Vandals destroy Charity Boat

[NB Alnwick]

but people can afford them when they COMBINE two wages.

 

And so, this pushes up house prices. I make no claim to having been a perfect (or even particularly good) parent but I think parents should consider the welfare of their children when making decisions and if this means deciding to live in cheaper or rented accommodation in order to enable one parent to stay at home and care for the needs of their children, this may be better than taking on a debt that requires both parents to work full time just to service that debt.

 

My own childhood was difficult because I was frequently at home in bed with Asthma and related lung disease - I probably owe my life to a caring mother who was always at home for me. The fact that we lived in a rented 'council house' and did not have some of the luxuries that other families enjoyed has never been a problem for me.

Edited March 19, 2008 by NB Alnwick

[Dominic M]

Like imperialism, this philosophy can only succeed by creating winners and losers.

It is a Utopian ideal that there should be a society that has no winners or losers.

 

No philosophy when put into practice has ever succeeded in creating one though - whatever "ism".

[cotswoldsman]

Makes I laugh when you hear the ill-informed rubbish taken straight from a few newspapers spouted as if it the gospel truth.

 

We don't have to send 10 year olds to adult prisons (except if we would like to extend their criminal training), pensioners are not (in general) getting beaten up for pennies and children are not (in general) getting abducted every time they play in the streets. With regard to this last I think if you look at the reality (rather than your spoon-fed rubbish) you'll find it is mostly people known to the children who commit most of the crimes against children.

 

The reality, if you care to open your eyes and look around is that you (yes, you) are privileged to live in one of the safest and most affluent times and places ever in human history. You might want to give thanks to wet liberals, human rights activists, 1960s social thinkers and such like for this rather than whingeing about what are, in the run of everyday life, very rare events.

 

Well said!!

[NB Alnwick]

They are beaten regularly, enlisted and generally subjugated and oppressed. Then we'll live in the crime free society that existed in the minds of the middle-aged, middle classes who never saw every other kid in his council estate street go to prison.

 

I am not aware of any of the children from our estate going to prison. In fact many of them have done extremely well in their various professions. I did once get locked up for the night in a cell at the old Rugby police station in Railway Terrace when someone spiked my drink at a party and the organisers thought it would be a bit of fun to throw me out and have me arrested.

 

It was no fun for me - I must have slept on the stone floor and woke up covered in muck and bruises with my only suit ripped and ruined. I had vomited during the night and the police made be get on my hands and knees and scrub out the cell with water and disinfectant - although I had no memory of my arrest or what happened during the night I know it was an awful and disgusting experience. I had to explain all that to my mum when she came to collect me.

 

I was subsequently fined thirty shillings for being drunk in a public place but it wasn't the court appearance or the fine that made me avoid ever getting into that situation again. It was the embarrassment of the whole episode and the way I had let my parents down - it still hurts to think of it.

 

Getting back to Carl's point, being brought up on a council estate is no bad thing and doesn't necessarily make you a criminal. Similarly being middle class is no bad thing either. It used to be what people aspired to - I certainly cannot understand why anyone would aspire to becoming an ignorant vandal

[Chris Pink]

this may be better than taking on a debt that requires both parents to work full time just to service that debt.

and, by extension, much working time (== money) is spent on the costs of being able to do that work, commuter transport, clothing, rewards, the inability to spend time going to the market. After that time, a proportion of working time (== money) is spent working directly for the government by earning the tax they take.So after you've taken out the debt servicing, the taxation, the overheads of going to work, you can spend the last hour of each day working for yourself (or your children).Seems like a pretty good argument for not working to me. (or at least just doing the last hour)

I certainly cannot understand why anyone would aspire to becoming an ignorant vandal

it may be the only thing left.

[grahoom]

And so, this pushes up house prices. I make no claim to having been a perfect (or even particularly good) parent but I think parents should consider the welfare of their children when making decisions and if this means deciding to live in cheaper or rented accommodation in order to enable one parent to stay at home and care for the needs of their children, this may be better than taking on a debt that requires both parents to work full time just to service that debt.

 

so where is this cheap accommodation you speak of?

 

rented accommodation in the area I live in is expensive.

[magpie patrick]

First: I hope somehow that Stourbridge can get another boat and carry on the good work... This seems to be being lost in the debate

 

second: Alnwick (and possibly others) seem to be argueing that it is both parents working that is causing the problems. Leaving aside any problems that this issue does cause it isn't high on the causes of antisocial behaviour: there is a fairly strong link between crime (or antisocial behaviour) and deprivation. I am NOT STATING THAT IT IS OK for those who suffer economic deprivation to set narrow boats on fire, but I am saying it is far more likely that they will!

 

Often as well deprivation is concentrated: in the worst case there can be areas where 80% of adults or more do not have jobs (or at least, not ones the tax man is aware of!). Of course, if you go from leafy suburban home to either town centre office or out of town industrial estate you often don't see these areas: some of the worst estates (in terms of deprivation) are literally hidden away: main roads avoid them and "other people" from outside have no reason to go there. The only time we as boaters see these areas is when canals go through them: and then we're horrified: we'd be equally horrified if we walked through these areas, but we don't.

 

So the links are generally economic and social deprivation, single parent families, lower standards of education etc especially when these all occur at once, and often they do. My father worked full time and my mother part time, they were (are) married and took their responsibilities seriously, putting family and home before individual aspirations. This doesn't mean they lead an austere life, but it may explain where my strong work ethic, healthy respect for right and wrong, and desire to live in a family home come from. Now imagine if they'd both been unemployed, dad a petty criminal, living in a run down rented house amidst neighbours who were pretty much the same: what would I aspire to then?

[NB Alnwick]

so where is this cheap accommodation you speak of? rented accommodation in the area I live in is expensive.

 

One of the objectives of the post-war Atlee government was to provide affordable housing for all. In many areas they did succeed in this objective.

 

It was not that government that then sold those homes for profit thus starting an excallation process that placed them beyond the reach of those they were originally intended for.

 

It was the people who lived in them and subsequently sold them to make money.

 

First: I hope somehow that Stourbridge can get another boat and carry on the good work... This seems to be being lost in the debate

 

Getting back to the story that started this debate in the first place. I cannot find any reports of the incident in the local news websites - does anyone have any more info?

Edited March 19, 2008 by NB Alnwick

[grahoom]

One of the objectives of the post-war Atlee government was to provide affordable housing for all.

 

In many areas they did succeed in this objective.

 

It was not that government that then sold those homes for profit thus starting an excallation process that placed them beyond the reach of those they were originally intended for.

 

It was the people who lived in them and subsequently sold them to make money.

 

yes, which now means that there are not many cheap houses for people, or cheap rented accommodation - unless you go on some sort of social housing waiting list, which generally means if you're a couple with an average income you'll get very little help.

 

So for a lot of couples, who have kids - their only real option is for both parents to work.

Edited March 19, 2008 by grahoom

[Dominic M]

A narrow boat that was kept at the Ruskin Centre on the Stourbridge Town Arm and was used by a charity to help kids with learning difficulties has been destroyed by mindless vandals.

 

The boat was set adrift from its offside mooring and set on fire - damage is so severe that the boat is probably a complete wright off.

 

This is yet another incident in the same area which has before included the sawing off off balance beams , vehicles being pushed into the canal and empty factories being torched

 

Words of disgust are hardly adequate for these morons !!!

If we go back to the topic posted in the first place, it absolutely invites people not to comment on the incident at Stourbridge, but on the mentality of those who commit such mindless acts. It does, after all, finish with the somewhat categorical statement, "Words of disgust are hardly adequate for these morons !!!"

 

It would be interesting to know what has happened in this specific incident, but it seems to be off the news radar. But not half as interesting as the ensuing debate on social malaise that it sparked off.

[chris w]

It is a Utopian ideal that there should be a society that has no winners or losers.

 

No philosophy when put into practice has ever succeeded in creating one though - whatever "ism".

 

That's because everyone is different and some of us strive to be "winners" and/or "leaders. Others are happy to be the "sheep". You will never change that diversity. I like "sheep". It means there's less competition to beat.

 

Chris

[Dominic M]

That's because everyone is different and some of us strive to be "winners" and/or "leaders. Others are happy to be the "sheep". You will never change that diversity. I like "sheep". It means there's less competition to beat.

 

Chris

So do I. Particularly with mint sauce.

[grahoom]

That's because everyone is different and some of us strive to be "winners" and/or "leaders. Others are happy to be the "sheep". You will never change that diversity. I like "sheep". It means there's less competition to bleat.

 

Chris

 

[NB Alnwick]

But not half as interesting as the ensuing debate on social malaise that it sparked off.

 

Although I am beginning to enjoy the idea of being 'retired' this and similar debates has really got the brain cells working. Clearly there is a problem and equally clearly, non of the political parties appear to know how to deal with it.

 

Perhaps we should go into politics - but boats are much more fun . . .

[Dominic M]

Although I am beginning to enjoy the idea of being 'retired' this and similar debates has really got the brain cells working. Clearly there is a problem and equally clearly, non of the political parties appear to know how to deal with it.

 

Perhaps we should go into politics - but boats are much more fun . . .

Indeed Graham. In fact I think some of the extended debates and abuse that takes place on this forum concerning boat electrics replicates debates in the Commons with an uncanny similarity

[Chris Pink]

d some of us strive to be "winners" and/or "leaders.

 

Well i wish you every success in your chosen striving, do let us know how you get on.

[carlt]

That's because everyone is different and some of us strive to be "winners" and/or "leaders. Others are happy to be the "sheep". You will never change that diversity. I like "sheep". It means there's less competition to beat.

 

Chris

And there are others who don't measure their individuality by the number of people they "beat", or the size of their bank account.

[NB Alnwick]

And there are others who don't measure their individuality by the number of people they "beat", or the size of their bank account.

 

Winning isn't necessarily about beating anybody nor is it necessarily about what you have or have not in your bank accounts.

 

You are a winner if you have achieved what you have aspired to achieve - this week, in my case, that was steering 'Alnwick' all the way from Cropredy to Napton without making my painful back any worse. I managed to do that and, for once, there was a good excuse for gettimg Jane to do the locks.

[carlt]

Winning isn't necessarily about beating anybody nor is it necessarily about what you have or have not in your bank accounts.

 

You are a winner if you have achieved what you have aspired to achieve - this week, in my case, that was steering 'Alnwick' all the way from Cropredy to Napton without making my painful back any worse. I managed to do that and, for once, there was a good excuse for gettimg Jane to do the locks.

I was referring to Chrisw's yardstick of success.

[chris w]

Winning isn't necessarily about beating anybody nor is it necessarily about what you have or have not in your bank accounts.

 

"Winning" (to me) is about getting what you want out of life so in that sense it appears we agree. That may or may not include financial reward.

 

I much prefer to be a "leader" than a "follower" so my life/career has been guided (inter alia)by that goal. If you put any group of people/strangers together, there will always be leaders and followers that emerge. Both types are needed, one isn't "better" than the other - it's just that we all wired diferently.

 

Chris

[magnetman]

I blame television, for destroying childrens' ability to learn how reality works.

[carlt]

"WIf you put any group of people/strangers together, there will always be leaders and followers that emerge. Both types are needed, one isn't "better" than the other - it's just that we all wired diferently.Chris

There are leaders, followers and individuals.It's the individuals that don't want to lead and refuse to follow (and probably aren't needed, except to make the world a bit more interesting)

I blame television, for destroying childrens' ability to learn how reality works.

Yes, thank heavens telly wasn't invented when we were kids.

[NB Alnwick]

Yes, thank heavens telly wasn't invented when we were kids.

 

Carl, you must be older, even, than I . . .

[NFA]

The advantage of being a leader is not having to watch other peoples arses all day; as you follow them. .

[magnetman]

Carlt - I don't know if you are having a go at me or being ironic but my parents would not allow me or my sisters to watch tv when we were young. Having no tv IS an option regardless of when it was invented.