Underclass

[Aggers]

...I try not to judge people on what they have, but on their behaviour,
and try to take people as I find them...................

That's a very sensible way to look at it, Kaz.
It's so easy to generalise, and that is what most people do.

One of the main drawbacks of democracy is that politicians will not take what may be obviously
the right course of action, for the simple reason that it will lose them votes at the next election.

I'm afraid the situation will consequently get worse and worse as time goes by, until the economy
finally collapses. Then everyone will suffer.

[pederito1]

You do meet some lovely people who come from under privileged backgrounds, eg on here yet others from wealthy ones who turn out to be absolute Sxxxs. Not on here.

[Kaz]

You do indeed Pederito I've known people from across all walks of life, and mixed in well, that started when I went to grammar school, but find you get nice and nasty across all classes.........That's why I take people as i find them

[Oojamaflip]

Kaz, similar to you: very hard-working but financially poor upbringing on a council estate, then being the only one from my school who passed the 11+ and went to Grammar school, etc, etc. My mum still lives in my childhood home on what is now classed as a 'sink estate'.

People cannot help the circumstances they are born into, nor can we always help the 'stuff of life' that is thrown at us to alter our life's circumstances. If we naturally have enough brain cells, or we've had the education and the emotional backing which means we're secure in who we are and have a capability of attempting to change our lives, we sometimes do not have the ability to recognise that not everyone has had this privilege. This is why generalisations and stereotypes are so dangerous. Always, always, it's best, as Kaz says, to speak as you find. I know and have genuine friends who are the Frank Gallaghers of this world, who can dodge and dive and 'do a deal', and equally I have genuine friends who could be described as the 'great and the good'.

It's been said before, that our Welfare State is there as a safety net, and thank the Lord it's there. The only ones 'deserving' of criticism are the intentional lead-swingers, those who 'work' the system, the cheats, and maybe those who have the unchanging attitude 'my mother's auntie's brother once paid tax, so it's my right'. It's sad to me that those many others who are so deserving and in need are caught up generalisations and stereotypes.

[Workingman]

Yes Ooj, I agree, but generalising and stereotyping is what happens, and the main culprits for those attitudes are the media, some politicians, quite a few "think tanks" and even some in the DWP.

Not long from now Daw Mill pit will close with the loss of 650 jobs. It will close, not because the workforce is useless or because of union/management disagreements, but because of an uncontrollable fire. Once it closes all of those 650 people, from pitmen through supervisors, middle manages, engineers and senior management, will get a new title: Unemployed. They will also get to carry a new bagde in the eyes of many, once they go on the dole: Scroungers. Just like those who have lost their jobs, from the bank shut-downs and the Hight Street crisis, they will all be lumped in with the lead swingers, the baby factories and the players of the system - like it or not. After a few months of trying to find work that does not exist many of them will become to believe that they are, indeed, useless.

If the cycle is to be broken then things have to change. The authorities (DWP) have to go after the true "scroungers" with a big stick while at he same time looking at all the others as individuals with individual needs. I will not be holding my breath.

[Oojamaflip]

If the cycle is to be broken then things have to change. The authorities (DWP) have to go after the true "scroungers" with a big stick while at he same time looking at all the others as individuals with individual needs. I will not be holding my breath.

I couldn't agree more.

But then again WM, as soon as political noises are made to that end, history shows us the uproar that occurs: the recent attempts at weeding out the sick from the 'if I say I've got a bad back . . .' DLA benefit. Or the attempts by the CSA to make fathers named and accountable. Maybe the fault is that the methodology is not thought through in an intelligent way?

[cromwell]

If the cycle is to be broken then things have to change. The authorities (DWP) have to go after the true "scroungers" with a big stick while at he same time looking at all the others as individuals with individual needs. I will not be holding my breath.

Maybe the fault is that the methodology is not thought through in an intelligent way?

Yes, I think this is right.
What seems to happen is target setting. "We need a reduction of X percent in this area - do it". So, as long as the people tasked with the job get their X percent reduction, it's job done. Whether they have taken money off the deserving or the undeserving, they don't care.

[Workingman]

I agree. There isn't a "thought through" methodology.

Everyone is tarred with the same, populist, brush - each a tick in a box. They do NOT care - never have and never will. All those at the workface want to do is tick the boxes and go home. I don't blame them.

I was in Eastgate Jobcentre in Leeds today and I could point out those who have no intention, ever, of finding work. I could see them and the DWP workers could see them, but they have no power to stop them. They are scared of them. These people are a physical threat.

They might not be the majority, but they are a 'presence', and to attend Eastgate is intimidating for those of us not familiar with the system - and for the DWP workforce. So what happens? Those of us who are easy targets get hit the hardest. It is all ar5e about face.