|
Socoder -> Off Topic -> 'Fixing' the yob culture of the UK? |
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 05:07 | |
spinal
|
I was thinking recently, that the main reason we have so many yobs in this country now is probably due to the amount of handouts the unemployed get from the government. Reason - The unemployed have no reason to look for work as the government will give them free money for doing nothing. If these unemployed fill in the right forms and talk to the right people, they can get more money than someone working 40 hours per weak. Even worse, if they have children, they can 'earn' up to 6 times the national minimum wage (depending on how many kids they have). This situation if encouraging people to sit at home and do nothing. These people, not having a reason to care about anything, do not care what there children get up to. The children at the same time are learning from these people, that it is OK not to care about work and responsibilities, because the government will just keep giving them money for nothing. Once they leave school, they don't need to look for a job, they can get paid for sitting about all day, or as the norm is heading, roaming the streets causing trouble. They have nothing better to do after all. Solution - Stop unemployment benefit after 6 months, not swapping people onto a different list to get money after this time. If you have been unemployed for 6 months you should get absolutely nothing, no rent paid, not council tax paid, not even 'hardship allowance' 6 months is plenty time to get a job, you might not think those hundreds of job they offer you are good enough, but they are jobs. As for the arguments that the foreigners are 'stealing' all the jobs, they can only do that because them British unemployed are not accepting them and would rather collect the free money than go and earn it. Once the parents have jobs, the kids will learn that responsibility is a good thing, they will start to care about what they do, they will want a job when they leave school. It is up to the government to stop giving people free money, if someone has no money they will have to get a job, if they are willing to employ someone who doesn't even speak English, you will be able to get that same job. I usually loose track of what I'm saying, so if any of the above does not make sense, well, it did in my head before I started. -=-=- Check out my excellent homepage! 
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 06:24 | |
steve_ancell
|
I reakon that we should grap all of the Chavs and Yobs and ban them from purchasing Addias clothing, then make the bastards wear a suit and tie. That would really piss them off. |edit| BTW... Unemployment is no excuse for being a Chav. I've been out of work for a few years now which is due to illness. I developed severe depression as a result, and I also have ADHD. And yet with all of that going on, I don't go around the streets, breaking into other peoples cars or mugging the elderly. I was taught the rule that, "If it is not mine, then dont touch it without permission from the owner". Basically, I think that all the bad Chavs should be set affloat on a raft and left there. |edit| |edit| Double Editey... Or simply strap them to a rocket and fire them into space.  |edit|
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 06:41 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
I actually caught a bunch of Chavs a few days ago, attempting to vandalise both mine and my Dad's cars. The thing is with this f**cking law is... If I were to go out and challenge them and they all gang up on me and get beaten shitless, I would get branded a hero for going out and getting murdered for shouting my mouth off. Yet if I were to fight back at them, I would go to jail. It's a change of parliament that is needed, coz it is those twats that give the Chavs the power to rob and murder people. BTW, It never came to that scenario, thank f**k. They all kind of dispersed very quickly when they saw me walk out of the door. Makes me wonder sometimes... Do I really look that menacing  .
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 07:05 | |
shroom_monk
|
Although (as Steve said), the extra benefits aren't what make people chavs, there is still a problem with the benefits system. Most people get benefits for a legitimate reason at some point, but find that they're better off on benefits than they are working! Waste of tax-payers money...
-=-=- A mushroom a day keeps the doctor away... Keep It Simple, Shroom! |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 11:50 | |
|
mindstorm8191 |
I see that problem here in America too. There are many people that would be happy living off the government, and make no money for themselves. And I agree, it teaches their kids that they don't have to take responsibility for anything. I don't know all the rules about welfare in this country, but I believe that anyone can find a job if they go look for it. I also agree, if you're not sick or disabled, there should be a cut-off date on the government providing benefits. My uncle told me a story once about a relative of ours once. It was Christmas, and she was happy about being accepted into a benefits program (I dunno what kind it was or anything) and got a $300 check. What did she do with the money? Brought her kid, who was some 1-2 years old, a $300 gold wrist band, and was showing it off to everyone. My uncle almost threw her out then and there, but didn't because it was Christmas. But I wouldn't complain if he did. On the other hand, my girlfriend has cerebral palsey (sp) and can't walk without crutches. She would be more than happy to get a job and help pay the bills around the house, but can't because of her situation. The government gives her a check every month, but its not very much - certainly not enough to pay an average rent. But its all she really gets. I think these programs should provide money on a person-to-person basis. Simply filling out papers isn't enough - people are sure to lie about their situation, if they will get more money because of it. But that would probably cost a lot more in overhead costs than it might be worth. So I dunno... -=-=- Vesuvius web game
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 12:23 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
In this country, the jobcentre system sucks. I go to the jobcentre quite often and I normally talk to an advisor who sometimes agrees to send me to one of those places for the unemployed, as an attempt to stop me going insane with boredom. Now I'm on some sort of register that allows me to do permitted work and computing being one of them, the problem is I'm in a catch 22 situation. To do the kind of work that I'm capable of doing I need to be qualified, the government don't like paying for tuition for people over 25 years old. The thing that pisses me off... The government pay for the Chavs and Yobs to go on courses. The Chavs then attend college and just prat-arse about all day throwing abuse and biting the hand that feeds them. Yet I myself go along to the jobcentre voluntarily to genuinely seek help getting back to work, and they tell me there is not much that they can do because it would be a waste of government cash if I f**k up. Their main excuse is... They can not risk sending me on a computer course as I might not be able to hold down a job for long periods because I have some sort of sleeping disorder that is a result of the depression. And yet those Yobbo Chavvy twats get it handed to them on a plate, and they abuse it left-right and f**king centre. I will try not to get too disheartened by it though... One day I might get lucky and claim my life back. Or I could always try contacting Anne Widdicombe, maybe she could help. On a program I saw on TV a few days ago, She seemed to be able to get a lager-lout a job within about 10 minutes. Even He blew it. |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 13:24 | |
power mousey
|
You guys taxed it up nicely.  Seriously, you guys echo my thoughts and sentiments well. |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 13:39 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
Actually come to think of it, I'm still waiting for my Employment Advisor to respond to a message that I sent to her the other day. I wonder if I should ask her if there is such a job that involves driving an Army tank around the housing estates to squash Yobs and Chavs .
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 13:58 | |
|
spinal
|
As well as the cut off date, there should be a minimum employment period before you are allowed to claim again, say 2 years. If you can't hold a job for two years, then no unemployment money.
-=-=- Check out my excellent homepage!
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 14:04 | |
|
power mousey
|
hmmmmm..... well, hey steve. why don't cha build and use those radio controlled flyers for tracking and survillance of these yobs and Chavs. Become a defense contractor and consultant for the government. And for security and defense too. Perhaps even a census taker for surveying and counting the number of sheep for the governments monthly and annual reports of its animal farm assets. ahhhh!!!  |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 15:23 | |
svrman
|
As one of the many many people in today's society who have to put up with yobs and chavs on a regular basis, I can see where you're coming from. I don't think stopping benefits will be a good idea though. For one, I would imagine that in doing so, you'd just send crime rates soaring sky high. Another reason is that "unemployed" is just too broad a category - there are some who actually make the effort so why should they be punished?  As well as the cut off date, there should be a minimum employment period before you are allowed to claim again, say 2 years. If you can't hold a job for two years, then no unemployment money. Tbh it won't stop the yobs/chavs from breeding which I feel is the real problem here. It's almost as if they're bolstering their forces :S. -=-=- BlitzRSS script back online!
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 16:28 | |
|
spinal
|
Just for steve - View on YouTube -=-=- Check out my excellent homepage!
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 17:11 | |
Jayenkai
|
LOL
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 18:45 | |
Scherererer
|
For all of us that aren't british, define: Chav Yob and any other british slang~ -=-=- YouTube Twitter Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:03 | |
HoboBen
|
That was a hilarious video! But I disagree with nearly everyone else here, I'm afraid! This bit about "if they have children, they can 'earn' up to 6 times the national minimum wage (depending on how many kids they have)" is statistics being twisted - that's something that only applies if you have about 20 kids, which would be expensive too. And minimum wage is rubbish, anyway. In reality, a lot of people have a really hard time on benefits, and most try their best to get jobs but they can't. For unemployment to vanish, there have to be more jobs to go to! But there's cuts everywhere nowadays. New Labour is headed straight back to Thatcher. I mean, my dad had a PhD, but he had a helluva time getting jobs. He was made compulsory redundant from the only decent paying job he managed to ever get, and had to settle for short-term and part-time work when he could. And he found the process of getting the benefits humiliating - the job centre treat the people there as children, and if you haven't got a job, it doesn't matter if you have a PhD, you're still forced to go to courses in basic skills. And a lot of people really can't work - there's the disabled and ill and the over-50's who have taken early retirement that New Labour are trying to force back to work until they're all 65, with that number trying to rise. The majority of people I know(knew) died before they hit 65, so they're working until they die with no well-deserved relaxation afterwards. I think the solution to everything would be to tax the rich - properly. The poorest in society pay nearly 40% in direct and indirect tax (VAT on what they buy, etc.), while the richest pay something like a quarter of one percent (I can't remember exactly, it's possibly even lower). Britain is the super-rich class' tax-free-paradise. If we taxed the rich properly, we could afford to give the unemployed an income they could live on, the poor wouldn't be poor, and more jobs could be created with the investment of all this money. And by the rich here, I don't mean the millionaires - I mean the billionaires. If the billionaires were taxed properly, everyone could be millionaires. (And then money would be pointless, because we'd all have enough, but I have trouble convincing people that money should be abolished, so keep it if you insist!) Now that unemployment is solved, this is how Chavs/yobs would be sorted too... Most the chavs I know, the really nasty people, are from rich families - kids of the drug lords, and the kids of people who inherit fortunes. These kids don't have to care about where their money will come from - they've got everything. If you tax them so that they can't afford to buy all those expensive drugs and bling and cars, well, they'd have to pay attention in school and get a decent job. You do get a few rotten apples in the working class families too - but most of these are from the poorest areas, and really have a hard time. If the government made life easier and taxed the rich to support these people, that I believe would solve things too. But, I think we know, New Labour's not going to start taxing the rich anytime soon. That said, everyone feel free to disagree and flame me (politely). -=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:16 | |
|
HoboBen
|
Ooh, and I missed out a bit.As for the arguments that the foreigners are 'stealing' all the jobs, they can only do that because them British unemployed are not accepting them and would rather collect the free money than go and earn it. I'm with you here, but for a different reason. In defence of asylum seekers, if businesses were forced to actually pay them proper wages instead of using them as cheap labour, no-one could complain that they were stealing jobs. Also, they wouldn't have to flee their countries for their lives if the UK and America or any other guilty country didn't keep sticking dictators everywhere or reducing the country to poverty with debt - in one country, a French company actually owns the entire water supply - including rain - and taxes it. If you stick a bath tub on your roof to collect drinking water, you have to pay for it. In Saudi Arabia (The UK gov. is very friendly with the monarchy there, because they sell them guns) and other countries, Trade Unionists (or anyone who attempts to become one) are exiled, and have to flee to places like the UK (where asylum seekers have literally no rights at all). -=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:42 | |
|
HoboBen
|
@Instinct Chav (I'm very sure I know at least 5 of those in the pics, but they do tend to look the same.) Yob - Boy spelt backwards Bling - over-expensive flashy jewellery. -=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:48 | |
|
Scherererer
|
I think y'all should tax your queen; doesn't she own most of the land or something? Frankly I'm not sure why the UK still has a monarch, seeing as how parliament appears to control everything. For a comparative reference, age for retirement benefits in America is 65, and about the top 5% of the US population pays for 90% of the taxes. Granted we've got some major outliers like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc. but its set up so that the percentage taxed off of income increases as salary approaches infinity. |edit| I know bling, I think that was actually coined from american rap artists, but thanks for the links |edit| |edit| we dont' have chav's and yobs, we just have gangsta's, punks, goths, wiggers, jocks, emo kids, preps, scene, and then for every ethnicity there is a different kind of gang which are all essentially the same thing |edit| -=-=- YouTube Twitter Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:56 | |
|
HoboBen
|
Hey, Even JK Rowling is richer than the Queen! Boy wizard Harry Potter has made author JK Rowling richer than the Queen, according to The Sunday Times Rich List. The 37-year-old has more than quadrupled her personal fortune in the past two years. Her £280m makes her the wealthiest woman in showbusiness and Britain's 122nd richest person - 11 places higher than the Queen. Source: BBC.co.uk Interesting about those American stats though. That's how tax is supposed to work in officially and in theory, but often doesn't I know bling, I think that was actually coined from american rap artistsI thought that the rap artists nicked it from Jamaica, actually
-=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 19:58 | |
|
Scherererer
|
haha, well, wherever it came from i hear it in every song on the local rap stations
-=-=- YouTube Twitter Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 20:10 | |
steve_ancell
|
@ Mousey & Spinal... PMSL.
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 20:15 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
The only problem is with cutting benefits for Chavs is, if they are not getting any money from the benefit system, they will just go out and do burglary and go mugging old people as they walk the streets. They is only one place for Chavs, it's called Military Service. Or we could always put them against a wall and shoot the f**kers.
|
| Sun, 26 Aug 2007, 20:25 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
@ Spinal... I think that even putting them on the moon is still not far enough. Ejecting them from the Solar System would be good. |edit| ROFL... I can just imagine it. The Chavs will be mugging Zorgons on their way through the Galaxy. |edit| |
| Mon, 27 Aug 2007, 01:23 | |
|
shroom_monk
|
@Spinal - LOL!  @Instinct - Why do we have a monarch when we have a government? Well, I don't know, but I think we did it in history... @HoboBen (first comment) - Most of that works in an idealistic situation, yes. However, we do not live in an ideal world. Some people are very honest, but some people are not. -=-=- A mushroom a day keeps the doctor away... Keep It Simple, Shroom! |
| Mon, 27 Aug 2007, 01:58 | |
|
HoboBen
|
Well, call me crazy But I believe a perfect world is possible.
-=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Mon, 27 Aug 2007, 02:40 | |
shroom_monk
|
You're crazy!
|
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||