-
• #27
Bill, 12? Ha ha.
It never happened, or if it did, it happened so long ago that no-one else was around to witness it. Not even his mum.
-
• #28
Paging Slaytanic....
-
• #29
Bill, 12? Ha ha.
It never happened, or if it did, it happened so long ago that no-one else was around to witness it. Not even his mum.
I didn't mean him per se :-) It's just a figure of speech.
-
• #30
Something to do with poor distribution of wealth. The fact that the gap between the poor and wealthy has grown to ridiculous proportions and that social mobility is apparently worst now than 40 years ago.
Bullshit...
Really!
Why don't you post your address - it would make easier to redistribute the wealth for the estate scum.Yes, they are a product of society, but not all chose the life of crime and it's patronising assuming, that they cannot achieve anything only because they are underprivileged.
Trunks is correct that inequality has grown and social mobility declined in the UK. These are facts. Capitalism systematically creates wide distributions of wealth, opportunities and life conditions. Poverty and deprivation generate crime. Just because some people can deal with it doesn't mean that all can. In any case, corporate crime far outweighs street crime in total costs to society, and you are really quite safe despite the sensationalization of isolated violent crimes.
You are deceived by a sense of self-worth exaggerated by delusions of your own individual moral worth and self control (which make you discount the different material and psychological conditions of others) and by capitalist mythology (hegemony) that has you scared of poor people when the wealthy are robbing you blind.
-
• #31
east end images denies the premise of tree trunks, that mobility has declined, which is actually true (and it is also quite low to begin with), and then goes on to invoke the opposite premise (which is false) by claiming that the underpriviledged can do whatever they want as long as they try hard enough and play by the rules.
-
• #32
'Poverty' will almost always get worse as a country gets richer, because of the way poverty is defined, or more specifically the 'poverty line'. The main poverty line used in the European Union is a relative poverty measure based on "economic distance", a level of income set at 50% of the median household income. That median is stretched by the top, say, 10% who are very well off, so even if the people below this line actually have more money, they are still "poorer". [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measuring_poverty[/ame]
I'm sure the BBC had a little toy on their site you could play with to see how it worked. I couldn't find it though.
Anyway it is weird.
-
• #33
er, No Polo, No talk?
-
• #34
I know, I know.
-
• #35
I've played polo, once.
-
• #36
drinking in the northgate doesnt count
-
• #37
east end images denies the premise of tree trunks, that mobility has declined, which is actually true (and it is also quite low to begin with), and then goes on to invoke the opposite premise (which is false) by claiming that the underpriviledged can do whatever they want as long as they try hard enough and play by the rules.
If by rules you mean finishing school? Yes.
-
• #38
Fuck it, I don't see any form of justification of violent crime. Period.
er, No Polo, No talk?
Max, I know you are buys playing polo, but it happened we are on the same forum.
I'd love to play polo, but I'm cumbersome and old. -
• #39
I'd love to play polo, but I'm cumbersome and old.
...Must... ...resist... ...urge... ...to... ...insult...
-
• #40
but I'm cumbersome and old.
Feeble.
-
• #41
I'd love to play polo, but I'm cumbersome and old.
the real problem is your mind not your body.
-
• #42
yeah bill manages!
-
• #43
Fuck it, I don't see any form of justification of violent crime. Period.
Not justification, but understanding. In any case, capitalism is violent, it's just violence by the powerful, so it's not defined as crime.
-
• #44
+1
What I mean is, that simplistic Robin Hood methods are not the way to repair the society. This is nothing more than populism, thus not far from what the BNP are trying to imply.
You'd have to be 12 to try to justify armed robbery, especially when on the receiving end are polo players...