quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I cut and colour my own hair... costs me almost nothing.

Bah - who needs giovanni?

I can offer to do yours too, if you wish.

 

Peace and Rapture

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedicat

The post was worth it at the least for a few bits of colouful Brit slang.

Undercracks

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent


It's a whole different language over here, Kedicat. Bet you've never heard the phrase "I'm going down the rec on me chopper"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedicat

The post was worth it at the least for a few bits of colouful Brit slang.

Undercracks

It's a whole different language over here, Kedicat. Bet you've never heard the phrase "I'm going down the rec on me chopper"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Based on the above, you've missed the point of the post. My post is not discussing the merits and limititations of wealth creation.

Sorry for that misunderstanding - its just that very often, you seem to portray this Socialist Worker image, which I perhaps unfairly attributed as the source of this thread too.

I'm talking about a society where product and style means more than people's welfare. We moan and whinge about paying tax towards social provision but we don't mind paying 60 quid to get a hairdo (it's a hairdo for God's sake.....snip, snip.....£60 please....oh, bargain, thanks very much) just because the shop is shiney and full of dolly birds who consumers are aspiring to because they've over-indulged in too many magazines. I am not talking about entrepreneurial endeavour. I am talking about our society and the way we are prepared to pay way, way over the top for nothing because of a perceived level of social acceptance (because we have the media in our brains day after day telling us we need these things to be fulfilled).

I agree with you. We are far too obsessed with ourselves, and with trying to live up to some image we're sold as being what we ought to be. If I only watched TV and only read magazines, I'd think my situation hopeless, as all the women there are perfect Goddesses in every way. But then I take a walk in the real world, and see that in fact most women are fairly normal and so my self image is not threatened after all - well, only as much as any woman's is.
 
In my position, I ought to have a five bedroomed mansion in Surrey. I ought to have a Bentley and a Ferrari. I ought to have plastic surgery every year. I ought to wear the latest ridiculous crap that trundles out of the fashion houses of London, Paris and Milan. Thing is, I know thats a load a crap. I dont want it, I wouldnt have it even if I could afford it and to be honest I find those who pursue it to be, well, lets say shallow and remain polite about it.
 
But in the end, if people have the money, then some people will engage in that elusive and illusory search for the perfect life. It would be impossible to prevent it, and also impossible to prevent entrepreneurs from exploiting their search.
 
We also have to bear in mind, that in the absence of strict class structures such as we used to have, money is what governs class these days because we are still class concious. Wealth brings privilege - and since we Brits seem obsessed with social climbing, so many of us will give the appearance of wealth, even if we dont have it. Mrs Smith could get her hair done in her own home for about 20 quid, but by being seen at Giovanni's and paying over the top for the same service, she will feel better than the rest of us and others will see her in a different light too - she can afford such indulgence, ergo she is better than me etc. One sees the same thing in all consumer markets - ordinary people paying for stuff they dont need, all to keep up with the Jones's, and all on credit, most usually. Its whats keeping the economy going after all - a whole country running on credit because no one wants to be thought of as less than successful and wealthy and upper middle class.

In other words, we value over-priced, stylistic items because we live in a society that places higher value on consumerism to achieve social acceptance than it does social welfare.

I agree we place too much value on achieving an image, but this worthless activity is what is driving the economy right now, so that social welfare can be afforded. As I have said before, there will always be an underclass and there will always be a need for social welfare, even if we had full employment. Its the nature of a market economy which relies on comparative wealth disparities (in terms of not just money, but skills, production/service technology et al) for it to function. In such a system, some skills and technologies will be worth more, and some less, and so those engaged on activities on the less side will form an underclass, whatever happens.
 
As I have also said before, we make sufficient provision for social welfare in the UK - more than sufficient perhaps. I calculated last night that my little company provides nearly half a million pounds in tax revenues to the government every year, and thats not counting all the fuel duties and VAT and so on, which I and my employees pay in our life outside of work. We cannot pay more without making the whole thing unviable. And thats just one little company amongst thousands.
 
If the people who require social welfare would treat it as a hand up, rather than as a handout, then I could be more sympathetic, but I live amongst these people and the vast majority of them seem to be doing very well on benefits thank you very much. Meanwhile, the people in the Deansgate obviously require some assistance - they are entitled to benefits and housing, so why are they not getting it? No more money is required, but definitely the system needs to be examined closely and reviewed with the aim being not to induce a lifestyle but a safety net as intended, and to remove the fraud and waste that goes on within it - which rob not only those who pay tax for it, but also those who need it and must do with less than a decent service.

It's time for a change to our political landscape. If the Conservatives and New Labour have nothing more to offer us than neo-liberal economics and a chaotic free-for-all culminating in a huge wealth gap, serious levels of alcohol and drug abuse, child poverty, crime, anti-social behaviour, teenage pregnancy and social deprivation then it's time to get rid and move on.

I agree. But sadly the only way to power these days is by engaging with the real power brokers who can pay for one's marketing of a new message/party to replace the current system - and by so engaging have to water down any change to keep the status quo as it is. Take any new, minor party for example - they need wealthy backers to get their message out, and in the meantime the Murdoch press slaughter them with disinformation and outright libel. If one wishes to assume power, one has to sell out one's principles it would seem.
 
Even if one had a far superior system and policies on which to stand at election, one would lose. Because people believe what they read in the News of the World, The Sun et al.

In the meantime, I'm going to set up shop down the road, call myself Marco Del Pierro, sell Marco's 'finest authentic Italian ice creams' and charge £50 for a cone, dollop of lancashire ice cream and a flake (monkey's blood added for an extra fiver). The proceeds will be donated to a local school. The new Irony Tax.

Good luck (lick?) with that one. Having raised money for charity before, this sort of activity is a nightmare of red tape. And try getting public liability insurance in this day and age - there wont be any profits to donate after you've paid that. 

Oh, and I'll come back to your wealth creation points when I have more time. Don't underestimate my business sense just because I'm only 33 and value social welfare. After leaving University I have worked in varying levels of business and sat more business/finance related exams than you can shake a stick at. As said, I'll come back to these points.

Hey, I'm only 38 NG. I only have 5 years on you - albeit most of that time running a business, and thinking radical thoughts on politics (much more radical than anything you have posted here!). You went to university? Wow, that makes me one of the socially deprived then, because I got a place and couldnt afford it! I did spend a fair few years studying nights and weekends whilst working though, so I would guess I had a sufficient grounding wherewith to continue to debate, what with paper qualifications and the best education that the real world could provide.
 
Please dont misunderstand me NG - I would like to see some big changes too, its just that it seems to me that the changes I would like to see are at variance with yours in their nature, rather than in their aims. But then, this the nature of politics it would seem - we all want the same things more or less, but disagree on how to achieve them.
E

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

That said, my purpose is to notice that often one needs to be removed from abject poverty by only one or two generations before they begin to scorn those less fortunate than themselves.  If you were on a lifeboat  in the middle of the ocean would the rich deserve more water and food than the poor?  Would the navigator deserve more food and water than the oarsman?   Would you chuck the sick, lame and lazy over the side?  Would you foul the lifeboat with waste?  Would those manning the oars be reminded by the captain that they were lucky he had given them a job, or should they be thanked and encouraged for their efforts?  If we perceive the earth as a lifeboat in the sea of the universe and those of us on it had the common goal  of survival. The weakness of one is the weakness of all.  Consequently it is the responsibility of the group to help, encourage and comfort the one?

thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Good post Thompson but those who speak from the UK live in a system of welfare that is totally out of control and has produced major injustice. For example it was admitted that if recent pension proposals were implemented then it simply would not be worth average earning Brits trying  to save to protect their own future !

Indeed. I am one of those who was sold a pig in a poke back in the late 80s /early 90s. I refuse to make any pension provision for myself anymore- these pension companies take my money for 40 years, and at the end of it tell me "sorry, we fxxked up, you've got nothing" - whilst during those 40 years they seemed to make enough money for themselves that they have nothing to worry about. And worse - those who have chosen a benefits lifestyle over work make no provision for themselves whatsoever, because the state will pay for them anyway - so why on earth should I pay for my pension, and pay tax to provide for theirs too, in a means tested environment which should by some miracle, any pension I pay for materialise, I would be no better off for having saved for it?

NG's view that conspicuous consumption is responsible for poverty is just ridiculous.

Indeed. Conspicuous consumption of imported goods, paid for on credit, is all that is driving our economy to produce the tax revenues to pay for social welfare to combat poverty. It will be "interesting" to see what happens when the bubble bursts - fairly soon I would think.

We spend a lot on hair cuts or automobiles therefore we cause poverty. Totally illogical in my opinion.

Absotively! We dont need to rebalance our economy in any way - but what we do need to do is to ensure we have a coherent set of shared values in this country, such that people are not lured into seeking illusory perfect lives, but recognise what is and what is not worthy of pursuit in both the personal and national life.

For a start its not even the same "we" in both cases.

quote:

And there are sufficient jobs available in the UK right now. We are bringing over hundreds of thousands of eastern and central European people to do them, because people here wont do them. They might not be the most glamourous or well paid jobs, but they are there. If social benefits are so poor, then how come those claiming them are not jumping to fill these vacancies? Simple answer - because the vacancies pay less than one can receive from claiming benefits. This is why the claim that social provision in the UK is so poor, falls flat on its face.

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I would ask if you have ever lived on benefits?
Because this last sentance is utter bollocks.
Geez - I am such a brit.

Peace and Rapture

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

And there are sufficient jobs available in the UK right now. We are bringing over hundreds of thousands of eastern and central European people to do them, because people here wont do them. They might not be the most glamourous or well paid jobs, but they are there. If social benefits are so poor, then how come those claiming them are not jumping to fill these vacancies? Simple answer - because the vacancies pay less than one can receive from claiming benefits. This is why the claim that social provision in the UK is so poor, falls flat on its face.

This is something I feel completely strongly about having experience first hand - I wanted to elabourate.

The higher paid employment is being outsourced abroad because the labour is cheap.  So, here at home, with have thousands of unemployed skilled people, desperately seeking jobs...ANY jobs - even these 'non glamourous, low paid jobs' you speak of and what happens - they are told they are too old, or too skilled and not worth employing.

 

Yes - and this is where we need to reorganise what we are doing. Too many people in this country (richer and poorer alike) do not share a vision of what it is to be a member of a nation. The attitude seems to be, screw everyone else, this is about me, and me alone. I need have no conscience at all, in fact that would be a hindrance. I can and should climb over the bodies of others to get mine. Its an every man for himself attitude, which is corrosive at all ends and in all parts of society.

 

But throwing more money at the problem is not going to do anything other than prove expensive. Instead we need a new national consensus on what are the responsibilities, duties and values we all should have if we wish to participate in the benefits of the collective activity known as a nation. Anyone who doesnt like it, should go elsewhere, and it applies at all levels - not only the lifestyle benefit claimant who refuses to countenance the duty to find work, but also the corporations who outsource and refuse to invest anything in the country from which they rip massive profits.

 

They cannot get the jobs they are skilled for, because of GREED of companies who out source for cheaper labour, which is why immigration is so vital to the british economy.

 

Greed on getting your hair done at giovannis and not sue who cuts the local pensioners.

Greed on buying Jimmy Choos and not Asda.

Having the ferrari and not the Ford.

 

Your response on benefits is completely middle to upper class reaction.  If you lived on benefits instead of being able to, in your position,

'ought to have a five bedroomed mansion in Surrey. I ought to have a Bentley and a Ferrari. I ought to have plastic surgery every year. I ought to wear the latest ridiculous crap that trundles out of the fashion houses of London, Paris and Milan. '
 
Just for information - my family is lower working class, you know the unskilled labourers? I came from nothing, having had the same state education that all have, having no advantages whatever, having no rich daddy to provide me with anything. All that I have, is what I have worked to get. Your assertion of my class is remarkable.

Yes - I worked for the benefits agencies.  Yes I also have first hand experience of living on benefits.  And I even work with families struggling to support themselves, let alone house themselves on the stigma that living on benefits affords.

 

I must be missing the stigma bit. No one where I live seems to feel any stigma whatever. In fact they seem to be well pleased with themselves whenever they manage to obtain something more for nothing. As to the struggle bit - well, are you suggesting that life on benefits should be comfortable? Where then the inducement to get off benefits in a system which already provides more than enough help?

 

You want to see poverty?  Look further than the homeless person on the street or your perception of what 'comforts' being on benefit affords.

 
I've travelled through central and eastern Europe. There is no one in the UK who needs to live in poverty, and few who realise what poverty actually is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

And there are sufficient jobs available in the UK right now. We are bringing over hundreds of thousands of eastern and central European people to do them, because people here wont do them. They might not be the most glamourous or well paid jobs, but they are there. If social benefits are so poor, then how come those claiming them are not jumping to fill these vacancies? Simple answer - because the vacancies pay less than one can receive from claiming benefits. This is why the claim that social provision in the UK is so poor, falls flat on its face.

This is something I feel completely strongly about having experience first hand - I wanted to elabourate.

The higher paid employment is being outsourced abroad because the labour is cheap.  So, here at home, with have thousands of unemployed skilled people, desperately seeking jobs...ANY jobs - even these 'non glamourous, low paid jobs' you speak of and what happens - they are told they are too old, or too skilled and not worth employing.

 

Yes - and this is where we need to reorganise what we are doing. Too many people in this country (richer and poorer alike) do not share a vision of what it is to be a member of a nation. The attitude seems to be, screw everyone else, this is about me, and me alone. I need have no conscience at all, in fact that would be a hindrance. I can and should climb over the bodies of others to get mine. Its an every man for himself attitude, which is corrosive at all ends and in all parts of society.

 

But throwing more money at the problem is not going to do anything other than prove expensive. Instead we need a new national consensus on what are the responsibilities, duties and values we all should have if we wish to participate in the benefits of the collective activity known as a nation. Anyone who doesnt like it, should go elsewhere, and it applies at all levels - not only the lifestyle benefit claimant who refuses to countenance the duty to find work, but also the corporations who outsource and refuse to invest anything in the country from which they rip massive profits.

 

They cannot get the jobs they are skilled for, because of GREED of companies who out source for cheaper labour, which is why immigration is so vital to the british economy.

 

Greed on getting your hair done at giovannis and not sue who cuts the local pensioners.

Greed on buying Jimmy Choos and not Asda.

Having the ferrari and not the Ford.

 

Your response on benefits is completely middle to upper class reaction.  If you lived on benefits instead of being able to, in your position,

'ought to have a five bedroomed mansion in Surrey. I ought to have a Bentley and a Ferrari. I ought to have plastic surgery every year. I ought to wear the latest ridiculous crap that trundles out of the fashion houses of London, Paris and Milan. '
 
Just for information - my family is lower working class, you know the unskilled labourers? I came from nothing, having had the same state education that all have, having no advantages whatever, having no rich daddy to provide me with anything. All that I have, is what I have worked to get. Your assertion of my class is remarkable.

Yes - I worked for the benefits agencies.  Yes I also have first hand experience of living on benefits.  And I even work with families struggling to support themselves, let alone house themselves on the stigma that living on benefits affords.

 

I must be missing the stigma bit. No one where I live seems to feel any stigma whatever. In fact they seem to be well pleased with themselves whenever they manage to obtain something more for nothing. As to the struggle bit - well, are you suggesting that life on benefits should be comfortable? Where then the inducement to get off benefits in a system which already provides more than enough help?

 

You want to see poverty?  Look further than the homeless person on the street or your perception of what 'comforts' being on benefit affords.

 
I've travelled through central and eastern Europe. There is no one in the UK who needs to live in poverty, and few who realise what poverty actually is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

I might have missed the point - what stood out to me was that Tommy Smith isn't living in a cardboard box down the row.

Ah... but if he was - He may be better off!