Reverse Psychology...
London our capital city and some other major cities in the UK had civil unrest in August. Classed as riots. Property was set on fire, theft, looting, damage, violence and sadly loss of businesses, homes and worst of all some loss of life.
You can look at why it happened and who was to blame not sure I am clever enough to give an answer and its not my job to do so but many of the experts called in to comment by the media during the days that followed were wrong or perhaps it was too soon after the event. These days many want instant solutions.
Politicians had plenty to say on the subject but local MP's whose areas were affected showed the expected anger but also some measure in what they said.
Overall the Government's solution seems to be to penalise many genuine families alongside those who did cause problems because they've blamed people on benefits but many who do receive help still did not take part in the unrest. Many who do work are on such rubbish wages, that many household's still have apply for help from the state to attempt to have a decent income to live day to day.
It was said without proof that many who took part in the unrest were in gangs, on benefit etc...all generalisations. And you can understand that being thought of as being a probable reason. Some will come from disadvantaged homes but even that is a stereotypical term. I have yet to see official statistics to prove that.
Many shown taking part on tv news looked older than children and teenagers, it has been stated already by some who at the time said it was mainly gang led they've had to change their opinions and few belonged to a gang. Many were below the age where you can claim benefits.
If you are already into crime chances are you will be earning more than you'd get by signing on. And if we're led to believe that many were using the internet and social networks to decide where they'd all meet up next, however they afford or acquired them they obviously have access to a computer and/or the latest mobile phones etc...
Though anecdotal there was the daughter of a millionaire driving people around to loot from shops and then motor away the goods, we had a potential sportsman who was said to be a footballer with a bright future ahead of him, a young female adult who was likely to be an ambassador to promote the 2012 Olympics taking place in London next year and who had already met the London Mayor Boris Johnson and athlete/organiser of the Olympics Lord Sebastian Coe, a teacher's helper, a male nurse and so on. So not all taking part were not in work and we can only judge by those who have been aprehended, plenty have not been.
There is a programme on the radio next week which takes a different line, it asks why did so many of the population not join in? What stopped the rest of society from doing so? It could be interesting.
Today the media(virtually every broadcaster)has mentioned in the news and phone-ins a survey that says that 49% of parents and 5% of pupils would welcome corporate punishment back into schools. I believe they were asking how people could/should be disciplined and the survey was held soon after the riots which may've coloured the views of those who took part.
The media has made it sound as though all parents across the land feel the same way but its a survey arranged by a newspaper and only one. Then picked up and used as filler, its also publicity for the newspaper but some of what I have heard has avoided mentioning which newspaper published it and I have yet to hear a breakdown as to what social classes, ages, sex, which areas of the UK were included and most importantly how many took part.
And how it was presented it is so easy for those watching and listening to take it as the Gospel truth.
Update:That programme is on air tomorrow(September 19th 2011)on BBC Radio 4 at 8.30pm called Analysis and available for 7 days via the online player. It might be available as a podcast and some programmes are now archived for longer.
You can look at why it happened and who was to blame not sure I am clever enough to give an answer and its not my job to do so but many of the experts called in to comment by the media during the days that followed were wrong or perhaps it was too soon after the event. These days many want instant solutions.
Politicians had plenty to say on the subject but local MP's whose areas were affected showed the expected anger but also some measure in what they said.
Overall the Government's solution seems to be to penalise many genuine families alongside those who did cause problems because they've blamed people on benefits but many who do receive help still did not take part in the unrest. Many who do work are on such rubbish wages, that many household's still have apply for help from the state to attempt to have a decent income to live day to day.
It was said without proof that many who took part in the unrest were in gangs, on benefit etc...all generalisations. And you can understand that being thought of as being a probable reason. Some will come from disadvantaged homes but even that is a stereotypical term. I have yet to see official statistics to prove that.
Many shown taking part on tv news looked older than children and teenagers, it has been stated already by some who at the time said it was mainly gang led they've had to change their opinions and few belonged to a gang. Many were below the age where you can claim benefits.
If you are already into crime chances are you will be earning more than you'd get by signing on. And if we're led to believe that many were using the internet and social networks to decide where they'd all meet up next, however they afford or acquired them they obviously have access to a computer and/or the latest mobile phones etc...
Though anecdotal there was the daughter of a millionaire driving people around to loot from shops and then motor away the goods, we had a potential sportsman who was said to be a footballer with a bright future ahead of him, a young female adult who was likely to be an ambassador to promote the 2012 Olympics taking place in London next year and who had already met the London Mayor Boris Johnson and athlete/organiser of the Olympics Lord Sebastian Coe, a teacher's helper, a male nurse and so on. So not all taking part were not in work and we can only judge by those who have been aprehended, plenty have not been.
There is a programme on the radio next week which takes a different line, it asks why did so many of the population not join in? What stopped the rest of society from doing so? It could be interesting.
Today the media(virtually every broadcaster)has mentioned in the news and phone-ins a survey that says that 49% of parents and 5% of pupils would welcome corporate punishment back into schools. I believe they were asking how people could/should be disciplined and the survey was held soon after the riots which may've coloured the views of those who took part.
The media has made it sound as though all parents across the land feel the same way but its a survey arranged by a newspaper and only one. Then picked up and used as filler, its also publicity for the newspaper but some of what I have heard has avoided mentioning which newspaper published it and I have yet to hear a breakdown as to what social classes, ages, sex, which areas of the UK were included and most importantly how many took part.
And how it was presented it is so easy for those watching and listening to take it as the Gospel truth.
Update:That programme is on air tomorrow(September 19th 2011)on BBC Radio 4 at 8.30pm called Analysis and available for 7 days via the online player. It might be available as a podcast and some programmes are now archived for longer.
posted by The Great Gildersleeve | 7:34 pm
4 Comments:
And more recently they have said a large percentage already had criminal convictions: apparently 73% had previous criminal convictions and of those 30% or more have served a prison sentence before.
I'm glad that you reminded me about that. If they could've blamed the benefit culture it plays into the Government plans regarding getting people off welfare but most experts called in to talk about such events often take an educated guess using past experiences. And this time they got it wrong.
I'll take a guess that those who have not been caught are probably of a similar background. I can't be any less wrong saying that.
As I said earlier many who work still need help.
The housing benefit is to be capped at £100 a week but a new survey suggests that private property is rising again and the average family for nothing particularly special is having to find approx £780 per month.
You will have to therefore find the other £380.
Its similar to the cost of gas and electric...they say use less and save, you do but they increase the price so you'll still pay more for less.
Its a business they don't want you to use less.
A sucker wrote into a local paper about the proposed wind farm near here which will be the largest in the UK and the turbines are three times as big as the Angel Of The North. He welcomes the farm as it will save him money...
Does he really believe that?
Of course there are wasters but most are genuine and they were struggling already so when these cuts bite I really wonder what the future holds...
until the government controls hosing prices (it won't) then this problem will continue; of course they're shit scared of the reaction to putting hundreds of thousands in negative equity or at least into massive debt (because all those people the have already spent all the equity living the high life for 15 years thinking they're rich)
I have a few blog posts in draft form but I'll borrow from one of those...
A few days ago a Christian charity said they are now delivering food parcels to 100,000 families in the UK.
In the States where they tend to believe the public should look after themselves and the State should do less...
46 Million households are living below the poverty line, its not all wasters(it couldn't be)many are working but the minimum wage is ok for perhaps someone still living at home with parents but not for a hosuehold where you are bringing up a family.
$11,500 for a single person and $22,500 for a family is considered as low income and you are poor.
If you convert the currency into sterlng many over here are surviving on a similar rate(In work and unemployed/sick and on welfare)
We really are in a sorry state...
And they say that we are a rich economy. Maybe that's why because most people are being paid rubbish wages and only a few are feeling any benefit from the profit businesses are making.
Post a Comment
<< Home