The Underclass , and how to Help it

[Rude Boy]

I wonder too why so many Chavs sport Manchester United attire when they have never set foot in Old Trafford and certainly couldn't point out Manchester on a map.

This is in no way meant as a dig at Man Utd as I'm sure this phenomena is a huge embarassment to their genuine followers.

[Spook]

"Name me a socialist country you'd like to live in."

Sweden always seems perfectly pleasant.

"The reasons why Russia is failing at capitalism is the fact that there is no check and balances set up by thier new govt."

I'd agree with that - they went for unadulterated capitalism and, surprise surprise, ended up with a very few very rich people, a vast number of paupers and a shattered society.

Socialism is needed in a reasonable society. The market is not the best producer of social goods. Free-market education produces Dotheboys Hall - no-one would entrust power supply to anything other than a producer so highly regulated it is all but state run if not actually state run.

There is no such thing as a perfect market, any imperfections will inevitably lead to monopoly suppliers which is very bad news. To prevent monopolies occuring, the government has to regulate the market, this introduces an element of socialism.

Installing ethics has nothing to do with it - capitalists will not be dissuaded from exploiting anything they can in the pursuit of profit. Enforcing ethics is more to the point.

So we come to the, very obvious, point that a mixed economy in which private production (capitalism) is tempered by goverment control (socialism) produces the best results.

I'm not entirely confident that the Victorian slum dwellers and factory workers would have been delighted with the news the economic system they were working under was all about promoting "freedom" and "the dignity of the individual".

You live in a partly socialist society. You may want to stop handouts to farmers, abolish public high schools, libraries and municipal transport services, open up your media and utility outlets to foreign ownership, cancel the steel tariffs, reduce government bureaucracy concerning monopolies, pollution etc - because that all gets in the way of the capitalist urge to make bigger profits, etc etc etc. But it seems that most of your fellow countrymen welcome these socialist aspects of their society.

How to help the underclass - easy, provide all members of society with opportunities for self-advancement.

Providing opportunities of self-advancement for all members of society - now thats the tricky part.

[Bob Singleton]

Caractacus wrote:

> After three, Bob:
>
> "Tomorrow belongs
> tomorrow belongs,
> tomorrow belongs to me."
>
> Shooting's rather inefficient and costly. Wouldn't gassing them
> be better? Just trying to insert some commonsense into the
> proceedings.


I was just trying out being "reactionary" for a while... but I didn't like the way it made me feel... I saw a picture of Oliver Letwing and I almost started believing he'd make a great Home Secretary!!! )

[Spook]

"Hey, the opportunity is there to make it if you want to. Some people will never do it, because it takes HARD WORK. Surprise! I did not get my car or house by exploiting someone or taking a job from a poor or minority person.

MAYBE...just maybe...I worked hard for it? Eh?"

Well thats alright then

I have no idea of your family background.

but if you're content to say that a resident of the worst inner-city slums your country has to offer has had exactly the same opportunities as you then well done.

The fact that social mobility rates for the poorest in your society are so woeful is obviously of no concern to you as you have spent your life battling through such deprivation.

"A lot of your status depends largely on how hard you want to work for it."

And a lot depends on the opportunities offered by your background.

"not always because the "mean old capitalists" stole everything from the meek little people. Jeez...that kind of thinking is straight from the Kremlin."

Seeing as you have clearly failed to grasp any of my arguments you have resorted to "you disagree with me - you must be a communist". From this I will concede that your "success" has nothing to do with you receiving a priviledged education.

"Typical of leftist types that don't trust the individual and believe the individual is basically a dope or a crook that needs to be watched and told everything to do and does not know what is best for themselves."

Really - and what in my post suggested to you that I think that all people are crooks? Capitalists know what is best for themseves - they make money!! But they don't know what is best for anybody else. If there are no laws against capitalists expoliting whatever they want in order to make money then they won't be crooks. If your government chooses, as it has, to put in place large amounts of legislation to curtail the excesses of capitalism, then they appear to be agreeing with me that unrestrained capitalism will result in abuse and exploitation. Why not complain to your senator that all of this legislation is unnecessary and should to repealed because "good ol' capitalists would never want to exploit anyone".

"I find it also highly offensive that if we don't have "Nanny Govt." looking over our heads 24/7, us capitalists will abuse everyone and run amok. That is simply untrue. Not everyone is Enron or Haliburton and to think so is stereotyping and simply untrue."

Take it up with your "nanny state" government - not me. You may claim that without regulation you would be running an environmentally friendly business, your employees would enjoy the highest standards of health and safety, your customers would be in no danger of being ripped off, you would willingly pay the full amount of tax on your profits .Of couse the idea that a capitalist would exploit anyone in the pursuit of profit is patently absurd - makes me wonder why you government imposes so many "nanny state" regulations.

"However, I never siad there should be NO govt. regulations and a total free-for-all. Thats highly unrealistic."

But that is what unadulurated capitalism is. If you can accept that its possible to have a reasoanble discussion about the level of socialism needed to leaven capitalism - without mentionong the Kremlin every time someone disagrees with you - then some progress could be made.

"Typical class warfare"

I would have thought that typical class warfare was the working class demanding ownership of the means of production and distribution. I am suggesting that capitalist behaviour should be partly restrained by government regulation if you want to have any form of functioning society. I appreciate that you don't understand the difference - but there is one, trust me.

"Man...you gotta give that kind of thinking up or you'll never get anywhere."

Well thank you for that - here was I thinking that I was a fairly well-to-do professional. Clearly I must be wrong and you have managed to determine my economic and social status from my previous post.

"Racism and classism are detremental to progress."

I've no idea how you've managed to link this to racism - but I'm sure it makes sense to you.

Seeing that this thread contains many examples of denigrating chavs - nothing wrong with that and the Sheppeyscum website is very funny - its a bit rich to suggest that I alone am displaying classism whilst your views of the poor as being idle layabouts are in any way enlightened.

[Officer Dibble]

A lot of your status depends largely on how hard you want to work for it."

And a lot depends on the opportunities offered by your background."

But nearly so much as you would like to believe spooky. The prime determining factor in this arena is the quality and quantity of grey matter awarded to you by the gods of DNA - You could send a chimp to Harvard, but he's still not going to be able to create the next Microsoft.

Also, you wouldn't be turning your nose up at us "denigrating chavs'" if you didn't live in a nice middle class area and have to put up with their shit, never mind look at them. You?d soon change your tune if, in the hypothetical event of you being ordered to live (by a ultra leftist government) in a vacant council house on a Chav estate in, say, Grimsby. Yeah, the old highfalutin' University socialist principles would soon go out of the window when the Chavs started smashing your windows, beating up you kids, playing '50 Cent' at full blast in the house next door - at 2.00 AM - scratching your People Carrier, setting fire to your garden shed and breaking in to nick your DVD player while you?re out at Labour Party community awareness meeting.

Yep, talk is cheap when all your pals are nice civilised university whallas from nice neighbourhoods where they sell Ciabatia in the local grocery store.


Officer Dibbs ?puttin' a couple of strategic spokes in spooky?s wheel.

[Rude Boy]

I personally know a few people who grew up in council housing and went on to work in futures in London and earned huge sums and accrued all the good things in life, bloody good luck to them. They worked hard and they deserve it.

Conversely I know of a few people from far more affluent backgrounds whose parents gave them every chance to prosper and they blew it. It's their choice, I couldn't give a shit.

It really pisses me off that it's considered uncool to work hard and aspire to being wealthy and as for the old line about "Money not buying you happiness." Let me tell you that it fucking well does.

[Peter]

Rude Boy wrote:


> "Money not buying you happiness." Let me tell you that it
> fucking well does.

Whoever said money doesn't buy you happiness is shopping in the wrong places.

[mart]

You know buggerall about me Bimmercat so where does the envy thing come from?
Stuff your cheap jibes about leftists, I'm proud to be one. And this will shock you, I've just completed my first NZ IR return and declared everything, I don't mind paying taxes if it helps people worse off than me.
If the capitalist system allows Enrons etc. then its at fault.
Your system stinks to high heaven and you are welcome to it.

Mart

[mart]

"Five generations of the same family"
Are you sure you are using language properly.
Assuming a generation to be say, 15 years, then the youngest would be a newborn baby and the oldest 60. Or a 15 yearold and a 75 yearold.

Mart