Mass Homelessness Soon?

[tinfoilhat]

3 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

I don't think that's what I or newspaper has done at all.

 

Have you completely overlooked the comments from the the University of Sheffield sociologist or the professor in criminal law from the University of Birmingham?  There is clear comment that the prevalence of crime was unreported. There wasn't the immediate awareness of it as happens now due to modern social media technology with all its associated hype. 

 

The fact remains that whenever someone will think back to the Swinging 60s they will simply block out the fact that crime existed and may have existed just as much as it does today. The reporting of it didn't exist in the same form and that is a big difference.

 

Of course I'm not accusing everyone who carried a knife as some murderous stabber but at the same time I'm not so naive to think that knife crime, muggings and violent behaviour only significantly escalated after Maggie took office.  

 

I'd certainly agree crime didn't arrive when Dixon of dock green was cancelled. I was told tales of some proper violence (And thats before we get into 70s/80s football violence which was massivly more widespread than today) on a friday night thats way worse than today. Domestic violence, homophobia, racist attacks were far more prevalent.

 

My point was knife crime really, it's a far newer phenomenon.

[bassett one]

yes theres been may fazes in our lifetime,the teddy boys,mods/rockers,football,drugs ect,but the worst story i heard was a well known fellow burning a fifty pound note in front of a homeless person

[Anna B]

3 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Will you stop bringing up "Thatcher's Britain" it's a weak argument.

 

The concept of winners and losers, rich and poor, the haves and the have not were established for centuries before Thatcher was even a twinkle in someone's eye.

 

You really do need to broaden your horizons as to what the realities of life in the 50s 60s and 70s was like, even well before that.   

 

We are all guilty (including myself) of only remembering the nice bits.  Many of us were nothing more than children during those periods and only saw one tiny part of life. 

Even more of us weren't even born at all and so only have the image of those periods from the warped interpretations portrayed by our parents and grandparents.

 

Is still amuses me that there are entire areas in South Yorkshire who are sometimes two or three generations on from the Thatcher era who are still blaming her for their own failures in society. It's embarrassing. 

 

The research is out there for all to see.   The  actual hardships of daily living, earning and keeping a roof over ones head was just as difficult "back then" as it can be today.     

 

The rich, entitled, lucky and privileged were just as prevalent in society back then as they are today.

 

We need to stop pretending that one prime minister's reign is the epicentre of all social and economic overhaul. It wasn't.

So, in this rich country of ours, to what do you attribute the rising tide of homelessness, foodbanks, debt, suicide et al?

 

Please don't say coronavirus, sure that's aggravated it, but it was a huge problem long before that.,

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

So, in this rich country of ours, to what do you attribute the rising tide of homelessness, foodbanks, debt, suicide et al?

 

Please don't say coronavirus, sure that's aggravated it, but it was a huge problem long before that.,

Well, exactly the same basic reasons as all the poverty, homelessness and starvation certain people faced back in the Victorian times or the great recession of the 20s or following wartime or the great recession of the early 70s or the housing crash of the 80s and the mass interest rate rise or the collapse of the dot com boom of the early 90s or maybe even the banking crisis of the 2000s....

 

Good grief the vagrancy act was established right back in 1824, the term temporary accommodation was first used in the 1948 National Assistance Act. Legal definitions of homelessness was put in statute in 1977 and even the most vocal of homeless charities, Shelter was established in the 1960s.

 

This is not exactly a new story nor can it possibly be argued that it's as a result of one single colour of government.  

 

Yes yes of course we have all seen the news pictures and the sad faced interviews with those parents who can't feed their children, and those

Slacktivism social media campaigns about the pensioners who were about to lose their home and the rah rah chanting and placard waving from the middle classes banging on about how awful these corporations are and their greedy tax avoiding ways before stepping into their nearest Starbucks to grab a mochabocachocolatte and we read the Guardian opinionators spewing about how the internet is all terrible and ruining the high street and creating mass jobless and economic gaps whilst sitting in their Holland Park ivory Towers picking up their Amazon parcels and Wholefoods pre packed lunches...... but the question still remains.  Is the poverty position worse now or do we just get to hear about it more.

 

Regardless, whatever my opinion, one thing YOU can't say with any credibility is that such dire circumstances only exist after one woman who is not been in power for 30+ years and has been dead for over 7 years.  Its nonsense.

Edited November 3, 2020 by ECCOnoob

[Jim Hardie]

2 hours ago, bassett one said:

yes theres been may fazes in our lifetime,the teddy boys,mods/rockers,football,drugs ect,but the worst story i heard was a well known fellow burning a fifty pound note in front of a homeless person

Urban myth.

[Anna B]

54 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Well, exactly the same basic reasons as all the poverty, homelessness and starvation certain people faced back in the Victorian times or the great recession of the 20s or following wartime or the great recession of the early 70s or the housing crash of the 80s and the mass interest rate rise or the collapse of the dot com boom of the early 90s or maybe even the banking crisis of the 2000s....

 

Good grief the vagrancy act was established right back in 1824, the term temporary accommodation was first used in the 1948 National Assistance Act. Legal definitions of homelessness was put in statute in 1977 and even the most vocal of homeless charities, Shelter was established in the 1960s.

 

This is not exactly a new story nor can it possibly be argued that it's as a result of one single colour of government.  

 

Yes yes of course we have all seen the news pictures and the sad faced interviews with those parents who can't feed their children, and those

Slacktivism social media campaigns about the pensioners who were about to lose their home and the rah rah chanting and placard waving from the middle classes banging on about how awful these corporations are and their greedy tax avoiding ways before stepping into their nearest Starbucks to grab a mochabocachocolatte and we read the Guardian opinionators spewing about how the internet is all terrible and ruining the high street and creating mass jobless and economic gaps whilst sitting in their Holland Park ivory Towers picking up their Amazon parcels and Wholefoods pre packed lunches...... but the question still remains.  Is the poverty position worse now or do we just get to hear about it more.

 

Regardless, whatever my opinion, one thing YOU can't say with any credibility is that such dire circumstances only exist after one woman who is not been in power for 30+ years and has been dead for over 7 years.  Its nonsense.

Not one woman, but one continuous economic policy in play for 40 years, to drive back the welfare state. 

 

I woukd argue that the post war period was the most egalitarian in British history, when everybody benefitted, and lead to the most social mobility we have known. 

I thought that level of support, so hard won, would continue. How wrong I was.

 

Remember, the working class have only had representation for 100 years. And only a fraction of that in power.

Edited November 3, 2020 by Anna B

[altus]

26 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I woukd argue that the post war period was the most egalitarian in British history, when everybody benefitted, and lead to the most social mobility we have known. 

I thought that level of support, so hard won, would continue. How wrong I was.

Whilst there was undoubtedly a more egalitarian mood in the post war period, which helped massively with the politics around creating things like the NHS, don't underestimate the effect that WW2 had on social mobility. Loads of middle class people where killed in the war opening up opportunities for the working classes that would otherwise not have existed. Everybody shuffled up a bit and we invited immigrants in to take up the now vacant posts at the bottom of the ladder. Lower social mobility now is, to some extent, down to a return to the norm after the anomaly caused by WW2.

[catmiss]

I’ve not heard any plans to accommodate the street homeless in the forthcoming lockdown. Does anyone know?

[Westie1889]

I honestly don’t really understand who people are referring too when they describe ‘the working class’ these days as it seems to bracket everyone within that group as hard done too and struggling financially which I don’t think is true.

I grew up near Worksop in a working class family and most friends families were miners.

Some went to Uni and did well in their careers, others went down the route of getting a trade and working for themselves which has provided most of them with a comfortable lifestyle.

Is a tradesman from this background earning £40-£50k working class? They certainly aren’t in any hardship.

Also they have pushed the Uni option for their kids in a way their parents didn’t for them and the loans scheme means it’s accessible for all (albeit debt) and more kids from poorer homes are going to Uni than ever before.

One friends son has graduated with a PHD in Chemistry and his brother a Masters in the same subject, their grandads both worked down the pit.

I think the old terms around the class system are almost irrelevant these days. Yes there is a tiny elite at the top based on wealth, but even some of them are from working class backgrounds.

And there is also a group at the bottom who are disadvantaged, low pay/poor education and high house prices being a key reason for this.

But for the rest there is a high degree of social

mobility possible for the reasons I describe above, and that’s why we keep getting the type of governments we vote for.

If the majority of the working class were struggling in the way that has been described Labour would have a landslide every election, but they don’t.

I was amazed Worksop (and Bassetlaw) voted in a Tory MP last year. There were lots of reasons including the abuse a well liked and hard working MP was getting from some within his own party and also Brexit.

But people also didn’t like Labours message around identity politics. If you continually tell

people they are downtrodden and have no hope but their circumstances are very different to that they won’t identify and therefore vote for you.

The definition of middle class is ‘University educated and/or middle management’ but in political terms I think parties need to look at earnings if they want to bracket people, the old terms around class seem pretty much irrelevant now to much of the population.

 

 

[Anna B]

On 06/11/2020 at 02:59, Westie1889 said:

I honestly don’t really understand who people are referring too when they describe ‘the working class’ these days as it seems to bracket everyone within that group as hard done too and struggling financially which I don’t think is true.

I grew up near Worksop in a working class family and most friends families were miners.

Some went to Uni and did well in their careers, others went down the route of getting a trade and working for themselves which has provided most of them with a comfortable lifestyle.

Is a tradesman from this background earning £40-£50k working class? They certainly aren’t in any hardship.

Also they have pushed the Uni option for their kids in a way their parents didn’t for them and the loans scheme means it’s accessible for all (albeit debt) and more kids from poorer homes are going to Uni than ever before.

One friends son has graduated with a PHD in Chemistry and his brother a Masters in the same subject, their grandads both worked down the pit.

I think the old terms around the class system are almost irrelevant these days. Yes there is a tiny elite at the top based on wealth, but even some of them are from working class backgrounds.

And there is also a group at the bottom who are disadvantaged, low pay/poor education and high house prices being a key reason for this.

But for the rest there is a high degree of social

mobility possible for the reasons I describe above, and that’s why we keep getting the type of governments we vote for.

If the majority of the working class were struggling in the way that has been described Labour would have a landslide every election, but they don’t.

I was amazed Worksop (and Bassetlaw) voted in a Tory MP last year. There were lots of reasons including the abuse a well liked and hard working MP was getting from some within his own party and also Brexit.

But people also didn’t like Labours message around identity politics. If you continually tell

people they are downtrodden and have no hope but their circumstances are very different to that they won’t identify and therefore vote for you.

The definition of middle class is ‘University educated and/or middle management’ but in political terms I think parties need to look at earnings if they want to bracket people, the old terms around class seem pretty much irrelevant now to much of the population.

 

 

I don't think it's just income that decides class, but power and influence. 

Only 7% of the population went to private schools, but they hold nearly 50% of the top jobs. This kind of elitism separates them from 'the workers' and they become more divorced from the realities of every day life, but have the power to decide what happens to them via politics etc. That means they can maintain 'closed shops' at the top for people like themselves.

 

I grew up in the 50s and 60s and really believed you could do anything; 'the sky's the limit' thinking. And to a certain extent it was true. It was a time of more social mobility than we'd ever known, especially with free higher education and full employment. I thought it would last for ever, but sadly it was not to be. If you're in a steady well paid job, hang on to it, because they're becoming rarer and rarer. They are being eroded by circumstances and successive governments. 

 

The current younger generation is struggling on all fronts. Even with a University education the jobs are simply not there, and those that are, are often dependent on 'knowing someone' who can give you a leg up. Without contacts, or the right 'networking' group it's very hard for people to break into certain professions, and practices like internships (working for no pay) are unaffordable to many for whom an income is a necessity. 

House prices have made home ownership impossible in certain parts of the country, and even renting is outside the purse of many young people, so places like London, the hub of so many things, is not an option.  

Edited November 10, 2020 by Anna B