Is Britain's class system at the root of all our problems?

First topic message reminder :

The right of the Tory party have an elitist aristocratic arrogance that I'm sure many in Britain's middle classes feel.

The working man and woman in this country means nothing to them.

Nothing the Tory's do has anything to do with expense, because we are a very wealthy country, look at overseas expenditure.

The Tory's are at the very top of our class system, the middle classes want to be there, and our lower classes havent got a chance.

The Tory's want to keep the status quo, and they will throw everything at you to keep the status quo, because they dont wont the average Brit to become one of them.

This pensions crisis is based on class and privilige, it is not about expense.

The Tory's will always be successful at driving wedges between the old and the young, between the public and the private, because Britain's working class consolidation has gone

I believe our class system is at the root of Britain's ills.

What say you ?

Ivan wrote:I did find it particularly hypocritical that a Tory MP - Nadhim Zahawi - should demand her resignation, and I've 'tweeted' him and told him as much.

No doubt Mr Zahawi has no problems with Boris Johnson being the Tory Mayor of London despite being on record as saying that black people are “flag-waving piccaninnies with water melon faces", that “if left to their own devices the natives of Uganda would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain”, that South Africa under Nelson Mandela's leadership was a "tyranny of black rule", and that the people of Papua New Guinea have “orgies of cannibalism and chief-killing”.

What the good lady should have said is that it's the Tories (whatever the colour of their skin) who specialise in "divide and rule" - employed against the 'benefit scroungers', private sector against public sector, and most of all, rich against everyone else.

Thank you for that Ivan some one else was trying to explain the ( divide and rule) BLAME GAME and it has taken your post to let me see the light on this.

Fair point witchy.

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?

Ivan wrote:blue. Boris Johnson most certainly did make those comments. They're well documented and I'm not in the habit of posting anything libellous; for a start, I'm not rich enough to defend any action against me! It's also true that Johnson is a thief, who stole an item from the home of Tariq Aziz in Iraq and was ordered by the Met to return it.

Clearly Diane Abbott's comments were unwise in the PC world in which we now live (even if she was referring to the 19th century), and in the environment which saw Alan Hansen being castigated for calling someone "coloured" recently. My annoyance is with the hypocrisy of Tories such as Nadhim Zahawi MP who were calling for Abbott to be sacked yet are quite happy for Boris Johnson to represent their party in a very senior role.

You forget Ivan its one law for them and another law for us PLEBS.

Ivanhoe wrote:

Redflag wrote:

Ivanhoe wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:The backbone of Tory support is aspirational working-class voters.

Yes you are right.

So, when this backbone of working class Tory supporters vote, they are voting for a lack of investment in all our vital services, including education and the NHS, plus eradication of the State pension, and the welfare state.?????????, plus the continuation of coucil house sell offs, without building anymore, plus the privatisation of our Utilities and excessive charges for shareholder profits and bosses salaries, plus a low waged, short term, insecure workforce., ?????????

What are they, completely bonkers ?

I think it is something along those lines Ivanhoe, I just hope the "aspirational Tory voters" are very happy with themselves at what they have unleashed on the rest of the UK and hope they do NOT sleep at night.

Redflag, I dont think they "think". What's needed is a short sharp shock, to bring them into reality.

Thanks Ivanhoe you are right there do you think that seeing people put on the streets or bed and breakfast or hostels could be the SHORT SHARP SHOCK?

Redflag wrote:

Ivanhoe wrote:

Redflag wrote:

Ivanhoe wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:The backbone of Tory support is aspirational working-class voters.

Yes you are right.

So, when this backbone of working class Tory supporters vote, they are voting for a lack of investment in all our vital services, including education and the NHS, plus eradication of the State pension, and the welfare state.?????????, plus the continuation of coucil house sell offs, without building anymore, plus the privatisation of our Utilities and excessive charges for shareholder profits and bosses salaries, plus a low waged, short term, insecure workforce., ?????????

What are they, completely bonkers ?

I think it is something along those lines Ivanhoe, I just hope the "aspirational Tory voters" are very happy with themselves at what they have unleashed on the rest of the UK and hope they do NOT sleep at night.

Redflag, I dont think they "think". What's needed is a short sharp shock, to bring them into reality.

Thanks Ivanhoe you are right there do you think that seeing people put on the streets or bed and breakfast or hostels could be the SHORT SHARP SHOCK?

Yes, but only if they once had a mortgaged home, a well paid job, and a wife or a husband. Britain does have the highest divorce rate in Western Europe. And somebody once said, experience of life is the only education worth a damn.

Lets all backslap each other and kid ourselves that the previous slime balls in power wouldn't have done exactly the same. When was this country ever run correctly, who exactly was the first to allow commerce to make the laws, who exactly was in charge when we were taken to two wars for very little reason and who was was the first to suck Gaddafi's dick whilst the others fought for a gobful. Get real and stop fanatasizing about how good life was. Of course unemployment was less, everybody was claiming disability instead. Kids were paid to stay on at school thus hiding the truth from the figures and of course extra benefits were paid to immigrants to guarantee their future vote. Yep this lot are really bad aren't they!

tittf

I have a particular female relative who brought up three children on her own, and allthough she has always gone out to work, she struggled to balance bringing up a family, run a home and go out to work.

Without working tax credits and some help towards rent she simply could never have coped, and I believe that she tryed to do the right thing, she did not sit back and simply live on benefits, she prefered to try and stand on her own two feet, but it wasent enough to manage.

We have got into a situation where there are millions of families and pensioners who rely on benefits as a "top-up" in order to sustain a basic standard of living.

Should tax credits, income support or housing benefit be taken from such people ? - absolutely not, unless of course these same people can either earn wages or be given a pension that they could live on.

In the old days before welfare, people scratched a living, some ended up in work houses, poverty meant communal kitchens, soup kitchens, relying on charity or hand outs.

Today we live in a society where the boss of a nationalized bank gets a £960.000 bonus on top of his £1.2 million salary, and at the same time a humble council worker is thrown onto the scrap heap, onto the dole.

A man on the dole but doing a few jobs on the side will look at the Royal Bank of Scotland and think to himself what exactly ?

tlttf wrote:Lets all backslap each other and kid ourselves that the previous slime balls in power wouldn't have done exactly the same. When was this country ever run correctly, who exactly was the first to allow commerce to make the laws, who exactly was in charge when we were taken to two wars for very little reason and who was was the first to suck Gaddafi's dick whilst the others fought for a gobful. Get real and stop fanatasizing about how good life was. Of course unemployment was less, everybody was claiming disability instead. Kids were paid to stay on at school thus hiding the truth from the figures and of course extra benefits were paid to immigrants to guarantee their future vote. Yep this lot are really bad aren't they!

Actually, Eastern European immigrants are not allowed to claim any benefits until they complete one full year of work, and then they are only allowed to claim one third of what Britain claiments receive.

"Actually, Eastern European immigrants are not allowed to claim any benefits until they complete one full year of work ..."

That's cheating if you're going to use logic. Little Englanders would never think of going abroad to work. Abroad is full of foreigners.

oftenwrong wrote:"Actually, Eastern European immigrants are not allowed to claim any benefits until they complete one full year of work ..."

That's cheating if you're going to use logic. Little Englanders would never think of going abroad to work. Abroad is full of foreigners.

You should write for Private Eye.

tlttf wrote:Fair point witchy.

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?

To each according to his need, lad. Why are we giving such incredible benefits to Cameron and the bankers? There lies the conservative conundrum - not. The rich can't see any problem even about eating our starved bodies, if it keeps them fit!

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?.

tlttf.......Come on my friend you know you cannot put common sense points to most of the posters on here, it confuses them. You also mustn't mention the last government and their failings, because that causes temporary deafness and complete denial of all knowledge of anything between 97 and 2010

blueturando wrote:

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?.

tlttf.......Come on my friend you know you cannot put common sense points to most of the posters on here, it confuses them. You also mustn't mention the last government and their failings, because that causes temporary deafness and complete denial of all knowledge of anything between 97 and 2010

I beg to differ there after all we have had it rammed down our throats for the last 1year 9months but the majority of Labour members and voters know the OUR party did not get it right every time just like your Gov't are not getting it right every time now but you are just as bad you will not admit when your Gov't gets it wrong that AUSTERITY will not work on its own as said by top ECONOMISTS.

And the majority do not believe that the workers should keep the unemployed for the rest of there life, considering that there is only 500,000 jobs available and there is 2.658 Million unemployed and that figure is going to rise can you pick jobs out of thin air to fit the other 2 Million into jobs GOOD FOR YOU you better offer yourself as another adviser to the Gov't after all they have not got enough have they.

witchfinder wrote:tittf

I have a particular female relative who brought up three children on her own, and allthough she has always gone out to work, she struggled to balance bringing up a family, run a home and go out to work.

Without working tax credits and some help towards rent she simply could never have coped, and I believe that she tryed to do the right thing, she did not sit back and simply live on benefits, she prefered to try and stand on her own two feet, but it wasent enough to manage.

We have got into a situation where there are millions of families and pensioners who rely on benefits as a "top-up" in order to sustain a basic standard of living.

Should tax credits, income support or housing benefit be taken from such people ? - absolutely not, unless of course these same people can either earn wages or be given a pension that they could live on.

In the old days before welfare, people scratched a living, some ended up in work houses, poverty meant communal kitchens, soup kitchens, relying on charity or hand outs.

Today we live in a society where the boss of a nationalized bank gets a £960.000 bonus on top of his £1.2 million salary, and at the same time a humble council worker is thrown onto the scrap heap, onto the dole.

A man on the dole but doing a few jobs on the side will look at the Royal Bank of Scotland and think to himself what exactly ?

Witchy
I also know people like this who try very hard to find a job. who hate the fact they are on the dole. the trouble is the likes of the Daily Mail are no interested in stories like this. what that like is to find the 2% who try to cheat the system. its what Tory votes like to believe about all unemployed people.

Redflag wrote:

blueturando wrote:

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?.

tlttf.......Come on my friend you know you cannot put common sense points to most of the posters on here, it confuses them. You also mustn't mention the last government and their failings, because that causes temporary deafness and complete denial of all knowledge of anything between 97 and 2010

I beg to differ there after all we have had it rammed down our throats for the last 1year 9months but the majority of Labour members and voters know the OUR party did not get it right every time just like your Gov't are not getting it right every time now but you are just as bad you will not admit when your Gov't gets it wrong that AUSTERITY will not work on its own as said by top ECONOMISTS.

And the majority do not believe that the workers should keep the unemployed for the rest of there life, considering that there is only 500,000 jobs available and there is 2.658 Million unemployed and that figure is going to rise can you pick jobs out of thin air to fit the other 2 Million into jobs GOOD FOR YOU you better offer yourself as another adviser to the Gov't after all they have not got enough have they.

Red could not put this better myself. good post Red

blueturando wrote:

Ihoe, by not responding to my comments regarding benefits, I can only assume that you think it correct that benefits should be for life and it should exceed the national average wage. Therein lies the socialist conundrum. Let those that want to work carry those that don't. You can't see a problem there?.

tlttf.......Come on my friend you know you cannot put common sense points to most of the posters on here, it confuses them. You also mustn't mention the last government and their failings, because that causes temporary deafness and complete denial of all knowledge of anything between 97 and 2010

O no Bluey. they made there mistakes, like being talk out of banking regulation. after the Tory party was lobbied like mad from the bankers. we should of backed manufacturing industry over the City. but this Government is doing far more damage in just 2 years than any I can think of in the last 30 years. as not only are they borrowing £157 billion in two years but are doing so while having no fiscal policy and no growth worth a jot. you cannot get worst than that.

Unless the infrastructure is in place and company owner/builder feels it's beneficial to relocate here then nothing will/can change.

Should bankers be able to claim bonuses to the extent they are No.
Should people be able to claim more in benefits than they can earn in wages No.

Witchy, your daughter should be given all the help and support she can be given, anybody putting themself out there should not receive less than somebody that doesn't try. I pretty much agree with your whole post (most unusual).

tlttf wrote:Unless the infrastructure is in place and company owner/builder feels it's beneficial to relocate here then nothing will/can change.

Should bankers be able to claim bonuses to the extent they are No.
Should people be able to claim more in benefits than they can earn in wages No.

Witchy, your daughter should be given all the help and support she can be given, anybody putting themself out there should not receive less than somebody that doesn't try. I pretty much agree with your whole post (most unusual).

tittf
you make a fair point on infrastructure that most people would agree with. However, remember this government put all infrastructure projects on either hold for the best part of two years or cutting these projects overall. it was only after almost six Q with no sign of economic growth that they even started to look at this very issue. now it will cost us more after a two year delay. all very silly in my economic book.

Is the 'overclass' at the root of all our problems?

Extracts from an article by Peter Beresford:-

"It is the divisive and damaging effects of those who are very rich and powerful that we need to fear, rather than poor and powerless…This ‘overclass’, which has grown disproportionately powerful socially, politically and economically, seems to show little commitment to traditional social values…..It is tied in with some of the most damaging developments in our society: the extreme risk taking of the banking industry, unaccountable and overpowerful media proprietors, rising inequality and disadvantage, declining social mobility and a careless approach to vulnerable people. Key representatives of this overclass are to be found among the leadership of tax avoiding corporations; unaccountable, asset stripping private equity companies; profiteers from the inordinately costly private finance initiative; corporate landlords imposing inflated rents funded by housing benefit; and outsourcing companies delivering poor value for money.

As the workforce is rewarded with a declining proportion of GDP, reduced pensions and inadequate social care funding, so directors' pay has headed for the stratosphere and their taxes are cut. Even as this is justified in the name of private enterprise and competition, the money markets are undermining national economies, corporations are culling rather than creating jobs, and the fabric of communities, from high streets to higher education, is in jeopardy. Perhaps most worrying is the overlap between this overclass and the government, separated from the rest of the population by education and wealth."

For the full article:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/03/overclass-threat-society?CMP=twt_gu

All true, but can be described in fewer words as "Me First" - an attitude as old as mankind itself. Whilst the majority will try to conform to the median level of behaviour and follow what are sometimes described as Christian values in their dealings with others, there will always be those who regard such behaviour as weakness.
In British history we have Kings and Robber Barons (interchangeable) whose successors continue in the same vein, but polished by manners and good PR.
It ain't gonna change any time soon.

oftenwrong wrote:All true, but can be described in fewer words as "Me First" - an attitude as old as mankind itself. Whilst the majority will try to conform to the median level of behaviour and follow what are sometimes described as Christian values in their dealings with others, there will always be those who regard such behaviour as weakness.
In British history we have Kings and Robber Barons (interchangeable) whose successors continue in the same vein, but polished by manners and good PR.
It ain't gonna change any time soon.

Since the 80's and Thatcher, human decency is seen as a weakness. Treading all over people with the utmost arrogance is seen as the norm.

There always will be a class system. If it isn't based on aristocracy, it will be based on money. On ability. How many millionaire footballers do you find on council estates. I wonder how many lottery winners are still in their semi-detached houses. The boy from the council estate who makes 'good' moves 'up'.

I have no feelings particularly about the rest of the aristocracy. I do respect the Queen for 60 years of being at the beck and call of Parliament. Entertaining guests on behalf of the country you and I would find obnoxious. Undertaking state occasions regardless of age. Most people would have retired long ago but she keeps going.

No I'm not going to go on.

Class systems have been with us from time immemorial. The emperor, his nobles, the scribes and the workers. And always will be.

trevorw2539 wrote:There always will be a class system. If it isn't based on aristocracy, it will be based on money. On ability. How many millionaire footballers do you find on council estates. I wonder how many lottery winners are still in their semi-detached houses. The boy from the council estate who makes 'good' moves 'up'.

I have no feelings particularly about the rest of the aristocracy. I do respect the Queen for 60 years of being at the beck and call of Parliament. Entertaining guests on behalf of the country you and I would find obnoxious. Undertaking state occasions regardless of age. Most people would have retired long ago but she keeps going.

No I'm not going to go on.

Class systems have been with us from time immemorial. The emperor, his nobles, the scribes and the workers. And always will be.

I could not agree more Trevorw2539. It all began with our Empire, our orrogance to each other, and the rest of the world.

This country has class system, other countries even now, operate a "Caste" sytem. Different word, same import!




Nothing bolder than the miller's shirt, that every morning collars a thief

old german proverb

Ivanhoe

The class system existed long before the 'British Empire' existed. Look at ancient systems, empires. It existed in Babylon, Assyria, Sumeria, Rome. 'King', nobles, scribes, 'working class'/slaves

trevorw2539 wrote:Ivanhoe

The class system existed long before the 'British Empire' existed. Look at ancient systems, empires. It existed in Babylon, Assyria, Sumeria, Rome. 'King', nobles, scribes, 'working class'/slaves

trevorw2539, I'm refering to modern Western civilisation. I am well aware of the ancient systems.

When Princess Diana kissed a Leper,, in Mother Theresa's Convent, I at least would have thought that thousands of years of prejudice would have been ended. But NO!

Even before the Romans arrived here, we had our Slaves and "Untouchables"

If "Pomp and Circumstance" were not devised to cowe the rest of us, what do you think all of that flummery at a State Opening of Parliament is there for? Show-biz?

oftenwrong wrote:If "Pomp and Circumstance" were not devised to cowe the rest of us, what do you think all of that flummery at a State Opening of Parliament is there for? Show-biz?

It's protocal.

Were it not for the class system, the Pease Pottage Conservative Club would be a simply awful place to frequent. The Tradesmen's entrance is well out of the sight of Members...

Well obviously. One doesn't want the lower orders to catch a glimpse of one's Jubilee Celebrations, does one? Remember those photos that circulated after the Chairman's induction ceremony of "footprinting the ceiling"? The butcher still won't send an apprentice to deliver.

by Phil Hornby Today at 6:05 pm



Were it not for the class system, the Pease Pottage Conservative Club would be a simply awful place to frequent. The Tradesmen's entrance is well out of the sight of Members...

Ay. That's the very low door where you have to take your cloth cap off and bow down to get in.

That door is so low that even the Trinidanian Champion Limbo Dancing Troupe were caused unmentionable injuries during a visit two Summers back. Mr Winston Calypso ( now known as Ms. Winnie) is still pursuing a case through the Courts...

Britain's upper class is now too snobbish to speak its name

(The more unequal we get, the less we want to talk about it)

Extracts from an article by Toby Young:-

The metamorphoses of the class system from overt to covert, above ground to underground, must be connected to the massive increase in economic inequality in the past 25 years or so. According to Oxfam, the 85 richest people in the world now control as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population put together. "Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table", says the charity’s executive director.

The pretence that Britain has become less class-bound since 1979 is a noble lie. It’s the illusion that prevents the masses from erupting in open revolt. What’s so remarkable is that everyone in our society has bought into it, not just the richest 1%.

For the whole article:-
http://www.spectator.co.uk/life/status-anxiety/9121471/the-class-thats-too-snobbish-to-speak-its-name/

Interesting article - did you read the comments?

boatlady. I've read them now, but it has spoiled my afternoon!   
 
Those comments are just further proof (if it were needed) of how nasty, vindictive, bigoted, selfish and brainless the right-wing mindset is. Facts rarely come into their arguments, unless they're contrived ones like the Tories produced yesterday about us all being better off. When confronted with facts, Iain Duncan Smith dismissed them because they were not what he believes. That disgusting excuse for a human being pursues his persecution of the sick and disabled with a religious-like zeal, apparently comparing it to "fighting slavery". A more apt comparison might be with 'The Final Solution'.

If you enjoy conspiracy theories as much as I do, the widening income gap is a natural replacement of the failed pre-war Class System by an intentional financial separation between Leaders and the Led. Serving a similar purpose.

Whenever I read anything I agree with in the right wing press, I tend to find it instructive to see what the readership makes of it- the readership of the Spectator simply confirmed my opinion of the demographic the Spectator seeks to serve.

What cements the class system in place is council housing.

It's the BIGGEST single perpetuator of class distinction in Britain!

Interesting comment - would you care to expand?
I'm not sure I really get what you mean

"Hard-working" Tories resent providing cheap houses for oiks. Simple.