Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

True, but you cant 'police' life.

1999. That's pretty recent. Not that those reports are the be all and end all of reality.
The hacking scandal also punched a hole in the perception of integrity about the police.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

True, but you cant 'police' life.

China says "challenge accepted".

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this but...why not just cut off the benefits?

biccat wrote:

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this but...why not just cut off the benefits?

Because some people actually need them to survive.

MrH wrote:China says "challenge accepted".

That's going well...

MrH wrote:Because some people actually need them to survive.

I'm not sure what part of "cut off the benefits" you don't understand. People will find a way to survive whether they have benefits or not.

MrH wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

True, but you cant 'police' life.

China says "challenge accepted".

Please, as if i care what China thinks it can do right now. All they are doing is making it illegal, they arent changing gak.

EDIT: Thank you biccat

Mr Hyena wrote:

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

biccat wrote:

MrH wrote:Because some people actually need them to survive.

I'm not sure what part of "cut off the benefits" you don't understand. People will find a way to survive whether they have benefits or not.

I'm not sure what to make of that comment, I think you misread something because your reply doesn't make any sense. I'm not sure how I "don't understand" what he meant.

biccat wrote:I'm not sure what part of "cut off the benefits" you don't understand. People will find a way to survive whether they have benefits or not.

Who knows, maybe they'll turn to crime and start looting. God forbid that should ever happen, for whatever reasons.

The problem is a lot of people who need benefits aren't receiving them whereas a lot of people are just abusing the benefits system. Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of people out there on benefits that need them. Hell I even know such people.

biccat wrote:

MrH wrote:China says "challenge accepted".

That's going well...

MrH wrote:Because some people actually need them to survive.

I'm not sure what part of "cut off the benefits" you don't understand. People will find a way to survive whether they have benefits or not.

Crime, for instance.

MrH wrote:

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.

Sure there's a problem, but it does not justify sterilization. Because thats what will happen if you want to stop people from having kids. If not that how else, penalize them after the child is born? That will only hurt them more than simply being born into the bad situation without having a parent heavily fined or in jail would have done. Who is going to decide, who has the right to have children, what a good enough standard of living is, I have known many people who came from impoverished or abusive households and made a great person of themselves. I agree that people having children they cannot support is a huge problem, but not nearly as huge as the precident forced sterilization would set. if the benefits are where the issue is for you, then again, its big government hurting you. Stop the benefits and the people who are according to you having children just for that purpose will stop. State sponsored sterilization is not, and has never been the answer, Not in the U.S.A. during the early 1920's, and not in Nazi Germany.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

I'm not assuming anything, I have eyes. I've been watching the news since it started and you can clearly see the vast majority of the looters are colored. I'm not sure why you'd try and dispute that fact?

Guys, I think we should give up on this debate of what and who's racist. It's irrelevant in the context of forum users in terms of this debate.

What matters is racism in relation to the current events that are being discussed.

Move on and take it to PM if it's bugging you all that much.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

Which is why I took offense to the post where I did not pick up the sarcasm

UK child benefit is £20.30 for the first child and £13.40 for the second and subsequent, per week. You need to have an awful lot of children to get rich on that, especially since they need feeding and clothing.

I think Child Benefit should be limited at the third child. Going over that is too much.

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

Well can you show a picture at least showing white people looting? I largely don't care what race it is thats doing it. But at the same time every picture I've seen has shown either black or middle eastern people. Thats hardly racism.

MrH wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

I'm not assuming anything, I have eyes. I've been watching the news since it started and you can clearly see the vast majority of the looters are colored. I'm not sure why you'd try and dispute that fact?

Because I know about cognitive bias.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

Well can you show a picture at least showing white people looting? I largely don't care what race it is thats doing it. But at the same time every picture I've seen has shown either black or middle eastern people. Thats hardly racism.

Exactly.

@MrH: While many if not most of the looters shown in the photographs taken of the looting are black, this does not indicate that all of the looters are black, or that all blacks are looters.

I think people are assuming that you're confusing a visible fact (Of the pictures shown, most of the people in them are colored) with an assumed fact (Ergo, most of the looters must be colored as well). I don't think you are, but it's always nice to clarify

darkPrince010 wrote:@MrH: While many if not most of the looters shown in the photographs taken of the looting are black, this does not indicate that all of the looters are black, or that all blacks are looters.

I never said all black people were looters, I never said all the looters were black, I said the vast majority of looters in this case are colored, which is true.

darkPrince010 wrote:@MrH: While many if not most of the looters shown in the photographs taken of the looting are black, this does not indicate that all of the looters are black, or that all blacks are looters.

I think people are assuming that you're confusing a visible fact (Of the pictures shown, most of the people in them are colored) with an assumed fact (Ergo, most of the looters must be colored as well). I don't think you are, but it's always nice to clarify

Wouldn't the majority be defined as the majority of criminals seen on images until further proof?

There isn't. Its kinda stupid to think so.

I don't think it's as bad as it used to be, but I still think there's a cultural hangover of it. Everytime I saw someone getting stopped and searched in London they were young, black, males - and they often didn't like it - I didn't live in a poor or 'criminal hotspot' area mind, so I didn't see it that often. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is a general perception of racial/social stereotyping for racial minority youth's, as well as for the police and what they represent. I think both are paranoid of the other to a degree and yet I feel there's elements of truth in both as well.

It's a complicated social issue and there are underlying causes, these looters obviously have developed a mentality towards anarchy, without any sign of empathy and purely materialistic motives. It comes down to poor education, poor family life, the steady break down of community youth projects, lack of self-respect and social discipline etc...It seems to be a cultural thing for them as well and goes beyond racial stereotypes. It's a result of failure on our educational system and many other areas, including punishment for criminality...the list goes on really

Now we're going to have a bunch of politicians argue about it and not understand anything about it with a lot of pooh-poohing going on...fun days

MrH wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

Well can you show a picture at least showing white people looting? I largely don't care what race it is thats doing it. But at the same time every picture I've seen has shown either black or middle eastern people. Thats hardly racism.

Exactly.

You didn't see the front page of the Metro this morning.

If you didn't care which race is doing it you wouldn't care about their skin colour.

Kilkrazy wrote:UK child benefit is £20.30 for the first child and £13.40 for the second and subsequent, per week. You need to have an awful lot of children to get rich on that, especially since they need feeding and clothing.

I dont know how the figures work out exactly, but to put it into perspective a little: my ex's brother has 2 children with a 3rd on the way. The eldest was recently diagnosed with ADHD (=more benefits) and when the 3rd child is born they will be receiving somewhere in the region of £32,000 a year. (the wife/fiancee also has epilepsy = benefits for her as well, so not perfectly accurate)

The brother has quit his job and probably wont go back, he doesnt need to.

@MrHyena:Not at all. Photographer bias (Either intentional or not) could cause such a bias. Simply relying on disparate photographs of looting in certain areas of the city does not give you the ability to then build a profile of the looters. While many shown in the photographs are black, ther could be as many if not more looters in other areas that are Caucasian/Asian/whatever; The photographs are simply not of those other areas with different looter demographics.

@MrH: the "All blacks are looters" was hyperbole, and I should have rephrased it to say "most" instead of "all." My apologies.

Kilkrazy wrote:

MrH wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Unless a count has been done you can't know that that is true. It is clearly indicative of a racist viewpoint to assume the majority are black.

Well can you show a picture at least showing white people looting? I largely don't care what race it is thats doing it. But at the same time every picture I've seen has shown either black or middle eastern people. Thats hardly racism.

Exactly.

You didn't see the front page of the Metro this morning.

If you didn't care which race is doing it you wouldn't care about their skin colour.

I don't care if they're white, black or purple, they're all scum in my eyes. The only reason I even mentioned their color is because others did and people like you are trying to dispute the fact the majority of them are colored, which is silly and just a symptom of extreme political correctness.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:UK child benefit is £20.30 for the first child and £13.40 for the second and subsequent, per week. You need to have an awful lot of children to get rich on that, especially since they need feeding and clothing.

I dont know how the figures work out exactly, but to put it into perspective a little: my ex's brother has 2 children with a 3rd on the way. The eldest was recently diagnosed with ADHD (=more benefits) and when the 3rd child is born they will be receiving somewhere in the region of £32,000 a year. (the wife/fiancee also has epilepsy = benefits for her as well, so not perfectly accurate)

The brother has quit his job and probably wont go back, he doesnt need to.

That's not statistical evidence, it's an anecdote.

There's a point to be made that it's not suprising that the majority of disaffected youths in an area might be ethnic minorities. You know. Because of racism.

Anyway.

I often think about yob culture and how to combat it. I really am not sure I have any sensible ideas about it. I see parents who will defend their sociopathic offspring to the hilt. I see parents who refuse to believe what kind of behaviour their spawn are up to. I see parents honestly trying their best and still coming up short, whether through unfortunate circumstances, weak will, or fear of being "too harsh". What can't be discounted is the peer effect and I believe the lack of any decent role models.
You can blame the education system, but it can't take the place of parents. You can blame the police or social services, but they can't take the place of parents, either. To my outsider's eyes, England's biggest social problems stem from the deeper than normal divides between economic classes and the disparity in culture and values between them. This leads to a pretty big gulf in understanding and empathy.
I'm pretty sure nothing particularly positive will come of this, policy wise, either.

I don't think it's as bad as it used to be, but I still think there's a cultural hangover of it. Everytime I saw someone getting stopped and searched in London they were young, black, males - and they often didn't like it - I didn't live in a poor or 'criminal hotspot' area mind, so I didn't see it that often. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is a general perception of racial/social stereotyping for racial minority youth's, as well as for the police and what they represent. I think both are paranoid of the other to a degree and yet I feel there's elements of truth in both as well.

It's a complicated social issue and there are underlying causes, these looters obviously have developed a mentality towards anarchy, without any sign of empathy and purely materialistic motives. It comes down to poor education, poor family life, the steady break down of community youth projects, lack of self-respect and social discipline etc...It seems to be a cultural thing for them as well and goes beyond racial stereotypes. It's a result of failure on our educational system and many other areas, including punishment for criminality...the list goes on really

Now we're going to have a bunch of politicians argue about it and not understand anything about it with a lot of pooh-poohing going on...fun days

It goes both ways. There is probably still some leftover racism; but theres also the current reverse-racism against whites.

I often think about yob culture and how to combat it. I really am not sure I have any sensible ideas about it. I see parents who will defend their sociopathic offspring to the hilt. I see parents who refuse to believe what kind of behaviour their spawn are up to. I see parents honestly trying their best and still coming up short, whether through unfortunate circumstances, weak will, or fear of being "too harsh". What can't be discounted is the peer effect and I believe the lack of any decent role models.
You can blame the education system, but it can't take the place of parents. You can blame the police or social services, but they can't take the place of parents, either. To my outsider's eyes, England's biggest social problems stem from the deeper than normal divides between economic classes and the disparity in culture and values between them. This leads to a pretty big gulf in understanding and empathy.
I'm pretty sure nothing particularly positive will come of this, policy wise, either.

It all relates to the global degradation of human society that is currently happening.