a single parent family, while she grew up in a mansion, is a grand-daughter of a baroness, went to public school and was a Cabinet Minister) What do you know of our backgrounds? Where have we lived? What jobs do we do? You should write for the Gaurdian (or maybe ask Johann Hari if he needs an assistant) with crap like that - like Zoe Williams who yesterday refused to accept that 13 years of the "progressive" Labour government had ANY RESPONSIBILITY WHATSOEVER for the current state of the economy or society and instead blamed Chief Executive pay for the riots (hmm, her Chief Executive Alan Rusbridger had a 7% increase to over £605,000 last year and the loss-making Guardian has stashed millions in the Caribbean away from HMRC then hyped up protesters against the likes of Vodafone and Top Shop who then attacked their shops). What were you saying about detachment from reality? Who was in power between 1997 and 2010 while 90% of these thugs grew up? Who created the education and economic systems which fail today? The Left sowed the seeds for the generation out rampaging this week and are now blaming government cuts - 99% of which haven't even happened yet and will actually only take government spendng back to the level it was in 2007 under Labour. OrbitMonkey on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914&page=2#post-25787 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 07:53:22 +0000 OrbitMonkey 25787@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Lol, Giga your bleeding heart Is soooo cute!! Go out there & hug a hoody, maybe thats all they need? viralshag on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25784 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:12:22 +0000 viralshag 25784@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ @ G1GA, That's a fair comment and I appreciate that you didn't reply as if I was somehow trying to attack what you said. I have friends who have similar views to yours and they will never debate or argue a point logically. I can accept what you said about material possessions not being a true gauge on what their circumstances are. In reply to: "There are a huge amount of factors to consider before passing judgement on the social circumstance of a person." I would love to look at certain aspects of our society without judgement but I personally find it very difficult to do. When you hear so many stories about the amount of people claiming benefits, and in some cases taking home more than another person working full time on a low income, it can be hard not to paint all the people with the same brush. Unfortunately, the minority of people that are put in the media limelight become much more the perception of what your everyday person sees. I imagine it is similar to how you feel when you see the more extreme comments and labels thrown around as you said. EDIT: I did change that last para a bit after reading it back ;) DSB on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25783 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:35:40 +0000 DSB 25783@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ There's no doubt that when you limit peoples upwards mobility in society, they usually become more criminal and violent. That's the same anywhere you look. Add to that a sense (not neccesarily a full fledged reality) of racial intolerance, and you have yourself a powderkeg. What's happening in the UK obviously isn't a political move or a political protest of any sort, but the ignition of those riots obviously is. I don't think it has anything to do with economy, since riots happen in any economic climate, and sparked by far less impressive things than this one. The only way to stop looting and vandalism is with overwhelming (although not disproportionate) force from the authorities, but ultimately I think ensuring that it can never happen is utopia. I don't know the plight of minorities in the UK, but I have seen ghettos in the US, and that's not the sort of place or situation that any country should accept or be proud of. Those people come as close to living a life with no dignity as is generally possible in a developed country, with very few hopes and very few chances of truly making a difference for themselves and their families. Their schools are ill equipped, their infrastructure is often crippled, their community sees no investment from anyone, including the people who live in it, and the stigma of that sort of social ecosystem is self-perpetuating. Sadly I don't see what the political options are, or where the political initiative would come from, to ensure that everybody gets back in sync with society. With immigrant communities in Europe you're looking at a low-income base that is going to seek a cheap place to live, and naturally one where the ethnic make-up is close to their own, just as ethnic citizens do the same, which simply serves to amplify the problems. To me it seems like an impossible task, and I think the reality is just that, while times have changed, you're never going to get rid of the sort of "caste" in any society, no matter how benevolent it is, where people feel marginalized, oppressed, and hopeless. At least it's not as bad today as it was 50 years ago, or 100 years ago. Christopher Jack on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25780 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:02:20 +0000 Christopher Jack 25780@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Anyone involved in these mindless riots are sociopaths & scumbags with a total lack of personal morals. I think the biggest problem with my fellow youths has to be the parents complete lack of attention to their children-then you get these kids with regular kids, infecting them with bad behaviour-so it's not always the parents fault, it also often involves peer pressure & personal issues too. I do think the schools need more disciplinary power, scare them straight before they become totally lost adults & raise their own sociopaths who influence their peers into joining them-it's a vicious cycle that's not going to end anytime soon unless somebody takes some serious action. G1GAHURTZ on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25779 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:19:07 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 25779@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ You're right, viralshag. Well put. I overreacted a bit. Probably due to labels like "greedy scum" and "spoilt bastards" being thrown about. The problem is that these labels were seemingly given justification based on the opinion that the people rioting were already owners of luxury goods. You ask: "why is it so illogical to think that people are not disadvantaged if they can own luxury items?" Because the material goods that a person is seen in public with has no bearing whatsoever on what sort of an upbringing they've had and in what circumstances. There are a huge amount of factors to consider before passing judgement on the social circumstance of a person. Besides, this was kind of the point of my initial post. Everyone, no matter how rich or needy, is under pressure to buy more and more goods, with the underpriveliged of society being more susceptible to succumbing to this pressure. It's the consumerism/materialism that tells people that they can buy social status and happiness. That's why you get people spending 70% of their relatively meagre wages on one iPod. Or one pair of designer jeans. Which is also one of the reasons that some guy, who spends 7% of his relatively healthy wages on an iPod, because all the bills have been paid, and then thinks that he has the right to compare himself with every other person in society, irritates me. viralshag on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25776 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:12:00 +0000 viralshag 25776@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ I was enjoying both sides of this debate but GiGA, you're second to last post is just sad. I'll be honest, most of them do strike me as lazy individuals and why is it so illogical to think that people are not disadvantaged if they can own luxury items? Hell, I work my ass off every day but still can't get everything I want. Just because people, like me, decide to take a not so forgiving stance and view on certain people and situations; all of a sudden we are rich, paid-for uni goers with a silver spoon in our mouths shouting all the way from the far right? When the actual reality is, some of us are people that probably grew up in similar disadvantaged situations but, believe it or not, decided to go out and actually work hard for what we have. When you make assumptions like that, how on earth can you preach about other people’s views and opinions? It really winds me up that just because I don't take a "but it's not their fault" approach to these situations I am some kind of person out of touch with reality. What you said is completely hypocritical, branding everyone who doesn’t share the same view as some kind of toff. G1GAHURTZ on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25774 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:26:46 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 25774@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ @ O'Connor: The simple fact that you think that Britain is not a consumer society (in fact, the majority of the WORLD is) shows that you're either just being intentionally antagonistic, or you're simply a whole lot less intelligent than I thought. Whether the US is more or less materialistic is totally beside the point. Simply put, when we spend (consume) less in the UK (and internationally), people suffer. Or were you asleep when the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8242825.stm">global credit crunch led to a global recession</a>? ManuOtaku on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25773 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:14:45 +0000 ManuOtaku 25773@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ i Dont live in the U.S, but Older Gamer reasonings in my eyes are very true, and it is a big part of the problem, and i like to add that this is the way they did design the development of our past and present generations, all around consuming, since TV Adds now internet, they were really well design in order to foment consuming with messages that goes to your subconsciousness, of course this lead to manipulated human beings how many times people buy something just for the sake of it, not becuase it needed it, the same with new techs advances that made us in some way more dependable, and they charge big time for this so called new techs, that more often that not harm us, with new modern disseases like stress and the likes. Iam dont like comunisim, i dont like it at all, and my point does not have to do with economical models (capitalisim, socialisim, etc), becuase at the end they are only means to control the sociaty, to keep the status quo, but for how long?; in some point in the next 20 years we are going to be almost 14 billion humans in the world, how the world be able to sustain us all, more sooner than not a new war or a "new unheard" disease will strike in order to avoid the lost of control that most of the people that rules the world are afraid off, i know we need some kind of control but why they can decide what is best for the people that doesn not have privilages, is easy when you are not on the short side of the stick. G1GAHURTZ on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25771 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:53:32 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 25771@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Wow, there's a budding Daily Mail columnist around... Some of the pure 'centre-right' biggotry on display here is quite sickening, actually. 'FWAWFWAWFWAW, nnnnnyeees, those poor, commoners deserve a good hiding! They're only poooooor, because they're all lazy scroungers, the lot of them, FWAWFWAWFWAW...' When I listen to these, born-with-the-proverbial-silver-spoon-in-mouth, self righteous, lost touch with reality, people speak, I really do pity them. Seriously, what kind of logic is that!? 'nnnnnnyeeees, If one can afford an iPod, one isn't disadvantaged! FWAWFWAWFWAW...' The kind of people who come out with this utterly deluded nonsense are very likely to have walked straight out of school into a good university, without paying a penny for it on their own, since daddy used his six-figure salary to make sure that he/she had everything that they needed to get there. Then they ridiculously try and decieve themselves into believing that the guy/girl born on a council estate to a single mother with a drug problem and string of violent boyfriends only didn't get a degree because he was too lazy! It's utter self delusion and a complete detachment from reality. I wonder how many of these gold chain wearing, Blackberry using, BMW(!?) driving people they actually know... Probably a great big fat ZERO, since they're the kind of person who only passes through the likes of Brixton and Hackney (just two of the places I've lived) with his hand on his wallet, hiding behind his copy of the Daily Mail! Wow, some people are completely disconnected from reality in their bubble of only-just-not-quite-far-right biggotry and snobbery. OlderGamer on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25770 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:13:10 +0000 OlderGamer 25770@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ With all due respect SG, your thinking is scary. Whats a free market? No such thing really. Not anymore. A free and unregulated market is one of the things that has lead the US to the problems it faces today. Unregulated companies finding loopholes(often times buying lawmakers and laws to create them), unregulated companies take American jobs over seas. Just two of the problems. We do not have nor do we need what a lot of people think of as "free markets". Its a great buzz word tho, and sounds nice rolling off of the tongue. What we have is a global market. Its a market where labour is cheaper in so many other nations that munufactering has moved a significant portion of its workforce elswhere. Services are the sameway(I laugh everytime I see the credit card TV add with the guy that says "Hello, my name is Peggy, you have problem?"). Many different sectors of our economy are effected. The result is simple - lost American jobs. The Republicans are a biz side party ensuring profits for and watching out for the well being of Biz. The thinking is sound, if biz is left alone, they will gorw, and when it grows it needs to hire people - that means more jobs. In the past, esp during periods of growth that was a great way of doing things. Healthy biz did mean biz hiring people and a expanding work force. But today, in our global economy, Walmart growth and increase in sales means more workers in China, Packistan, Mexico and etc. I think what we are experiencing is just a global redistribution of wealth. While the US falls, China booms. The wealth and power that the western nations(including the US) have enjoyed is increasingly being shared with "developing" nations. Or more percisly the leadership of those nations. Just because a product is made in Banglidesh, doesn't mean that the work force there is becoming rich. It just means that the conditions there are so poor that the work force is willing to work for very little cost to said companies, thats why they moved their operations there in the first place. SG1974, just really give the idea of free markets some thought. It can no longer be difined as what we learned in text books in school. Modern day free market is not something to be proud of, imo. Manipulating politicians, stepping on the workforce, dodging paying taxes. Maybe some of the dems go to far, but someone somewhere needs to look out for the people. Isn't that why the people vote to put them there in the first place? I am sick and tired of hearing about pacs donating to 2012 canidates. Already. Its likes why vote to begin with? Like with Rommney, his people have made and desolved several companys all donating the max limit to his campaign. The companys appear, then donate, then desolve. Is that right? I can't aford to donate a million usd to my fav canidate in order to get his/her attention. Its just corrruption. And more then anything greedy corruption is what lead to much of this mess to begin with. It might scare some, but it would have been nice if at sometime someone said "hey, you wanna be a US company, sell products to US consumers, then your going to make said product right here", or you can't sell it here. I am for a bit of isolationism, myself. Screw the rest of the world. Stop foriegn aid(humanitarian aid is different), how many billions did we need to give Pakistain? Russia doesn't need aid either. Spend those USD here, where they are needed. Tax the crap out of imports. Go read up on Walmart, see what they did to Huffy, to Levi, and more. No way a pair of jeans should cost 10usd. Sorry they just don't. Not when an American made pair costs 25usd. So Walmart puts their imported pair on the shelf made with near slave labour, even child labour and stupid shopers(or poor shopers with little choice) buy the pair of jeans for 10usd and the pair of American made jeans sit there. Eventualy the Americans that made said jeans lose their jobs. It happens all over the scale of the US economy, from steal imports to clothing to toys to electronics. My xbox is manufacterd in China, for example. Some of you guys are right our society is indeed consumer driving. But workers w/o jobs can't be comsumers. I think almost everything boils down to that simple fact. Jobs. Our nation does import a great deal from around the world, and I am not against fair trade. But we don't have fair trade at this point. Does anyone wonder what happens when the "working classes"/Middle classes are truely replaced with forgien work forces? Who is going to buy those cheaply made goods? In China little girls are working in factories manufacturing dolls that they can't even afford to buy. Free markets and fair trade indeed. Now I am no economist, never claimed to be one. I know there are people that are far more informed and far smarter then I. But it seems to me that a few very basic facts are true. Corruption is bad. Greed leads to corruption. Gov is the only one that can regulate and control out of control greedy corperations from causing harm while questing for more shareholder profits. Its ok for a biz to just operate, it doesn't need to provide record growth year after year. People w/o jobs can't afford to buy anything. Health care is a human right, not a priviledge afforded to only the wealthy. Acessible and affordable higher education benifits everyone. Americans no longer have control over their own nation. Political grid lock is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they institued a system of check and balances. Grid lock is bad. The US middle class is shrinking. Someone reading this will think I am full crap and will post about it. Someone reading this will agree with most of it, but prolly won't post anything due to fear of someone else posting hate back. Last fact, neither you nor I can really do a damn thing to change anything. sg1974 on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25769 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:19:22 +0000 sg1974 25769@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ I'm no fan of the Tea Party overall, but they have a valid argument in that government is getting too big and is taking up too much space which should be filled by the private enterprising that made the US the economic superpower it is (but might no longer be if Obama isn't careful). Like most things, what one hopes for is a sensible balance - between the intervention of government and the free market. But that requires intelligent legislators and an electorate not filled with sanctimonious asses with a sense of entitlement. The Republican Party has too few of the former and the Democratic Party has too many of the latter. As for attacking the Republican Party for the likes of Palin, Bachman et al, don't forget it was Democrats who spawned the Klu Klux Klan. And it is well documented that some Democrats support the central tenets of the TP. Noodlemanny on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25765 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 01:42:56 +0000 Noodlemanny 25765@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Wait Read that edit as "shit, posts always..." instead of "shit posts alw..." Noodlemanny on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25761 Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:55:28 +0000 Noodlemanny 25761@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ 'Capitalism is far from perfect but it's the best we've got'. Thing about communism is that it gives a very small elite selection people all of the power and gives none of it to the rest. The underdog becomes everyone who isn't a politician and they have no control over what happens to them or why. Now I love the idea of socialism, It's a heaven on Earth, but I don't think its realistically possible to exist in its entirety. You can put in things like the NHS and benefits which are all things that are socialist but their not exactly without their problems. The thing that makes socialism impossible is the way that there are always people who want more and will stop at nothing to get it. In order for everyone to be equal everyone needs to be roughly the same otherwise, well their not equal. Anyway the reason I think these riots have started isn't because its a "small symptom of the capitalist nature of the west and it's consumerism driven economy." its because David Cameron is changing everything. Now don't get me wrong I think that the fact hes changing everything is good. We can't get out a economic failure by sitting around doing shit all. This is what pisses me off the most. No one liked Brown because he didn't do anything, he just sat around pissing himself worried about pissing anyone off. And then we put Cameron in Downing Street because he said he'd actually do something. When he actually did, people lost jobs. Its as simple as that. Of course people have every right to be angry that they lost their jobs but the thing is, who expected anything else. There is no miracle cure but thats what everyone expects. No one wants to loose anything in this and yet people have to. Thats why people are rioting they want the easy way out. Difficultly is that most of the cuts effect low paid government funded workers who are generally considered 'The working class'. I hate referring to classes but theres no way around it. Thats why those are the kinds of people were seeing on the streets because their parents or themselves have lost jobs or even benefits. Benefits aren't always good but they can help, there just really easily exploited. I would also say that alot of the rioters are probably rioting maybe for the money etc but also just because their angry in general. People live to live, in this respect humans are extremely short sighted. We concentrate on how well were doing now and not worry about tomorrow. People don't care Cameron is trying to save a meltdown they care that they can't afford anything any more. Which would make anyone angry. The worlds never that simple but in this case I really do think that is the thing that started this all and what is keeping it running. There are things I've said here that I've not really explained very well but if I did this post would be quite long. EDIT- shit posts always look smaller in the edit screen. Ireland Michael on "#LondonRiots" http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=4914#post-25758 Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:05:05 +0000 Ireland Michael 25758@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ Steph: I don't think any of us will disagree on the stupidity of the governments in the US, but the issue of capitalism at the heart of this argument is something that permeates American society far more than it ever has (or ever will) Europe. I live in America (shock horror), and the one huge difference between the US and Europe is that it is *everywhere*. Everything is about money. EVERYTHING. Every. Single. Tiny. Little. Thing. "Buy this! Own this! Make sure you have this! Check out this!" Britain is not like that. It is not cowering under the constant shadow of capitalism. This pseudo-intellectual waffle of GIGA's that it is a "consumer society" that is driving people to these is applying a mentality that simply doesn't exist in these countries. sg said it best. This is a case of people being spoilt, not people being repressed. People are pissed off because they can no longer be lazy and get all their benefits and needs handed to them on a cheap silver plate. Britain is a nanny state. @stretch: People can understand about capitalism just fine. But most of them have little to no understanding of British society. Not by a long shout. See the above rest of my post.