+- kanji koohii FORUM (http://forum.koohii.com)
+-- Forum: Learning Japanese (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Off topic (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-13.html)
+--- Thread: London riots (/thread-8218.html)
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-14
why?
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-14
Quote:The election was over a year ago. It is possible to point the finger at all political parties, but that is beyond the point.Quote:p.s. did you notice that riots only seem to occur under conservative governments in this country lol?Sounds more like a fallout of Labour policies to me this time.
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-14
yeah, i was kinda joking... it's much more interesting to look at actual policies rather than blaming conservative / labour as a whole. Like midnightsun said, it was labour who brought in ATOS. Not sure who told them to act like they are doing though... seems ultra right wing to me.
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-14
IceCream Wrote:yeah, i was kinda joking... it's much more interesting to look at actual policies rather than blaming conservative / labour as a whole. Like midnightsun said, it was labour who brought in ATOS. Not sure who told them to act like they are doing though... seems ultra right wing to me.Sometimes people just forget what has happened over the past year, or just refuse to admit.
London riots - dizmox - 2011-08-14
Budget cuts were inevitable due to the previous government's overspending. They haven't just cut welfare for the fun of it.
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-14
and labour's policy was to soften the blow of the financial crisis by borrowing. It's not like they had no plan for repaying, it's just that their plan was long term enough to not have these kinds of significant impacts on society in the process. So, not really inevitable, is it, if there are other options...
Well, i don't really know about how national debt affects people, but as far as i'm aware, it wasn't having anything like the impact that massive spending cuts have on people in general. So i'm kinda at a loss to really understand why it has to be paid back NOWNOWNOW in the first place.
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-14
dizmox Wrote:Budget cuts were inevitable due to the previous government's overspending. They haven't just cut welfare for the fun of it.Let us not forget that there is always a choice between raising tax and cutting spending.
London riots - fakewookie - 2011-08-14
IceCream Wrote:and labour's policy was to soften the blow of the financial crisis by borrowing. It's not like they had no plan for repaying, it's just that their plan was long term enough to not have these kinds of significant impacts on society in the process. So, not really inevitable, is it, if there are other options...I'm guessing you don't watch the news? As Ireland, Greece, Italy, Cyprus, Portugal, Spain, and the United States have shown us, not cutting budgets significantly enough and borrowing even more works out great!
IceCream Wrote:Well, i don't really know about how national debt affects people, but as far as i'm aware, it wasn't having anything like the impact that massive spending cuts have on people in general. So i'm kinda at a loss to really understand why it has to be paid back NOWNOWNOW in the first place.We will spend more this year on interest on the debt we owe than on the military, or on the police.
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-14
It's my understanding that most of those countries are suffering & going bust because of the effects of being tied into the Euro, not because of debt by itself.
But is there any indication that Britain is even close to bankrupt? If so, i'll understand. I haven't heard anything like that though.
Obviously, you can't eternally borrow more than you pay back. But there's also some leeway within that. Borrowing to minimise effects of the financial crisis doesn't seem totally insane to me (borrowing for the war does though)... even if that means more interest over a longer period. We were already paying that interest back under labour, without these massive cuts, weren't we? Again, if not, i can understand.
Though really, it should definately be illegal to lend money to countries and have the interest rate be more than inflation for that country. (if it isn't already, i'm really not so strong on economics...)
London riots - fakewookie - 2011-08-14
IceCream Wrote:It's my understanding that most of those countries are suffering & going bust because of the effects of being tied into the Euro, not because of debt by itself.It's called the "European sovereign debt crisis". It's about national debt. They're suffering because their borrowing costs are now getting too high due to investors' lack of confidence in their ability to honour their debt commitments. We have avoided exactly this by enacting a plan of spending cuts and refusing to be averted from it.
IceCream Wrote:But is there any indication that Britain is even close to bankrupt? If so, i'll understand. I haven't heard anything like that though.Last year when this crisis started, the UK was being talked about along with the rest of the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain) as one of the countries that had dangerously high debt levels and was heading for a crisis. Now, you're right, there is no indication that we are close to a debt crisis. The precise reason for that is the 'safe haven' status this country's bonds now have thanks to this government's unwavering austerity policies. Believe it or not this country is leading on this right now, and we're being praised around the world.
IceCream Wrote:Obviously, you can't eternally borrow more than you pay back. But there's also some leeway within that. Borrowing to minimise effects of the financial crisis doesn't seem totally insane to me (borrowing for the war does though)... even if that means more interest over a longer period. We were already paying that interest back under labour, without these massive cuts, weren't we? Again, if not, i can understand.What exactly do you want the government to spend money on to "minimise the effects of the financial crisis"?
We always pay back our debt. That's why we have an AAA credit rating. The goal is to retain that rating and safeguard our ability to borrow as required. The way to do that is to inspire confidence in the bond markets. The way to do that is via fiscal responsibility, which is exactly what this government is enacting. Yes, everything was fine (on the surface) under Labour, because the world economy was booming and we weren't in the midst of a financial crisis, which we now are. The danger which we are now in requires certain sacrifices. That's something which we all just have to accept.
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-14
fakewookie Wrote:We always pay back our debt. That's why we have an AAA credit rating. The goal is to retain that rating and safeguard our ability to borrow as required. The way to do that is to inspire confidence in the bond markets. The way to do that is via fiscal responsibility, which is exactly what this government is enacting. Yes, everything was fine (on the surface) under Labour, because the world economy was booming and we weren't in the midst of a financial crisis, which we now are. The danger which we are now in requires certain sacrifices. That's something which we all just have to accept.Sorry, but AAA relates to credit worthy. America didn't lose it AAA, because it didn't pay back debt. UK's national debt still stand over £900 billion. It has been estimated that "Every household will pay £2,119 this year, just to cover the interest." So the real problems with many countries is that they still have debt, which they have failed to "pay back."
London riots - fakewookie - 2011-08-15
No, America lost its AAA rating because of the difficulties that were encountered in attempting to extend the debt ceiling, which resulted in an unnecessarily protracted process, because of the lack of new revenue increases in the deal that was eventually passed, and because the budget reductions that were announced weren't extensive enough. Hence, Standard and Poor's decided that US bonds weren't risk free any more.
Our debt is being paid back, we're just increasing it at the same time. We always pay it back. That is why people buy UK gilts.
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-15
fakewookie Wrote:No, America lost its AAA rating because of the difficulties that were encountered in attempting to extend the debt ceiling, which resulted in an unnecessarily protracted process, because of the lack of new revenue increases in the deal that was eventually passed, and because the budget reductions that were announced weren't extensive enough. Hence, Standard and Poor's decided that US bonds weren't risk free any more.I wrote that "America didn't lose it AAA, because it didn't pay back debt." Those pesky double negatives. In other words "The lose of America's AAA rate, wasn't the result of not paying back its debt." America's bond rating was used for the reason to remove the misunderstand that bond rating relates only to paying back debt.
Our debt is being paid back, we're just increasing it at the same time. We always pay it back. That is why people buy UK gilts.
UK national debt is over £900 billion. Taking the "pay it back" literally, UK hasn't pay it back. However, UK is paying it back with interest. I can't find anywhere that even suggest that UK has paid off its national debt paid it back after 1900.
Gilts slip as fears of credit downgrade for UK grow (Friday, 11 December 2009)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/gilts-slip-as-fears-of-credit-downgrade-for-uk-grow-1838134.html
Britons have donated £7m to help pay off the national debt (9th October 2010)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1318975/Britons-donated-7m-help-pay-national-debt.html
UK National Debt - how Britain owes over £900
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/
http://www.debtbombshell.com/
However, that isn't the issue here, is it.
London riots - midnightsun - 2011-08-15
dizmox Wrote:I am sure there Asians looting. I am not saying they are angels; two weeks ago an Midlands Asian gang was caught for pimping school girls. I can only tell you at my sister's place it was mostly whites and a few blacks. Near my brother and friends' place it was the same. I have been watching alot of T.V. The same pattern. Have you noticed Chinese looting? Me neither. The courts don't breakdown the numbers by ethinc groups but by age only it seems.Quote:p.s. did you notice that riots only seem to occur under conservative governments in this country lol?Sounds more like a fallout of Labour policies to me this time.
Re the Guardian article. One point of view; have read many others. Don't trust the Guardian anymore; have not for a long time. They are as biased as the Daily Mail. Did you read the note at bottom of the article?
"• This article was amended on 10 August 2011 to remove references to Afro-Caribbean and Afghani in contravention of Guardian style. This has been corrected,
Yet, have you read the Guardian's reports? They like to mention hisardic Jews were involved but mention no other religion. I am sure Catholics were there and CoE. Sadly I expect there would a few Budhists. Any non-believers? Any Methodists?. Baptists?....They are not consistent with their own reporting policy. BTW I am not Jewish.
Regarding bad parenting not being the last chance. I agree with the cuts etc, but for 30 years I have been campaigning for more teachers in the class room. The ratio should be one teacher for 15 students so they get enough attention. We cannot build new schools but we can still have two qualified teachers in the room. It would be paid for by getting rid of scroungers and raising taxation. I worked it out a few years ago. It was .4 of one pennny. A terrific investment. But schools should be free to discipline properly without do gooding meddling. It would take 20 years to work properly. Too long for politicians who only think in terms of elections.
London riots - dizmox - 2011-08-15
Omoishinji Wrote:We already have some of the highest income tax rates in the world. The average working professional already pays around 50% of their income or more to the government through various forms of taxation. |:dizmox Wrote:Budget cuts were inevitable due to the previous government's overspending. They haven't just cut welfare for the fun of it.Let us not forget that there is always a choice between raising tax and cutting spending.
London riots - midnightsun - 2011-08-15
Thora Wrote:Brand's banker argument seems like a red herring to me. It also isn't the total double standard he implies as there's been a massive backlash against bankers. [nevermind]I took Sebastian's comment the same way. My point was that has all been done before and is currently being done. There will be nothing new. There hasn't been for 20-30 years, save that recent population pressures have added to to tension (Britian is the most overcrowed country in Europe) , manual jobs that the working class used to have are vanishing. Those that remain are taken by immigrant labour (at first cheaper not so now), the Police were hamstrung by accusations of potential brutality and so did nothing at first and the advent of the Blackberry with encrypted messages meant the gangs were always one step ahead of the police. Educational standards of white working/underclass boys are now the worst of all ethnic groups. Actually, most of these reasons are a decade old.
I took Sebastian's post as focusing on process, not advocating any particular stance. He reminds people to consider the problem from all angles rather than reacting consistent with existing preconceptions and political viewpoints. At least that's how I interpreted it. :-)
modification of what midnightsun Wrote:it does seem to me that [midnightsun] comes across as aggressive and rather superior and [narcissistic...] If you think you can do better, then [run for office.] Stop pontificating.sorry, couldn't resist.(my changes in [ ])
Let's try to disagree with people respectfully, shall we? (The personal insults didn't really add to that discussion, imo.)
/off topic plea
Re your edited quote. I tried to stand for parliament, but did not get past the selection committee. I have been a local councillor twice. Would have stood more but I live abroad quite alot. Am nearing retirement and may do so again - if my health holds out. Not sure.
I stand by my comments. Re insults. Have you read the comments about Khatz - and you don't think insults add to the debate!? I saw this in the thread and the another thread re Sliverspoon." Scammer, snakeoil seller, dishonest, guru mentality (he never claimed to be one....)" and many others, directly made or implied. You made many valid points. It was the way you went about them. And the way some others joined joined in. There were balanced comments also.
Whole Ajatt thing reminds of the flamewar debates about RTK.
However, if you took that comment to be a reflection of you as a person, this was unintentional. I regret this and do apolgize to you. I have read many of your posts and such a comment would be unfair to you as person. Sorry.
Re the narcisstic comment. What cobblers.
.... now. Where is my mirror? Oh. There it is. Let's have look. Yes, there you are you gorgeous, silver haired old fox. My God. You are handsome! ......
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-15
midnightsun Wrote:Regarding bad parenting not being the last chance. I agree with the cuts etc, but for 30 years I have been campaigning for more teachers in the class room. The ratio should be one teacher for 15 students so they get enough attention. We cannot build new schools but we can still have two qualified teachers in the room. It would be paid for by getting rid of scroungers and raising taxation. I worked it out a few years ago. It was .4 of one pennny. A terrific investment. But schools should be free to discipline properly without do gooding meddling. It would take 20 years to work properly. Too long for politicians who only think in terms of elections.well, i guess this was what labour was trying as well, with the teaching assistant thing.
imo, the whole education system needs a fairly large work over, so i won't go into that here.
one of my ideas for this specific type of thing would be to have some sort of community service for kids of all ages. It should be work that they can see the effect of, and that has some level of responsibility associated, even though they're kids. They should be able to choose what type of work to do... from helping the elderly or younger kids to repainting & helping build new stuff to participating in local politics. It doesn't have to be really time consuming, but regular.
Kids should grow up with more of a sense of community. At the moment, all you're taught to think about as a kid is your own grades and your own achievements. You're not encouraged to think or do more than that, unless your own parents want you to. And those that don't achieve much academically often aren't left with a great sense of their own worth, and what they can do, and what good effects they can have on the world. I think it would have been really helpful to me as a kid if i'd been given the chance to do more stuff like that, even though i was good academically.
London riots - fakewookie - 2011-08-15
midnightsun Wrote:Why are you trying to bring race and religion into it? That isn't helpful, at all.dizmox Wrote:I am sure there Asians looting. I am not saying they are angels; two weeks ago an Midlands Asian gang was caught for pimping school girls. I can only tell you at my sister's place it was mostly whites and a few blacks. Near my brother and friends' place it was the same. I have been watching alot of T.V. The same pattern. Have you noticed Chinese looting? Me neither. The courts don't breakdown the numbers by ethinc groups but by age only it seems.Quote:p.s. did you notice that riots only seem to occur under conservative governments in this country lol?Sounds more like a fallout of Labour policies to me this time.
Re the Guardian article. One point of view; have read many others. Don't trust the Guardian anymore; have not for a long time. They are as biased as the Daily Mail. Did you read the note at bottom of the article?
"• This article was amended on 10 August 2011 to remove references to Afro-Caribbean and Afghani in contravention of Guardian style. This has been corrected,
Yet, have you read the Guardian's reports? They like to mention hisardic Jews were involved but mention no other religion. I am sure Catholics were there and CoE. Sadly I expect there would a few Budhists. Any non-believers? Any Methodists?. Baptists?....They are not consistent with their own reporting policy. BTW I am not Jewish.
London riots - midnightsun - 2011-08-16
@ fakewookie
Re religion. Exactly my point about the about the Guardian article.
These were NOT race or religious riots. But it is true some of the reasons for them are found in the attitudes and structures of different communities. Eg. the rise of gang culture in he black community and now the white community. Indeed, there are mixed gangs now. In Manchester, then are many violent white only gangs. It is not just a black problem. The black community gets overly tarnished in my opinion.
The reasons are complex but not new. Our local community and schools have noted for a long time now the parental attitude of Indians and other Asians and Chinese compared with black and especially white parents of struggling classes. They come from the same areas, have the same problems, but they seem to respect family and community more and certainly they respect education more. Of course there are exceptions. Our local community have known this for two decades. Remember, many came here not even speaking English and look what they have achieved. White working class boys now achieve the lowest academic results of all ethnic/social groups. But it is not just in these classes. The decline pervades above as well.
Go to the resorts of Spain and Greece. It is mostly white kids who are pissed and cause most of the problems. Britian is famous for it. The Germans and French do not cause nearly the same problems. Go to any town on a Saturday night you will see the same. These are mostly white communities.
Look at the expenses scandal. Look at Bankers's bonuses. Yes they deserve bonuses but their lack of altruism is staggering. Forget the name of the trading group but the company that owns Fortnum Mason (the trusted haunt of the poor), Primark and other concerns give a staggering amount of their profits to charity. Google the results; were i the news yesterday. Far more than they would pay in tax. This is a fine nodel. Why cannot Bankers adopt something similar? Greed.
The truth is Britain has never faced up to its problems (though we do seems to heap them on ourselves.) We have far too hgh an opinion of ourselves.
We should not look to Cameron and Milibrand for guidance. Rather Mr Wong and Mr Patel.
So much I want to say - I write too much anyway, but I have to go back to hospital. When I come out all this will be old news. Same old. Same old.
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-16
dizmox Wrote:I will do the research. You really don't want me to verify that, do you?Omoishinji Wrote:We already have some of the highest income tax rates in the world. The average working professional already pays around 50% of their income or more to the government through various forms of taxation. |:dizmox Wrote:Budget cuts were inevitable due to the previous government's overspending. They haven't just cut welfare for the fun of it.Let us not forget that there is always a choice between raising tax and cutting spending.
London riots - midnightsun - 2011-08-16
@ omoshinji.
Mostly, I concur with fakewookie's assesment. But I do see where you are coming from. Nobel prize winners don't agree on anything let alone mortals like us.
We have not been debt free, it is true. The question is, what is manageable debt? Once the market decides the risk of not being paid back has inceased they charge more or no longer lend. Look at the PIGs. Though the debt has not been paid back Britain has not defaulted on any new loan. Each loan is paid, then new ones taken out, which are paid. The problem is the total debt has increased to unmanageable levels. It was before the banking crises. There is now no margin left at all. Without the cuts etc interest rates would certainly have increased; loans and mortagages would have been more expensive and there would have been carnage espescially in the moribund housing market which would in turn destroy the economy. Only a 1- 2% increase will wipe out many homeowners. How ironic that Britain is regarded as a safe haven!
Also, official debt and real debt are two different things. We have alot of "off the books" debt -PFI etc. Also, personal debt is staggering. Those that can are rushing to pay debt off to reduce exposure while they can.
Britain is worse than it looks. Same with America. Though it lost its AAA rating (from only one agency, Standard and Poor) it is still the safest place in the world to have your cash. But it has not addessed its problems and seems incapable of doing so. If it does not do so soon, then the problems will be real. Anyway, the greater threat is not America but Europe.
I agree witht the cuts but feel uncomfortable, nevetheless. I do not believe anyone really knows the correct solution. Labour put us right in the proverbial. Blair and Brown were disasters. We cannot keeping trying to get out of debt by taking more one. What happens if the supposed growth does not happen hoped for with greater debt and stimulous? The debt just get larger. How many times have we tried that? But still, it is bloody galling to have cuts imposed on us by Tory and Liberal Democrat private/public school boys who will never themselves suffer these cuts.
Canada did this, with great pain but pulled through. The Germans have been doing this for nearly a decade and now look at them.
Riots happen under Tories because they tend to come in after Labour have spent/wasted all the money. I bet they are glad they lost the last election.
London riots - IceCream - 2011-08-17
@fakewookie: thanks for the explanation
if i get round to reading more about it, i'll come back to that discussion... but, there was a financial crisis under labour in 2008... the bankers crisis. They spent a ton of money bailing out the banks, and trying to keep cash flowing in society to avoid massive depression.Have you guys seen the sentences these guys are getting?!? It's INSANE!!! 1st time offenders going to prison for stealing bottled water?!? 4 years for writing on facebook, to incite a riot that never actually happened?!?
that's so, so sick.
Yeah, conservatives, what a great way to save money. We can expect these young people to end up with proper criminal connections now, and not have to do any kind of work in their communities to make up for what they did. Yep, that'll teach'em...
***** idiots.
c'mon Cameron, hug a hoodie...
London riots - Omoishinji - 2011-08-17
IceCream Wrote:Have you guys seen the sentences these guys are getting?!? It's INSANE!!! 1st time offenders going to prison for stealing bottled water?!? 4 years for writing on facebook, to incite a riot that never actually happened?!?When I heard about that I decided to check what American justice system will do to people who incite a riot. It seems that they are kind of lucky because under American Federal law they could have been sentenced to 5 years, and that is in the nation of Free Speech.
that's so, so sick.
18 U.S.C. § 2101 : US Code - Section 2101: Riots summarized reads.
(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent - ...
(2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; ...
Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
...
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/102/2101
Image they decided two pleaded guilty. They maybe able to get it reduced through appeal of the sentencing.
London riots - bodhisamaya - 2011-08-17
Don't agree with the Facebook guys' actions, but their words would seem to be protected under freedom of speech. It sounds like something leaked out of China rather than front page in London.
I do wonder if there is a media bias to only report on the negative actions done by UK rioters, while at the same time maybe painted the rioters in the Middle East as fighting against oppressive governments and editing video to reflect this. Having witnessed the dishonest way western media reported the Fukushima incident has left me extremely skeptical.
London riots - fakewookie - 2011-08-17
bodhisamaya Wrote:Don't agree with the Facebook guys' actions, but their words would seem to be protected under freedom of speech. It sounds like something leaked out of China rather than front page in London.Inciting violence is not protected by freedom of expression laws. Neither are libel, slander, or false advertising. Just because you can say something doesn't mean it should be legal.
Let's say the two had organised a mass of violence against ethnic minorities in a city. Tens of people showed up, and several people were brutally beaten and seriously injured. One of them dies.
What should happen to the two that publicised the event and encouraged others to take part, if they weren't actually involved in any violence themselves?