Burka

[Rubyretro]

"Poverty may be a contributory factor, but it's not an excuse

".
Robert -that is the exact line taken by my arab teacher, in my previous Post, so I can't disagree with it except that it's only -'not an excuse' -when every condition is offered to children to break the 'poverty cycle' and they refuse it (at an age where they can be judged to be able to understand what they're being offered).
Bob said two things that shocked me -he talked about the availability of cheap, or free, books and said that poverty was no bar to literacy, and he quoted Margaret Thatcher and said that no one could object to what she actually said - but I do.
In the first place, with 2 sons, I know that they totally refuse to read a book ; they would rather watch telly , play computer games, or kick a ball about. I order them a monthly science magazine, which they enjoy, and I go to the library and choose a pile of very varied books (fiction and non fiction, short novels or graphic novels), which I leave lying in their rooms without comment, and regularly turn off the screens -and I'm satisfied that they read SOMETHING. How can you blame children if their parents don't do something like that ? -it's not the kids' fault. Also there are are many immigrant mothers who came here for arranged marriages, who can't help with homework (and who's macho dads won't help), and don't speak the language, and don't leave home -let alone use libraries ; it's not the children's fault.
Therefore, it's in the interest of 'Society' (which is 'us' in collective), to make sure that those children are educated and at least have every opportunity to integrate and get decent jobs. We simply can't rely on 'individuals' to 'look to themselves' -because either some won't (and we will have to suffer the consequences later), or they WILL 'look to themselves', and their own personal wealth rather than contributing to our Society, by turning to Crime.

[brummie]

""I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation."

Now who would disagree with that?

No-one did more to create poverty and deprivation in this country than the Thatcher woman by destroying peoples jobs.Is it any wonder that Britain is broken when people feel that they have been abandoned with no hope or prospects.
We are still paying the price today for the culture she created in which the sole motivating factor is personal greed and to hell with those who get left behind.Her creation was a Britain in which it is every man for themselves with no resposiblities for the consequences.I for one would rather live in asociety where those who are better off and doing very nicely thankyou are made to support thiose who are struggling on a day to day basis,not just pull up the ladder and say "you're not entitled to anything,you're on your own".That should be one of the 'obligations' that people should be looking to meet.

[Robert]

My post (number 250) : "Poverty may be a contributory factor, but it's not an excuse." Quite how this equates with my believing that poverty is not a contributory factor, or with my needing to fly to Detroit, is beyond me.

[cappuccina]

Thatcher was born into privilege; how could anyone take anything she says seriously, really??

I mean she's not royalty where she was hiring people to wipe her a$$ and put toothpaste on her toothbrush, but she's pretty close...

Let her wander around in the Brightmoor neighborhood in Detroit too for a day....what a joke...

[Bob Hinton]

I remember what Thatcher did to the working class in Yorkshire the last time the Torys were in power. She said that there was no such thing as society. So whenever she saw anything resembling a "community" she smashed it to pieces in the name of progress.

Not quite. I think Mrs Thatchers remarks about society are possibly the most often mis quoted or misunderstood, coming a close second behind Enoch Powells remarks about 'Rivers of blood' ( which in fact he never said).

When Mrs Thatcher made that remark it was in answer to frequent comments blaming everything on 'society'. She pointed out there was no such thing as society just men and women like you and me, which is very true. Here is the full speech:

""I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation."

Now who would disagree with that?

[cappuccina]

I have NEVER said that anything was an "excuse" for crime; rather I have discussed things that are obvious contributors to it. Now, does that mean that everyone or anyone who has been poor is a criminal, or course not. My immigrant relatives were very poor, and no one was a criminal...why....because they lived in communities that had social cohesion and highly valued education.

Robert, if you do not believe that poverty contributes to crime, fly to the US and see how long you last in the Cass corridor in Detroit...

[Zodiac]

I totally agree with you Zodiac. I am thinking of the poor woman in Leicestershire who was driven to set light to her car with herself and her disabled daughter inside because of the terrible taunting and bullying they were subjected to. Her attackers should have been stopped long before it resulted in such a tragic end.

The Sure Start programmes initiated by the previous government were an attempt to work in such communities and foster positive realtionships and positive activities to address the causes of criminality in the communities. The initiatives included parenting classes - toy libraries - cooking activities - all sorts of things to encourage self-sufficiency - educational development and community cohesion. I have seen such projects work wonders in my own community and hope the new government will continue to support these programmes.

Hi Limehouse,

Thanks for your reply. Yes the Fiona Pilkington case was desperately tragic. Yet another appalling example of the strong/violent taking great pleasure in terrorizing the weak/non-violent, to the point of suicide, for sport! I have lost count of how many times I been forced to listen to some "expert" telling us how "Lessons have been learned". I first heard that phrase when I was just a boy, when I was young enough and naive enough to believe it. I would soon be disabused of any such belief. Thirty-odd years on and little seems to have changed, except for the increase in drugs and drug related violence, certainly little has changed for the better.

I really do hope that schemes like the one you mentioned will improve things, If it prevents just one murder from happening, just one family from being destroyed, then it will at least have achieved something. I am all for trying anything to see if it can make a difference, including the "tough love" approach, but also not excluding "tough justice", and "life" should mean LIFE. For the rest of your nature life, in harsh, spartan, conditions and without the possibility of parole.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

P.S. I'm afraid that I don't have much faith in our new "ConDem" government. I fear that things will only get worse. I remember what Thatcher did to the working class in Yorkshire the last time the Torys were in power. She said that there was no such thing as society. So whenever she saw anything resembling a "community" she smashed it to pieces in the name of progress. Now Mr Cameron talks about "Broken Britain" and how he wants to built a "Big Society"!!! In this context I am anti-hanging, as hanging would be too bloody good for the lot of em!!!

[Robert]

It's important to be clear about the distinction between causes and excuses. Poverty may be a contributory factor, but it's not an excuse. Just about anything can be a contriburory factor. For example, banks. If there were no banks there'd be no bank robberies.

On the subject of professionals, such folk often seem to speak as though they're the only people whose opinions should be taken into account. The trouble is, there's another side of the coin : professionals have a vested interest in keeping their jobs. So it's not surprising if they present their work as being terribly important. This is a factor that should be borne in mind.

[Limehouse]

Hi Limehouse,

I suppose the thing that really gets me upset about this whole poverty as an excuse for crime line of argument, is that it seems to take no account what so ever of the majority of those people who live in the same impoverished circumstances, on the same sink estates as the criminals, but who do not turn to violent crime. Yet it is these very same people who suffer by far the most at the hands of the violent criminals. Their lives are reduced to ones of constant fear, threats, intimidation and been the victims of what the politicians and statsticians refer to as "Petty Crime". It does not seem the least bit "petty" when you and your family are the ones on the the receiving end of it.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

I totally agree with you Zodiac. I am thinking of the poor woman in Leicestershire who was driven to set light to her car with herself and her disabled daughter inside because of the terrible taunting and bullying they were subjected to. Her attackers should have been stopped long before it resulted in such a tragic end.

The Sure Start programmes initiated by the previous government were an attempt to work in such communities and foster positive realtionships and positive activities to address the causes of criminality in the communities. The initiatives included parenting classes - toy libraries - cooking activities - all sorts of things to encourage self-sufficiency - educational development and community cohesion. I have seen such projects work wonders in my own community and hope the new government will continue to support these programmes.

[Zodiac]

Hi TJ

I don't think justice was done in your case. The attackers should have got jail sentences and should have been required to address the issues they had that led to the attack on you and your partner - regardless of their level of affluence or poverty. I don't think we should be soft on punishment - I just think the type of punishment should be non-violent and should seek to change the behaviour of the offenders. If they have literacy difficulties - they should be required to address this. I don't think povery is an excuse - it's a reason.

Hi Limehouse,

I suppose the thing that really gets me upset about this whole poverty as an excuse for crime line of argument, is that it seems to take no account what so ever of the majority of those people who live in the same impoverished circumstances, on the same sink estates as the criminals, but who do not turn to violent crime. Yet it is these very same people who suffer by far the most at the hands of the violent criminals. Their lives are reduced to ones of constant fear, threats, intimidation and been the victims of what the politicians and statsticians refer to as "Petty Crime". It does not seem the least bit "petty" when you and your family are the ones on the the receiving end of it.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[Limehouse]

“Poverty means fewer books in the home which means few opportunities for sharing early reading”

Rubbish. Books can be picked up from charity shops literally for pennies. Wouldn’t it be great though if we could have a central bank of books that poor people could visit to borrow books if they can’t afford them – oh wait we do they are called libraries!

“. Poverty for some children is caused by parents' addiction to drink or drugs or both which means a disruptive lifestyle - no proper routine - irregular meals - no constructive conversations that stimulate litreracy.”

So what you are saying is that the parents have enough money to waste on drink and drugs but not enough to spend on a few books and decent food.

“The connection between poverty - illiteracy and crime is well established”

Yes but what came first the poverty or the crime?

Now according to you the parents have money to spend on drink and drugs but not enough to give their children a decent start in life. Perhaps if the parents didn’t spend so much on drugs, which is a crime, they wouldn’t be in so much poverty!

Linking poverty with crime is a slap in the face to all those desperately poor people who strive like hell to keep on the straight and narrow.

Feckless, irresponsible people will squander what money they have – they are in poverty because they are criminals, not criminals because they are poor.

Yes Bob - some parents do choose drugs and drink over their children's needs and those children grow up in poverty because of their parents' criminal use of drugs so I suppose you are right to some extent when you say crime breeds poverty - but then you would have to examine the reason why someone would chose drugs and/or drink rather than to feed their children and that often leads us back to the original problem.

Yes - there are charity shops and libraries which are good sources of free/cheap books. Our local library is closing - not because people do not use it - but because our new government think people ought to travel in to town to borrow books. All thge local charity shops are always packed with people looking for bargain books - clothes and other things and people from all classes use them. I fully support the use of charity shops.

I would not dream of suggesting that all poor people turn to crime. I hardly had the best start in life and due to circumstances I will not go into - my entry to university was delayed until I was over thirty. I have always worked very hard and so have all of my family. However - we had other things in our favour that not everyone has and we were also under far less pressure to conform to the ideals of a very materialistic society.

Believe me - I do respect your arguments and I do believe in being tough in criminality - but in such a way as the outcomes are a change in attitude and behaviour and not siimply harsh punishments.

[Bob Hinton]

Chicken and egg

“Poverty means fewer books in the home which means few opportunities for sharing early reading”

Rubbish. Books can be picked up from charity shops literally for pennies. Wouldn’t it be great though if we could have a central bank of books that poor people could visit to borrow books if they can’t afford them – oh wait we do they are called libraries!

“. Poverty for some children is caused by parents' addiction to drink or drugs or both which means a disruptive lifestyle - no proper routine - irregular meals - no constructive conversations that stimulate litreracy.”

So what you are saying is that the parents have enough money to waste on drink and drugs but not enough to spend on a few books and decent food.

“The connection between poverty - illiteracy and crime is well established”

Yes but what came first the poverty or the crime?

Now according to you the parents have money to spend on drink and drugs but not enough to give their children a decent start in life. Perhaps if the parents didn’t spend so much on drugs, which is a crime, they wouldn’t be in so much poverty!

Linking poverty with crime is a slap in the face to all those desperately poor people who strive like hell to keep on the straight and narrow.

Feckless, irresponsible people will squander what money they have – they are in poverty because they are criminals, not criminals because they are poor.

[Limehouse]

Hi all

Ok let's say you are walking home and three men jump out of a car and attack you and your partner, the Police catch them and arrest them for attempted murder, GBH ABH, etc. They are let out on bail and have to go to court on a specific day to answer the charges.

You have two choices, see the court action through and let the law deal with them or have a man who you know kindly offer to have a friend knee cap them free of charge - (cos he is old school and doesn't think men should attack women).

Which choice do you pick??

I went with choice A, took them to Crown Court, where they each got a 6 month suspended sentence, had to wear an ankle bracelet for 3 month, had a curfew for 3 month, (which they got out of by getting food delivery jobs on a night) and 30 hours anger management class.

Within 2 month of this they where back in court for assault again.... 2 different cases.

Broken kneecaps would have stopped this. Did I make the right choice, legally yes, would I make that choice if it happened again - no, I think I would go for choice B next time round.


tj

Hi TJ

I don't think justice was done in your case. The attackers should have got jail sentences and should have been required to address the issues they had that led to the attack on you and your partner - regardless of their level of affluence or poverty. I don't think we should be soft on punishment - I just think the type of punishment should be non-violent and should seek to change the behaviour of the offenders. If they have literacy difficulties - they should be required to address this. I don't think povery is an excuse - it's a reason.

[tji]

Hi all

Just reading this thread and I thought I would point out something else from my experience of being attacked (described it a few posts back).

Again it is not statistics it is my own experience and I live in England not USA but the men that attacked me where not from a lower class background at all, I am assuming they either liked 'the high' they got or were just bored.

Tj

[Robert]

Ruby, interesting post and one worth pondering, since it's based on personal experience rather than a Magic Book of Statistics. Others will have had different experiences. Put all the experiences together and you get the view of society as a whole.

Cappuccina, perhaps those who don't vote realise that it would be pointless, as whomever they vote for, the country will still end up being run by people like you. You know, the people who really do know WTF they're talking about.
Keep up the drivel.