Liberals and class

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Complete rubbish. First off there is not a single estate in the entire U.K as deprived as the ghettos in most large American cities. Sure there's a serious poverty problem in many inner cities in the U.K but it's just not on the same scale as in American inner cities; there's no U.K equivilent of the South Bronx for example. It should also be noted that the sitution in these estates are nowhere near as bad as they were; due to effective and sustained government action (both central and local), something there's been a distinct lack of in the U.S.
The problems in these estates are NOT caused by the welfare state AT ALL; they're mostly caused by bad planning, collapsing local economies, overcrowding, poor community and race relations, outmigration etc. etc. etc... to try to pin the blame on the Welfare State is absurd and intellectually dishonest (we had serious poverty in our cities long before 1945; it was actually worse, far, far, worse, than anything we have now).

The sitution in the U.S is worse (and to deny that it's worse is just burying your head in the sand; sucessive adminstrations of both parties have failed the urban poor) for a whole range of reasons; everything from a welfare system that doesn't work to some of the worst examples of urban planning in the developed world ("I have a GREAT idea! Let's build a big road through the middle of a city!") and it's time that something gets done about it.
Drug abuse, defrauding the welfare system etc. etc. certainly don't help, but even if you could wave a magic wand and make 'em vanish, there'd still be a huge problem in the inner cities. These things didn't cause the problems and nomatter how serious they can get (and they do need to be dealt with) they are ultimately secondary problems, even if they can make the primary problems worse.
Sure some people bring poverty upon themselves, but it's important to remember that the vast majority don't.

Social mobility doesn't really come into this; sure there's always a couple of poor kids who come good, always will be, but focussing on it to a large degree is highly misleading for several obvious reasons.
What matters is the living conditions of the bulk of an areas population.

Not that any of this (or the article) has a lot to do with class. I should add that class doesn't have a lot to do with absolute income; relative income yes. Absolute income, no. $20,000 is a lot more in Tuskegee, AL than New York.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Now, when you say the situation is worse, it may be worse for the poor, but I don't really see that as a worse situation.

That's a very... strange... way of looking at things. Do you see poor people as inferior to you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A voucher system is about as likely to help inner city schools as setting fire to them. You end up taking the brightest kids out of a community meaning that the condition of the community gets even worse.
And education isn't the biggest problem inner cities have anyway; I'm not sure where that idea comes from.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Comfortable in their poverty? Absolutely not. That's were things went wrong in the '60's, that's what's wrong with the U.S Welfare system. Eliminating poverty and regenerating inner cities is what American inner cities need and sod all has been done about it.
As for "illegal"; it depends who defines what is "legal" and what is not. I certainly hope it isn't you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Letting the legislature deal with these issues = a lot of hot air, gesture politics and no action.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

State and local governments are fine for some things, but not really others. They don't have enough money to deal with the problem for one thing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The words of a spoiled little rich kid

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Charities cannot solve the problems caused by inner city decline

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I understand that John Dibble would be better off if you have him half of Bill Gates's wealth. However, I don't see that situation as being 'better' just because it's better for John Dibble.

Not comparing like with like are you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Generally speaking that's what voucher systems do. They do that because they're designed to do that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why must everyone here use irrelevent appeals to "freedom" all the time?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other words, because you're a selfish git who doesn't understand and can't be bothered to try to understand the problems that inner cities face

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, no it isn't

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Eh? Are you talking about something different to me, or what?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't see what that has to do with anything. From what I recall the Federalist Papers aren't actually part of the U.S Constitution.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, you don't seem to understand the problem

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because you already have one?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This latest post of yours has absolutely no specifics or substance.

I don't know bout that, but your post certainly doesn't. Not that it really matters; I'm not going to get involved in the sort of bitchyness that you seem to love so much

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Then quit trolling my topic.

1. I am not trolling
2. How exactly is this your topic? Sure, you started it, but other people are allowed a right to reply you know.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Philip: if all your going to do is throw a hissy fit everytime someone wastes as much time as I did debating with you, then I can't be buggered to carry on with this.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If by carrying on with this, you mean ignoring points and just posting text complete devoid of any substance, stopping would not bother me at all. In fact, I believe that's what I asked you to do.

If, on the other hand, you want to debate, feel free to start.

Always after the last word, eh?

Night

[Filuwaúrdjan]

We had a welfare system that was more "generous".

When did I say I was in favour of a more "generous" welfare system? I didn't. The welfare system before the "reforms" didn't work. The welfare system as it is now, doesn't work.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, but mainly due to the fact it was designed to maintain people in a sort of less bad poverty than to get them out of poverty full stop.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Problem is for them it was due to the flaws in the system

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, the bigger ghettos have been caused by the same sort of causes that have effected inner cities across the western world, but certainly the old (and the new) welfare system helped to perpetuate the situation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, yes, yes... it aims to do with it aims to do that... but does it work? No... not really; it wasn't really designed to work in a meaningful way, it's gesture politics basically. It doesn't work, it's flawed, the pre-reform system didn't work, it was flawed...