British soldier left to starve after losing JSA

[Rhyfelwyr]

This is unbelievable we have gypsies building palaces in Romania courtesy of the DWP yet a guy that served his country is left to starve alone in his flat after his Jobseekers Allowance was revoked.


From the Mirror article: (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/killed-benefits-cuts-starving-soldier-3923771)

"When David died he had just £3.44 to his name, six tea bags, a tin of soup and an out-of-date can of sardines. His electricity card was out of credit meaning the fridge where he should have kept his insulin chilled was not working.

A coroner also found he had no food in his stomach.

A pile of CVs for job applications were found near David’s body."

Heads better roll because of this. If it was up to me I would have Ian Duncan Smith on some sort of manslaughter charge because it fits the bill of criminal gross negligence in his duty. One of the most disgraceful things I have ever seen. Guys were setting themselves on fire back in Tunisia for far less when they kicked off their Arab Spring. But sadly people in this country will be too apathetic to do anything about it.

When are people going to stop buying into the lame mantra used by all the parties that our unemployed are all just scroungers? The reality is that there are always dozens of unemployed people for every vacancy... they can ride about on their bike all they like just like that moron Tebbit said but that is never going to change the fact that no matter how hard people look for work, the demand for them isn't there.

The scapegoating of the unemployed is sickening it and now people are dying because of it. Things have to change but they won't. What else can I say?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You need to smoke less Daily Mail.

This will turn out to be his untreated PTSD, and not really about the fact that he lost JSA.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Had JSA revoked ---> no money to power fridge ---> nowhere to store insulin ---> couldn't take insulin ---> died

No need for PTSD the chain of events looks clear enough at this stage.

Also I'm not a fan of the Daily Mail I just happened to see this on the front page when I was browsing the morning papers.

[Beskar]

He wasn't a British soldier, he was an ex-one who served for 2 years. He was last in the armed forces 30+ years ago, leaving by 1980's, then he worked at BT for 16 years since, the rest of the time caring for sick mother until she moved into a carehome, then on JSA. The use of 'British Soldier' is emotive, non-representative and not really that relevant. This wasn't someone back from Iraq then simply got abandoned, he has been out of the system for 3 decades.

It looked like this was a possible suicide as well, quoted from the article: "I think he just gave up." This is very unfortunate as it seems he wasn't getting the help and assistance he was entitled too. There are many organisations and charities which do help carers and even though having to return to work. There are various other 'soup kitchens' and free clinics which he could get in touch with if desperate.

It seems that a long list of very unfortunate incidents led to this persons death. There are many factors involved and opportunities missed.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Ex-soldier, whatever, doesn't matter if he served now or in the past. He served in Belfast at the height of the Troubles.

But according to Mr. Duncan Smith and his Job Center cronies this guy was just a scrounger who deserved to have his JSA taken away.

As somebody pointed out elsewhere, the reason he didn't take his insulin may well have been because if he didn't have any food to take before it, then the insulin could be lethal. Soup kitchens are not handy for everyone finding one is not like popping down to the shops, some people have to walk for hours to get to them. If you are struggling with diabetes you might not be up to that.

'Support groups' and 'soup kitchens', what am I hearing? That big society stuff is all garbage, it is the governments duty to provide a basic level of support so that people don't die of starvation/lack of basic medical care.

You can't get around the fact that the system is failing miserably.

[Beskar]

'Support groups' and 'soup kitchens', what am I hearing? That big society stuff is all garbage, it is the governments duty to provide a basic level of support so that people don't die of starvation/lack of basic medical care.

You can't get around the fact that the system is failing miserably.

Well, it is not that the system is failing, there is no political will to actually engage with the system as many people see it as toxic, due as you mentioned with your very own words "gypsey palaces" and even with the 'I don't vote' topic, you bring up here "But sadly people in this country will be too apathetic to do anything about it."

There are real world solutions to get around these issues, may not like them all, but they are in existence.

I could spend hours talking about how I believe there should be better funding for the welfare state, NHS and other public services. But political opinions are not what are really being discussed.

[InsaneApache]

As Liam Burns said "There's no more money left!"

So who is at fault?

Also Tebbit never said "get on yer bike" any more than Thatcher said "No such thing as society".

You been brainwashed without knowing it.


I could spend hours talking about how I believe there should be better funding for the welfare state, NHS and other public services

They've had £billions chucked at it since '97. Guess what? An 85% increase in managers.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well, it is not that the system is failing, there is no political will to actually engage with the system as many people see it as toxic, due as you mentioned with your very own words "gypsey palaces" and even with the 'I don't vote' topic, you bring up here "But sadly people in this country will be too apathetic to do anything about it."

If people are dying because of the current system then it is failing. End of.

Fact 1: Gypsies are building palaces with DWP money.
Fact 2: Ordinary Britons are dying because the DWP won't give them any money.

The system is clearly broke. I disagree that there is no political will to engage it, because there seems to be plenty of political will to cut it down piece by piece.

I also don't get why my complaints about apathy conflict about what I said in the "I don't vote" thread. Like I said do other things for my 'civic engagement'.


As Liam Burns said "There's no more money left!"

So who is at fault?

I'm not here to defend the entire welfare state, I am just saying that I find it disgraceful that this individual was left to die like that. Surely you would at least agree with that?


Also Tebbit never said "get on yer bike" any more than Thatcher said "No such thing as society".

You been brainwashed without knowing it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU_pDM1N7i0

"I grew up in the thirties with an unemployed father. He didn't riot, he got on his bike and looked for work and he kept looking till he found it."

Now unless he just felt like telling a story for nostalgia's sake, I'm pretty sure he's implying that the unemployed should indeed get on their bike just like his father did, and by extension, if they fail to find work then it is their fault for not trying hard enough.

Not only is that argument wrong, it is irrelevant. Because if everybody on the dole was to suddenly get on their bike and do everything in their power to find work, then the level of unemployment would not change at all. This is because of the fundamental fact that everybody keeps forgetting - there are always far more jobless than there are job vacancies. It is just the nature of our economy - full employment is no longer needed to fuel it.

So if we, as you suggest, truly can't afford to pay for the unemployed masses, then our only two option are to either let them all die of in some sort of Malthusian check, or reform the economy so that they gain employment. I know which option I would go for...

[HoreTore]

This is unbelievable we have gypsies building palaces in Romania courtesy of the DWP yet a guy that served his country is left to starve alone in his flat after his Jobseekers Allowance was revoked.

You'd get more sympathy if you didn't open with blatant racism and Daily Mail-type exaggeration and misinformation.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Had JSA revoked ---> no money to power fridge ---> nowhere to store insulin ---> couldn't take insulin ---> died

No need for PTSD the chain of events looks clear enough at this stage.

Also I'm not a fan of the Daily Mail I just happened to see this on the front page when I was browsing the morning papers.

Your JSA isn't meant to power your fridge - your Housing Benefit is.

I'm not saying this guy wasn't failed by the Welfare State but the fact is that if he'd gone to the Citizen's Advice and said "I'm diabetic and can't afford to power my fridge" they would have found a way to fix it.

They go through fazes of putting up posters and running TV adverts saying "check you have the benefits you are entitled to" and people don't listen - including me.

Every years these same papers go through contortions about how some widow's surviving on £70 a week - and nobody listens when it's pointed out that she's still only drawing 50% of a married pension, instead of a widows pension.

[HoreTore]

Your JSA isn't meant to power your fridge - your Housing Benefit is.

I'm not saying this guy wasn't failed by the Welfare State but the fact is that if he'd gone to the Citizen's Advice and said "I'm diabetic and can't afford to power my fridge" they would have found a way to fix it.

They go through fazes of putting up posters and running TV adverts saying "check you have the benefits you are entitled to" and people don't listen - including me.

Every years these same papers go through contortions about how some widow's surviving on £70 a week - and nobody listens when it's pointed out that she's still only drawing 50% of a married pension, instead of a widows pension.

I would still maintain that this is a failing of the system rather than incompetence on behalf of the claimants, though*.

Isolation, emptiness and apathy are powerful states of being, ones it's very hard to break out of. Our welfare states are poor at reaching out to those. But how to enable it to do so? Hell if I know. It's a lot more complex than the ol' "throw more money at the failing system"-quickfix.


Edit:
*in the extreme cases, that is. I doubt you failed to pick up your claim due to apathy, but my guess is that the one in the OP did.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I would still maintain that this is a failing of the system rather than incompetence on behalf of the claimants, though*.

Isolation, emptiness and apathy are powerful states of being, ones it's very hard to break out of. Our welfare states are poor at reaching out to those. But how to enable it to do so? Hell if I know. It's a lot more complex than the ol' "throw more money at the failing system"-quickfix.


Edit:
*in the extreme cases, that is. I doubt you failed to pick up your claim due to apathy, but my guess is that the one in the OP did.


Oh, no, the system failed - but there's a huge gap between "no help" and "failed to offer help".

In my case, I was living at home and working on a PhD - under the impression that disqualified me from JSA - it didn't.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...To fix it you need big government to take an inward look and fix itself. How often does that happen? :shrug:

Whenever a crisis hits. Short of that, not so much.

[HoreTore]

Oh, no, the system failed - but there's a huge gap between "no help" and "failed to offer help".

In my case, I was living at home and working on a PhD - under the impression that disqualified me from JSA - it didn't.

Completely agreed.

I could've claimed a month or two of unemployment benefits as well some years back, but I too wrongly assumed I wasn't qualified... But considering all the benefit-scrounging and outright theft I did in my conscript year, I'd say me and the state are about even.

[InsaneApache]

Now unless he just felt like telling a story for nostalgia's sake, I'm pretty sure he's implying that the unemployed should indeed get on their bike just like his father did, and by extension, if they fail to find work then it is their fault for not trying hard enough.

That's what people did back then. They went where the work was. Or starved.

A couple of years ago when I researched my family tree they went all over the place. Great granny was born in Yorkshire, Grandad in south Lincolnshire, mam and dad in Manchester, auntie in Scotland (building the Forth Bridge?)......

You can argue things are different now but are they? In 1978 I went to work at Hunterston B(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunterston_B_nuclear_power_station) just south of Largs in Ayeshire. I went because I needed a job so I could go out clubbing and getting drunk and chasing skirt. Important stuff.

Oh I lived in Manchester at the time so I had to move up there, luckily I'd lived in Saltcoats a couple of years earlier so I knew the area.

[Papewaio]

Pfft. I spend over 3 hrs a day commuting.

[InsaneApache]

Pfft. I spend over 3 hrs a day commuting.

If I'd commuted it would have taken nearly 9 hours to get there, not really viable.

[HoreTore]

They went where the work was. Or starved.

Or rioted. Or turned to crime. Or sold their bodies. Or beat up the jews.

The 30's was one of our darkest decades, don't try to pass it off as a golden age of righteousness.

[InsaneApache]

Or rioted. Or turned to crime. Or sold their bodies. Or beat up the jews.

The 30's was one of our darkest decades, don't try to pass it off as a golden age of righteousness.

I never said it was righteous. You're putting words in my mouth. It certainly wasn't a golden age. My grandmother lost 7 children, 5 in childbirth. My mam is a surviving twin.

It's just how things were back then when my dad was a kid.

[HoreTore]

I never said it was righteous. You're putting words in my mouth. It certainly wasn't a golden age. My grandmother lost 7 children, 5 in childbirth. My mam is a surviving twin.

It's just how things were back then when my dad was a kid.

You gave two options, both of which implied righteousness. Especially since it's contrasted with "kids these days..."

Fact of the matter is that your parent's generation were a bunch of thiefs, prostitutes and jew-bashers. Far fewer of todays kids turn to crime than they did back in the 30's.

[InsaneApache]

Fact of the matter is that your parent's generation were a bunch of thiefs, prostitutes and jew-bashers. Far fewer of todays kids turn to crime than they did back in the 30's.

You really are a vile individual aren't you?

My dads elder brother was one of the first British troops to liberate Belsen. I suppose that's where he beat the shit out of the jews eh?

[Papewaio]

If I'd commuted it would have taken nearly 9 hours to get there, not really viable.

And I've moved from Perth to Sydney to keep employed.

The quip about Sydney is that everyone has a part time job: commuting.

[HoreTore]

You really are a vile individual aren't you?

Don't you have some David Icke to read?


My dads elder brother was one of the first British troops to liberate Belsen. I suppose that's where he beat the shit out of the jews eh?

....And his best buds joined up with Mosley's gang of awesome.

Yes, we were all better off back in the day. Kids these days are worthless.

[Rhyfelwyr]

That's what people did back then. They went where the work was. Or starved.

A couple of years ago when I researched my family tree they went all over the place. Great granny was born in Yorkshire, Grandad in south Lincolnshire, mam and dad in Manchester, auntie in Scotland (building the Forth Bridge?)......

You can argue things are different now but are they? In 1978 I went to work at Hunterston B(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunterston_B_nuclear_power_station) just south of Largs in Ayeshire. I went because I needed a job so I could go out clubbing and getting drunk and chasing skirt. Important stuff.

Oh I lived in Manchester at the time so I had to move up there, luckily I'd lived in Saltcoats a couple of years earlier so I knew the area.

I can't honestly say what things were like then, so I can't make a fair comparison. Things are very different in general now though. My grandad (mum's side) had no qualifications at all yet he bought a nice tenement house no problem working as an ordinary shipbuilder, never had to worry about being out of work. I'm starting to think I will never own a house or have a stable job despite having a First Class Honours degree. I've done unpaid internships, several low-level jobs... but as far as I can see nothing is going to change. Where would I go if I was to follow the work? The unemployed are everywhere all over the UK.


You'd get more sympathy if you didn't open with blatant racism and Daily Mail-type exaggeration and misinformation.

Racism? Nope, sorry but that's not gonna wash, I'm not getting shut down because you are throwing such words about.

Welfare tourism is a real problem and because of the nature of what it is, obviously it is not going to be native Britons doing it (in Britain, anyway). You've got your head in the clouds if you don't think this is happening.


Gypsies on Benefits & Proud (http://www.channel5.com/shows/gypsies-on-benefits-proud/episodes/gypsies-on-benefits-proud)

"We follow father-of-three Ion and five fellow immigrants as they travel to the UK in January 2014, just days after work restrictions on Romanians were lifted. Ion is shameless about why he's moving to London: he wants to make £40,000 from benefits to help him build a new house for his family, back in the rural Romanian gypsy village where he grew up."

So the British state provides him with a £40,000 new house (and in gypsy village in Romania that's a big house), while an ex-soldier starves to death alone in his flat.

Its not on.

[HoreTore]

Racism? Nope, sorry but that's not gonna wash, I'm not getting shut down because you are throwing such words about.

Quit whining. Racism is what racism is, and it's exactly what you're doing: putting different worth on people based on their origins. I do note that you 'missed' the comments on misinformation and exaggeration.

Further, you're building a simple welfare queen type argument. This is the exact type of argument which has created the current system that you dislike. Keep doing it, and watch as the parts of the welfare state you actually like whittles away.

In conclusion, I do not see how it picking on one group of destitute people will advance the cause of another destitute people.

[Kadagar_AV]

I can't honestly say what things were like then, so I can't make a fair comparison. Things are very different in general now though. My grandad (mum's side) had no qualifications at all yet he bought a nice tenement house no problem working as an ordinary shipbuilder, never had to worry about being out of work. I'm starting to think I will never own a house or have a stable job despite having a First Class Honours degree. I've done unpaid internships, several low-level jobs... but as far as I can see nothing is going to change. Where would I go if I was to follow the work? The unemployed are everywhere all over the UK.



Racism? Nope, sorry but that's not gonna wash, I'm not getting shut down because you are throwing such words about.

Welfare tourism is a real problem and because of the nature of what it is, obviously it is not going to be native Britons doing it (in Britain, anyway). You've got your head in the clouds if you don't think this is happening.


Gypsies on Benefits & Proud (http://www.channel5.com/shows/gypsies-on-benefits-proud/episodes/gypsies-on-benefits-proud)

"We follow father-of-three Ion and five fellow immigrants as they travel to the UK in January 2014, just days after work restrictions on Romanians were lifted. Ion is shameless about why he's moving to London: he wants to make £40,000 from benefits to help him build a new house for his family, back in the rural Romanian gypsy village where he grew up."

So the British state provides him with a £40,000 new house (and in gypsy village in Romania that's a big house), while an ex-soldier starves to death alone in his flat.

Its not on.

Are we even allowed to call gypsies gypsies, like your link does?

I think "EU-Travelers" is the correct PC term these days. I might be wrong.

But, yes of course everyone with half a brain will quickly realize that gypsies tend to contribute mainly on the negative side when it comes to the building of a functional society.

Gypsies are a resistance-culture. They themselves clearly state that they don't want to adhere to the western world nation building agenda. As such (recistance culture), they will not adhere to other cultures. Thus any notion of nation building with gypsies along is a worthless effort.

Not to be racist or anything. It's only that what I just wrote is obviously racist, and also correct.

Racism + correct = mind blown for the majority. And that's addressed to you who read this, not Rhyf.

[Montmorency]

I really am confused by how most people use the word "race".


putting different worth on people based on their origins.

For instance: is race equivalent to upbringing?

However race is used, I'm fairly sure congenitality is part of its sense, somewhere along the line.

So be more careful, guys. If we need new or different terms for what we are specifically talking about, then let's acknowledge that rather than resorting to a certain word simply for its strong social and historical charge and salience.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Quit whining. Racism is what racism is, and it's exactly what you're doing: putting different worth on people based on their origins. I do note that you 'missed' the comments on misinformation and exaggeration.

I 'missed' nothing I gave you a clear example of a gypsy claiming tens of thousands of pounds to build a big family home back in his Romanian village. So my OP had no "misinformation and exaggeration". I am also not putting different worth on people based on their origins, I have no idea where you are getting such an idea from. My point is you should only be claiming benefits from a society if you intend of being a functioning part of it. As an admitted welfare tourist, this guy was just getting his money then going back to Romania to spend it. It's totally different from a native Briton trying to build a life here.


Further, you're building a simple welfare queen type argument. This is the exact type of argument which has created the current system that you dislike. Keep doing it, and watch as the parts of the welfare state you actually like whittles away.

Welfare tourists are destroying confidence in the current system. We could debate their actual financial impact, but at a more visceral level the behaviour of some of them is making tax-paying Britons lose their trust in the welfare state. But politicians are so PC/bound by EU law that they end up making ordinary Britons pay for this rather than the welfare tourists themselves.


In conclusion, I do not see how it picking on one group of destitute people will advance the cause of another destitute people.

I would like Romania and indeed all countries to have a healthy welfare system for their destitute. But you can't just come and take things from a society that you are not going to even attempt to be a part of. I have sympathy for immigrants who come here to build a better life and end up on welfare, but the behaviour of welfare tourists is disrespectful and destructive. Are you OK with the behaviour of the individual from that documentary I linked to?

@Kadagar - Yeah I agree gypsies have a pretty unhealthy culture. Some of them thought it would be a good idea to park all their caravans on a local football pitch. It is bizarre behaviour and I have no idea what they are doing.

[Papewaio]

So by EU law you can get social welfare in any nation you choose within the EU?

Does the citizens country offset any of these costs?

It seems strange that you can pay really high taxes in one country and another country has low taxes. But if you are a citizen of the low RS society you can just move across a border and get the other countries benefits without paying for them.

In some ways its like how multinationals have a holding company in Bermuda. So I suppose if it is good enough for Google its good enough for Citizen John Smith.

But I would suggest in the future that a citizens EU country or the one they pay their taxes in should be paying the tab.

[Beskar]

So by EU law you can get social welfare in any nation you choose within the EU?

Does the citizens country offset any of these costs?

No.

Basically, if you are entitled to a benefit whilst you are in that country, you have access to it. It is theoretically offset by the favour being 'returned'. So it would be comparable to someone moving within the same nation, you are entitled to the benefits of the state you are living in.

The cost of living is different between here and Romania, so basically they take the money whilst living in bad conditions here, then transfer it through to Romania where they get 'more' for it. So live like a Pauper today so you can live like a Prince tomorrow.

[HoreTore]

Welfare queen argument (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Welfare_queen)

The reason why we have ended up with the system we have now, the reason why people like the guy in the OP are left to starve, is because people have made arguments like the one you are doing now.

Maggie made a bunch of these arguments, and they allowed her to destroy much of the welfare system. If you want the opposite, I suggest you resort to a different set of arguments. If you wish to get rid of any benefits given to Romanians, do not fool yourself into thinking the general benefits for Britons won't disappear with them.


So by EU law you can get social welfare in any nation you choose within the EU?

As easily as a mother of 4 can get millions in child support. According to the Daily Mail; yes, according to reality; no.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No.

Basically, if you are entitled to a benefit whilst you are in that country, you have access to it. It is theoretically offset by the favour being 'returned'. So it would be comparable to someone moving within the same nation, you are entitled to the benefits of the state you are living in.

The cost of living is different between here and Romania, so basically they take the money whilst living in bad conditions here, then transfer it through to Romania where they get 'more' for it. So live like a Pauper today so you can live like a Prince tomorrow.

For every Romanian living on benefits here and sending it home there are, what, 10? Working and sending money home to Romania.

[Beskar]

For every Romanian living on benefits here and sending it home there are, what, 10? Working and sending money home to Romania.

Probably. They would make a lot more money working than trying to get it through our benefit system, especially getting over £200 a week opposed to £70.

[HoreTore]

For every Romanian living on benefits here and sending it home there are, what, 10? Working and sending money home to Romania.

Immigrants living exclusively on welfare(as far as the government know) are of course working as well. When you can get a human to wash your car for five pounds, you can't really fail to understand what's going on.

[Kadagar_AV]

For every Romanian living on benefits here and sending it home there are, what, 10? Working and sending money home to Romania.

That is the most absurd thing I have read 2014.

Source? From my point of view very few Gypsies does honest work in other countries.
1. Romanians are not the issue, a subculture thriving in Romania is. The gypsies, to be even more precise.

2. I don't think you will find many people who dislike "Romanians" at large. It is a very specific sub-cultural group of Romanians that the rest of the world dislike: The Gypsies, - for good reasons or bad is another topic.

I don't honestly think other cultures have a problem with Romanians, they have a problem with Gypsies.

[HoreTore]

That is the most absurd thing I have read 2014.

Source? From my point of view very few Gypsies does honest work in other countries.
1. Romanians are not the issue, a subculture thriving in Romania is. The gypsies, to be even more precise.

2. I don't think you will find many people who dislike "Romanians" at large. It is a very specific sub-cultural group of Romanians that the rest of the world dislike: The Gypsies, - for good reasons or bad is another topic.

I don't honestly think other cultures have a problem with Romanians, they have a problem with Gypsies.

Ah, the wonderful arrogance that only ignorance can produce...

The majority of Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants are employed (http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/press-office/Migration-Dr-Christian-Nygaard-full-report-Nov2013.pdf). Further:


The A2 employment rate, however, remains above the UK average.

A2 means immigrants from Romania and Bulgaria, ie. Roma. However, these statistics only count the legal sector. There is reason to suspect that a hefty number of Roma work in the black market, for example in agriculture or car shops, which will not be counted in these statistics.

Finally, you are being very imprecise when you try to be precise: the Roma is not a Romanian sub-culture.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

That is the most absurd thing I have read 2014.

Source? From my point of view very few Gypsies does honest work in other countries.
1. Romanians are not the issue, a subculture thriving in Romania is. The gypsies, to be even more precise.

2. I don't think you will find many people who dislike "Romanians" at large. It is a very specific sub-cultural group of Romanians that the rest of the world dislike: The Gypsies, - for good reasons or bad is another topic.

I don't honestly think other cultures have a problem with Romanians, they have a problem with Gypsies.


The Romani in the USA tend to be self-employed. They experience a high rate of overall unemployment, but not disproportionately so to other minorities, or to other groups of employees in their chosen labor niche (construction etc. are industries known for haphazard employment regardless of the ethnicity of the employee).

The Romani, as near as I can tell, are no more or less predisposed towards crime than are any other minority group once you adjust for socioeconomic factors.

I admit that I am having trouble finding good research pieces where their rates of incarceration and the like are parsed out for effective comparison.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That is the most absurd thing I have read 2014.

Source? From my point of view very few Gypsies does honest work in other countries.
1. Romanians are not the issue, a subculture thriving in Romania is. The gypsies, to be even more precise.

2. I don't think you will find many people who dislike "Romanians" at large. It is a very specific sub-cultural group of Romanians that the rest of the world dislike: The Gypsies, - for good reasons or bad is another topic.

I don't honestly think other cultures have a problem with Romanians, they have a problem with Gypsies.

Can the Daily Mail or the Mirror distinguish between Roma and Romanian?

I doubt it - hence my post.

Otherwise - I expect most Romanians would agree with you, and in general so do I. Although, the Roma community is not entirely composed of criminals it DOES have a similar "us or them" mentality to, for example, the historic Jewish community which means that it tends to protect its criminal element more than the settled populace generally would.

[Rhyfelwyr]

The reason why we have ended up with the system we have now, the reason why people like the guy in the OP are left to starve, is because people have made arguments like the one you are doing now.

Maggie made a bunch of these arguments, and they allowed her to destroy much of the welfare system. If you want the opposite, I suggest you resort to a different set of arguments. If you wish to get rid of any benefits given to Romanians, do not fool yourself into thinking the general benefits for Britons won't disappear with them.

I'm sorry but this is a completely ridiculous argument. According to you, I should not try to address any particular abuses of the system, in case that gives some sort of momentum to the people trying to break the whole system down?

If we do not scrutinize and challenge the system to make it the best it can be, just for fear of some Tory malignants using that for their own corrupt purposes, then the system will become a mess and one day it really will fall apart. You should know better than to suggest closing ranks and protecting abuses just because of some perceived outside threat.

Welfare tourism is a problem and it is something that the British welfare state was never intended to support. I am happy for people of any race or nationality to claim benefits if they are trying to build a life here, but I am not OK with welfare tourism. That is a sensible position. It doesn't mean I'm supporting a viewpoint that will lead to ordinary people losing benefits, on the contrary it means removing an unfair burden from the welfare system and allowing more to go to the sort of people they were intended for, for example this ex-soldier who so tragically died.

So long as you keep shutting down valid criticisms of the welfare system as "racist" or "welfare queen arguments", then you are going to keep fuelling the fire of the free-market fanatics who want any excuse to dismantle the whole thing.


For every Romanian living on benefits here and sending it home there are, what, 10? Working and sending money home to Romania.

Yet this is not necessarily a good thing. First off, it is silly to invite people in to take jobs when we already have so many unemployed people. Secondly, these foreign workers tend to be prefered by employers since they can abuse them and ignore things like workers rights. Finally, as you said, they send the money they make back home - it isn't contributing to our economy in the way it would if a 'native' had the job.

None of this makes such immigrants the bad guys in my mind, since unlike welfare tourists, they are just trying to make an honest living. But when it comes to immigration as a policy (rather than immigrants as people, which sadly I feel the need to point out for the benefit of some), then I have reservations with it for the above reasons.

[HoreTore]

The problem with the welfare queen argument is that it argues against a completely exaggerated version of reality. This Romanian did not simply turn up at the border to collect his 40k. He was given a reduced figure of what every Briton is entitled to.

Unless you are of the opinion that British welfare recipients are living the high life, I can't see how you can make the claim that this man is. Yes, taking your wages/whatever from a high-cost country to a low-cost country is a brilliant strategy for upping your living standards, see British retired people in Thailand for examples of that. You are, however, kidding yourself if you believe that this man will now live in Luxury back in Romania.

Further, this has absolutely no bearing on the man who died. It is indeed a completely unrelated issue. He did not loose his benefits because the system is occupied by Romanians. He lost his benefits because he missed a criteria necessary for getting said benefits. The bank isn't empty, he just did not make a withdrawal.

[Strike For The South]

Broken Britain

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yet this is not necessarily a good thing. First off, it is silly to invite people in to take jobs when we already have so many unemployed people. Secondly, these foreign workers tend to be prefered by employers since they can abuse them and ignore things like workers rights. Finally, as you said, they send the money they make back home - it isn't contributing to our economy in the way it would if a 'native' had the job.

None of this makes such immigrants the bad guys in my mind, since unlike welfare tourists, they are just trying to make an honest living. But when it comes to immigration as a policy (rather than immigrants as people, which sadly I feel the need to point out for the benefit of some), then I have reservations with it for the above reasons.

Well, on the one hand, Britain is historically responsible for Poland and Romania being in the shit to begin with - Bulgaria may possibly be someone else's fault but the primary members of the Entente, i.e. Britain and France, took certain decisions before, during, and after WWII that led to those countries which are actually in "Central" Europe along with Germany on the wrong side of the Iron Curtain.

A particularly pointed issue in the case of the Romania as their king is still alive to feel aggrieved on behalf of his contemporaries.

So I say - if you are Romanian or Polish or Czech etc. and you want to come here to work or to study, have at, better yourselves and better your countries by extension. It's about the only good thing the EU is doing at the moment. Conversely, scroungers should be briefly imprisoned, promptly fined, and then evicted.

As to "taking jobs", while it's true that these people depress wages in the labour market these wages are set by British companies who aren't interested in paying the living wage or anything close to it.

[Kadagar_AV]

Well, on the one hand, Britain is historically responsible for Poland and Romania being in the shit to begin with - Bulgaria may possibly be someone else's fault but the primary members of the Entente, i.e. Britain and France, took certain decisions before, during, and after WWII that led to those countries which are actually in "Central" Europe along with Germany on the wrong side of the Iron Curtain.

A particularly pointed issue in the case of the Romania as their king is still alive to feel aggrieved on behalf of his contemporaries.

So I say - if you are Romanian or Polish or Czech etc. and you want to come here to work or to study, have at, better yourselves and better your countries by extension. It's about the only good thing the EU is doing at the moment. Conversely, scroungers should be briefly imprisoned, promptly fined, and then evicted.

As to "taking jobs", while it's true that these people depress wages in the labour market these wages are set by British companies who aren't interested in paying the living wage or anything close to it.

Depressing the labour market isn't really a positive thingy, now is it?

While I of course agree (as it's commonly known) that immigration have a negative impact for the working peoples life and work situation, there is another issue you didn't mention...

The "taking the job" part is not just a saying, it's just how things are.

There are 2 factors main factors here, and you need at least one of them to have a positive result from immigration (national economically speaking):

1. When the immigrant have abilities that the work market need, and that can't be found among the people in the nation.

2. When there are more jobs than applicants.


I guess we all can agree on that, no?

I've met the argument "They do jobs others dont want"...

First of all, we should strive to make all jobs respected. Secondly, the benefit of having an immigrant take the job must make up for the loss of having +1 person on social wellfare in return.


Unqualified immigration is always a net loss.

[HoreTore]

Depressing the labour market isn't really a positive thingy, now is it?

It is.

Keynesian economics dictate counter-cyclical spending. Wage depression resulting from immigration will follow this, and its effects will by and large mirror the fluctuations of the economy.

Britain is a very wealthy country, and without restraining wages will create another bubble. A good example of this effect can be seen in any country dependent on exports which lets its inner market dictate the wage development. Hilarity will ensue within a decade.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Depressing the labour market isn't really a positive thingy, now is it?

It can be, but wages in Britain are not running rampant, so it isn't right now.


While I of course agree (as it's commonly known) that immigration have a negative impact for the working peoples life and work situation, there is another issue you didn't mention...

The "taking the job" part is not just a saying, it's just how things are.

There are 2 factors main factors here, and you need at least one of them to have a positive result from immigration (national economically speaking):

1. When the immigrant have abilities that the work market need, and that can't be found among the people in the nation.

2. When there are more jobs than applicants.

Many British people, especially the current generation who were fed the "university lie" will turn their noses up at a half-decent job with a living wage because it's physical rather than intellectual.

[Papewaio]

Immigrants may individually replace local workers. They also help generate a stronger economy and as a net force more oppoutunity.

[Brenus]

“Many British people, especially the current generation who were fed the "university lie" will turn their noses up at a half-decent job with a living wage because it's physical rather than intellectual.” Which I can understand as I did “half-decent job” when student and they are harsh, painful and a “living wage” is in fact not enough a have a life.
I left happily to immigrants the privilege to use pneumatic hammer(s), the spreading of boiling asphalt on roof, the digging of trench(es) and the removal of gravels. I did enjoy working on roofing and having a highly skilled job. But I left without regrets the awaking at 2 in the morning, the tram/underground morning, travel to the site in a noisy company’s half-truck, the cold in winter and the heat in summer, and the daily hazards of working in building (1 bone broken), to be so tired than I had no option than to collapse on the bed, trying to sleep when all my body was aching of the punishment. I did enjoy the feeling to build something, and the friendship of the workers on site, sharing of food and drinks sometimes, but I went there, got the T-shirt, I am done with it.

Morality: Make it a decent job with decent wages and perhaps Natives will do it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“Many British people, especially the current generation who were fed the "university lie" will turn their noses up at a half-decent job with a living wage because it's physical rather than intellectual.” Which I can understand as I did “half-decent job” when student and they are harsh, painful and a “living wage” is in fact not enough a have a life.
I left happily to immigrants the privilege to use pneumatic hammer(s), the spreading of boiling asphalt on roof, the digging of trench(es) and the removal of gravels. I did enjoy working on roofing and having a highly skilled job. But I left without regrets the awaking at 2 in the morning, the tram/underground morning, travel to the site in a noisy company’s half-truck, the cold in winter and the heat in summer, and the daily hazards of working in building (1 bone broken), to be so tired than I had no option than to collapse on the bed, trying to sleep when all my body was aching of the punishment. I did enjoy the feeling to build something, and the friendship of the workers on site, sharing of food and drinks sometimes, but I went there, got the T-shirt, I am done with it.

Morality: Make it a decent job with decent wages and perhaps Natives will do it.

Uh huh?

I currently do a shit job for less than the "living wage" so I have some perspective here. Fact is, there's no real way to make my job better, you could (and should) pay me more but it wouldn't make anyone any happier.

[Montmorency]

I left happily to immigrants

Whoa, dude - it would have been one thing to say that you left it happily to "others", but "to immigrants"?

The implication is that French natives are too weak or fragile to do manual work, or that manual work is simply beneath French natives. That sort of ambivalent ethnocentrism is strange coming from you.

[Brenus]

“The implication is that French natives are too weak or fragile to do manual work, or that manual work is simply beneath French natives. That sort of ambivalent ethnocentrism is strange coming from you.” I obviously made a mistake in my explanation. “Many British people” was on what I answered. So I emphasise on immigrants (good enough for them, kind of, of them good enough for the job).
And of course the "university lie" will turn their noses up at a half-decent job with a living wage because it's physical rather than intellectual” bit.
Natives and/or intellectuals don’t turn from manual works because these are beneath from them but because they are not paid enough. Yes, you will have some who think that it is beneath them, but how many Lords are street cleaners?

[a completely inoffensive name]

The scapegoating of the unemployed is sickening it and now people are dying because of it. Things have to change but they won't. What else can I say?

As much as I don't like to say it, some times there is a need for people to feel and distribute shame accordingly.

[Kadagar_AV]

Many British people, especially the current generation who were fed the "university lie" will turn their noses up at a half-decent job with a living wage because it's physical rather than intellectual.

Same here in Sweden.

What self respecting university educated ethnically western person would take a black peoples job?

I'm not saying that view is right or wrong, I am saying that that is the view people have, it's symptomatic in all the western countries I've witnessed.

As I said, nazism and nationalism have a good answer to combat that issue. I have not yet seen any other political ideology come up with a proved WORKING solution.


About the topic: I frankly get pissed off hearing about it. If people die under those circumstances, the state obviously have a problem that needs to be sorted.

[Kadagar_AV]

As much as I don't like to say it, some times there is a need for people to feel and distribute shame accordingly.

Of course. That's what's holding a welfare system up. Welfare MUST be a last resort, and the surroundings of a person should never accept it to be anything but.

If the surroundings start to admit any kind of cheating going on, the welfare system will collapse. I see it happening here in Sweden as we speak.

That is however not what Rhyf was pointing at, and I think you know it if you think another go around on the topic :)

[Husar]

Same here in Sweden.

What self respecting university educated ethnically western person would take a black peoples job?

You say that as though there were no educated, self-respecting black people... :inquisitive:

[Greyblades]

Uh, husar, there's no need to dance around it, Kadagar's shown himself to be an unabashed racist several times already.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You say that as though there were no educated, self-respecting black people... :inquisitive:

Sounded to me like he was mocking the Effete Swedish youth.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Of course. That's what's holding a welfare system up. Welfare MUST be a last resort, and the surroundings of a person should never accept it to be anything but.

If the surroundings start to admit any kind of cheating going on, the welfare system will collapse. I see it happening here in Sweden as we speak.

That is however not what Rhyf was pointing at, and I think you know it if you think another go around on the topic :)

You didn't get what I was saying at all.

[Kadagar_AV]

You say that as though there were no educated, self-respecting black people... :inquisitive:

I have no idea how you could read that out of what I have written. Last time I was in Berlin all the toilet attenders were black, has this changed much lately?

Back in DDR days it could be your friends mom, these days it's just "blacks". Possibly with some arabs sprinkled in, but then women ,as the men are to proud for such work.


Uh, husar, there's no need to dance around it, Kadagar's shown himself to be an unabashed racist several times already.

I prefer realist. A racist wants to put his race above others on a international scale, whereas I more nod and acknowledge racial differences as well as cultural differences, and have a non-bollocks view on how the different human groups co-exist (or fail at it).



Sounded to me like he was mocking the Effete Swedish youth.

Partly that.

Partly, however, I dare say there is now a "black peoples job" category in Sweden. Cleaners as an example, bus driver is another job that changes drastically demographically.

It kind of such having to work as cleaner.

It sucks even harder working as cleaner with you as the only white person on the job, surrounded by blacks and arab women.

I just call it as I see it, and that's what I see in Sweden today. Heck, it's what I see in Europe all over.


You didn't get what I was saying at all.

Yeah, alternatively you didn't try very hard understing what I was saying.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Partly that.

Partly, however, I dare say there is now a "black peoples job" category in Sweden. Cleaners as an example, bus driver is another job that changes drastically demographically.

It kind of such having to work as cleaner.

It sucks even harder working as cleaner with you as the only white person on the job, surrounded by blacks and arab women.

I just call it as I see it, and that's what I see in Sweden today. Heck, it's what I see in Europe all over.

It gets even more shocking when you read the cleaner's CV.

Or we could talk about the Slovakian nurses who come here and become strippers - less obvious, same problem.

We're importing an underclass, that's what the majority of modern immigration is.

[HoreTore]

It gets even more shocking when you read the cleaner's CV.

Or we could talk about the Slovakian nurses who come here and become strippers - less obvious, same problem.

We're importing an underclass, that's what the majority of modern immigration is.

The school secretary where I work is a certified psychologist with two masters.

Prior to starting her 40% position here, she worked as a waitress at a pizza restaurant.

An insane waste of a resource.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I have no idea how you could read that out of what I have written. Last time I was in Berlin all the toilet attenders were black, has this changed much lately?

Back in DDR days it could be your friends mom, these days it's just "blacks". Possibly with some arabs sprinkled in, but then women ,as the men are to proud for such work.



I prefer realist. A racist wants to put his race above others on a international scale, whereas I more nod and acknowledge racial differences as well as cultural differences, and have a non-bollocks view on how the different human groups co-exist (or fail at it).




Partly that.

Partly, however, I dare say there is now a "black peoples job" category in Sweden. Cleaners as an example, bus driver is another job that changes drastically demographically.

It kind of such having to work as cleaner.

It sucks even harder working as cleaner with you as the only white person on the job, surrounded by blacks and arab women.

I just call it as I see it, and that's what I see in Sweden today. Heck, it's what I see in Europe all over.



Yeah, alternatively you didn't try very hard understing what I was saying.



And why are you still referencing skin melanin content as though it were a relevant to character, intelligence, etc.?

You want to ding certain cultures for a value set that creates antiquated or counterproductive behaviors and mind-sets, then have at it. A person's cultural upbringing can have profound influences on their subsequent behavior. "Race" isn't relevant.

Who exactly were the Jannisaries...hint, they were seldom Turks in terms of "race."

Ever read "Out of America?" You can get a good look at just how an American of African descent fits in with most African cultures.

How about entertainment? Is Mathers "un-authentic" cause he isn't an African-American from the "hood?" Or maybe, just maybe, the cultural imprint of the 8-mile district supersedes skin color?

[Beskar]

Most 'black' people I see here are doctors and the toliet cleaner is 'white' (polish).
Does that mean that being a medical Doctor is a 'black' persons job, and toilet cleaning is 'white' ?

I never understood how this racism works, it is like they completely miss out socio-economic factors and think getting a suntan makes you dumber.Naturally, low-skill labour tends to be more present in poorer segments of the population because those jobs are not paid well, so they are poor. Working manual labour in the sun will make your skin darker than someone working in an office.

Before you say 'What is this about Sun-tans?', then do some reading about the East. It is the same trope that existed within 'white' populations too, but with the advent of 'black' slavery, its meaning changed in some areas. It is just that some people are ignorant of its roots.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I have a totally different experience to Kadagar when it comes to immigrants, because the demographics in the two places where I have lived (Scotland and Northern Ireland) are evidently very different from Sweden.

I've never seen a non-white cleaner in all my time at school or at work. Or a non-white bus driver. The people I see doing the lower-end jobs are always white. Go to a council estate and it will probably be 100% white. I see very few non-white people in general.

The handful of blacks, Arabs, Asians etc that I see tend to be well-off looking business people, that you would only see much in the commercial parts of the city centre.

So if I was just to go off this evidence, I would have to conclude that blacks, Arabs etc are the master race and whites are just poor untermenschen.

[Brenus]

Guys, if you read or watch the 3 Musketeers, or the Count of Monte Cristo, the news is the author is black. His father, the General Dumas, was black and a slave during his first years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas-Alexandre_Dumas

So, the profession or the capacities has nothing to do with the melamine, but as Dumas' father proved it, as to do with the family environment and opportunities.
http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/features/blackeuro/dumasfather.html

[Husar]

I have no idea how you could read that out of what I have written. Last time I was in Berlin all the toilet attenders were black, has this changed much lately?

I've never been to Berlin but I think I've also seen white toilet cleaners here in Essen and elsewhere. However, being a toilet cleaner does not make one stupid per default and neither do a few black people being toilet cleaners mean that all black people only qualify as toilet cleaners.

[Beskar]

I have a totally different experience to Kadagar when it comes to immigrants, because the demographics in the two places where I have lived (Scotland and Northern Ireland) are evidently very different from Sweden.

I have been to Gothenburg, Lund and Copenhagen and I never saw a single minority. The bus drivers were all 'white', even the cleaners at Liseberg were 'white'. I did see something different though, a large percentage of blonde haired people. Perhaps it is different in Stockholm, as everyone mocked the capital like we do here and said "No no, you don't want to visit Stockholm".

Have to remember, the both of us are in the 'North'. Kadagar's experience in Stockholm might be closer related to London.

[Viking]

I prefer realist. A racist wants to put his race above others on a international scale, whereas I more nod and acknowledge racial differences as well as cultural differences, and have a non-bollocks view on how the different human groups co-exist (or fail at it).

One thing is to recognise the current state of affairs, quite another thing is to assume that it will continue being that way and that it has always been that way.

[HoreTore]

Ah, good ol' racial realism (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racial_realism)....

[Kadagar_AV]

Uh... a lot of people seem to have read me wrong:

I am NOT advocating that a job is a black persons job. Me personally do not have any ideas of what melanin formula should have which and what job.


Again: I am simply stating that what PVC hinted, at... That we have imported a new underclass.

I have also stated that it sucks for people ethnically from that country to be tossed in with that bunch of people (arabs and blacks) as society now, if not before, look down on those jobs.


GEEZ, give me a break here, and start reading what I actually write instead of putting words in my mouth.

I don't give a rats *** if its right or wrong to have black people and arab women doing all the ****** work... I am simply stating that those ethnic groups are the ones who get those jobs.

Rhyf live in a place with not enough of them around, trust me, would there be more brownies around you would see the same ethnic split on jobs.

It's the white flight syndrome in extreme, white people absolutely RUN away from a job that is mainly held by brownies, from my experience.


Heck, in sweden it got to the extreme where a friend of mine got actively told of to apply for a job, as that job was meant for Africans.

I just call it as I see it, and what I see is ****** up.



Oh, and about the rocket-scientist-immigrants-now-facing-manual-labour... Let's just say most Somali or Afghan immigrants aint exactly rocket scientists. Nor well educated.

Heck, nor even educated, like, at all.

The best educated Somalis or Afghans have like a year or so of Quaran school, where they mainly get taught to beat their women senseless.

Quite a lot of them are analphabets, and the majority have, like, grade 3 education or so. That's the men of course, the women are quite often seen as pack animals.

Let's also remember that education in Somalia does not live up to western standards, so even those few who get a higher education is basically = a moron compared to western standards.

I dare anyone to prove that wrong with legit sources.

http://www.unicef.org/somalia/education_56.html

[HoreTore]

The best educated Somalis or Afghans have like a year or so of Quaran school, where they mainly get taught to beat their women senseless.

Unsurprisingly, this is wrong (http://www.imdi.no/no/Fakta-og-statistikk/Fakta-og-statistikk/Utdanning/).


I dare anyone to prove that wrong with legit sources.

You require sources, since you've brought a grand total of.....

Zero sources and nothing but your own prejudices?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

And why are you still referencing skin melanin content as though it were a relevant to character, intelligence, etc.?

Maybe my brain just works more like Kad's (could be genetic) but from where I'm sitting he's always talked about groups and perceptions, internal and external.

Kadagar has no time for non-Germanic cultures, to be sure, but his point for the last page or so has been about "blacks" as a group.

I have been to London fairly often and, yes, the bus drivers, ticketers on the Underground, the cleaners etc. ARE first-generation black immigrants, often from Africa rather than former colonies. They are, as Kad says, developing into a distinct social strata separate from the white working class.

People imported to work for next to nothing, crap jobs, crap hours, taking all the crap. It's like a modern-day form of Serfdom, enough to get by but never enough to escape.

[Husar]

And does that say more about the blacks or about the whites putting them into that place?
If they are refugees for non-economic reasons, a quiet job as a toilet cleaner in London may actually be preferable for them than whatever would happen to them in the country they come from.

And where does this idea come from to import an underclass of serfs? The multicultural leftists who keep asking for lower wages for everyone?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Maybe my brain just works more like Kad's (could be genetic) but from where I'm sitting he's always talked about groups and perceptions, internal and external.

Kadagar has no time for non-Germanic cultures, to be sure, but his point for the last page or so has been about "blacks" as a group.

I have been to London fairly often and, yes, the bus drivers, ticketers on the Underground, the cleaners etc. ARE first-generation black immigrants, often from Africa rather than former colonies. They are, as Kad says, developing into a distinct social strata separate from the white working class.

People imported to work for next to nothing, crap jobs, crap hours, taking all the crap. It's like a modern-day form of Serfdom, enough to get by but never enough to escape.

My problem is he just tosses it off with the label "blacks" or "black jobs." That kind of commentary all too easily trends towards stereotyping.

You, in three sentences, addressed the socio-cultural issues and spotlighted the potential downside of a co-culture developing in this fashion. If he'd done it that way, I would not have griped -- THAT kind of commentary leads people to think and evaluate.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Maybe my brain just works more like Kad's (could be genetic) but from where I'm sitting he's always talked about groups and perceptions, internal and external.

Kadagar has no time for non-Germanic cultures, to be sure, but his point for the last page or so has been about "blacks" as a group.

I have been to London fairly often and, yes, the bus drivers, ticketers on the Underground, the cleaners etc. ARE first-generation black immigrants, often from Africa rather than former colonies. They are, as Kad says, developing into a distinct social strata separate from the white working class.

People imported to work for next to nothing, crap jobs, crap hours, taking all the crap. It's like a modern-day form of Serfdom, enough to get by but never enough to escape.

I can agree with that when you put it that way, but I think the big difference between you and Kad is that he is not so sympathetic towards blacks in general.


Rhyf live in a place with not enough of them around, trust me, would there be more brownies around you would see the same ethnic split on jobs.

The problem is you are taking a demographic phenomenon that perhaps exists in the major financial/industrial urban centres, and trying to make sweeping generalisations across times and peoples based on that, even when they don't hold true. You can't call something a "black person job" just because black people tend to do it in Stockholm or London.

[Kadagar_AV]

I can agree with that when you put it that way, but I think the big difference between you and Kad is that he is not so sympathetic towards blacks in general.



The problem is you are taking a demographic phenomenon that perhaps exists in the major financial/industrial urban centres, and trying to make sweeping generalisations across times and peoples based on that, even when they don't hold true. You can't call something a "black person job" just because black people tend to do it in Stockholm or London.

I can be sympathetic toward black people. I really think we in the west should help build up Africa from scratch, as an example.



About "black peoples job", I'm not saying toilet cleaning is a job only for black people and everywhere. I am saying that in areas with lots of immigration of black people, they tend to trend towards certain jobs.

And when a job has gotten somewhere around 20% filled with blacks, all the white people get another job where they can be surrounded more with white people.

I just call it as I see it, I put no personal feelings into it.

But yeah, we are definitely creating a new under class, and we in Europe seem to do our best to overburden our wellfare system enough for them to crash at any day now.

A shame, really.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I can be sympathetic toward black people. I really think we in the west should help build up Africa from scratch, as an example.

Well after the mess we made last time I wouldn't be so confident about another attempt. Before we entered the scene Africa has some of the most impressive empires of the ancient/medieval world. I recall Mansa Musa of Mali fielding hundred of thousands of troops including heavy cavalry and he was said to be the wealthiest individual ever. Plus, China is already rebuilding Africa anyway.


About "black peoples job", I'm not saying toilet cleaning is a job only for black people and everywhere. I am saying that in areas with lots of immigration of black people, they tend to trend towards certain jobs.

And when a job has gotten somewhere around 20% filled with blacks, all the white people get another job where they can be surrounded more with white people.

I just call it as I see it, I put no personal feelings into it.

Well considering their lack of education (coming from the Third World and all), it is not surprising that black people do low-level jobs.

Although I'll grant there may be something in what you say about white people leaving a type of job once immigrants start doing it. But again, any link with race is most likely only tangential. That trend could probably be best explained by changes in the work environment, for example a boss abusing his employees, because if they are immigrants he knows he can get away with it. Or the social stigma of doing what is regarded as a "black person's job". There may be more basic human reasons for it as well, eg not being able to talk much with your co-workers if they don't speak your language.

I just don't see why you keep evoking racial language surrounding the issue when there's no reason to believe that race is at the heart of the matter.

[Kadagar_AV]

Well after the mess we made last time I wouldn't be so confident about another attempt. Before we entered the scene Africa has some of the most impressive empires of the ancient/medieval world. I recall Mansa Musa of Mali fielding hundred of thousands of troops including heavy cavalry and he was said to be the wealthiest individual ever. Plus, China is already rebuilding Africa anyway.



Well considering their lack of education (coming from the Third World and all), it is not surprising that black people do low-level jobs.

Although I'll grant there may be something in what you say about white people leaving a type of job once immigrants start doing it. But again, any link with race is most likely only tangential. That trend could probably be best explained by changes in the work environment, for example a boss abusing his employees, because if they are immigrants he knows he can get away with it. Or the social stigma of doing what is regarded as a "black person's job". There may be more basic human reasons for it as well, eg not being able to talk much with your co-workers if they don't speak your language.

I just don't see why you keep evoking racial language surrounding the issue when there's no reason to believe that race is at the heart of the matter.

The bolded parts answer the underlined part, doesn't it? So it's ok for you to talk about black and white people, but not for me? You kind of confirmed exactly what I have posted here, so what are you arguing against really?

[Rhyfelwyr]

The bolded parts answer the underlined part, doesn't it? So it's ok for you to talk about black and white people, but not for me? You kind of confirmed exactly what I have posted here, so what are you arguing against really?

So you are saying that when you have casually referred to these jobs as "black peoples jobs", you were in fact not suggesting that these are rightfully black peoples jobs (in the sense that black people and low-level jobs are somehow inherently suited for each other), but rather, you were making some deft commentary on social perceptions?

I am a little bit dubious of that given your track record. If somebody who frequently arques for "racial realism" and says that blacks have low IQs and that this explains the situation in Africa, then if that person starts talking about "black peoples jobs", what conclusions do you think I am going to come to? Would it be unfair of me to do so?

It's like you are trying to make edgy comments but then retreating when probed about it. I liked you better when you were just a good old fashioned honest, upstanding racist. You've changed, man.

[Kadagar_AV]

So you are saying that when you have casually referred to these jobs as "black peoples jobs", you were in fact not suggesting that these are rightfully black peoples jobs (in the sense that black people and low-level jobs are somehow inherently suited for each other), but rather, you were making some deft commentary on social perceptions?

I am a little bit dubious of that given your track record. If somebody who frequently arques for "racial realism" and says that blacks have low IQs and that this explains the situation in Africa, then if that person starts talking about "black peoples jobs", what conclusions do you think I am going to come to? Would it be unfair of me to do so?

It's like you are trying to make edgy comments but then retreating when probed about it. I liked you better when you were just a good old fashioned honest, upstanding racist. You've changed, man.

Re-read what I have written in this thread. I thought I had made it perfectly clear that the "black peoples job" was about perception.

This thread isn't about racial realism or anything like it, it's about a failed welfare system and work system. I thus tried to be on topic.

We can discuss WHY blacks stand out when it comes to other topics too, of course, but this probably isn't the right place or time... I for one know that I would never like to have a job if it was filled with black people and arabs... I have noticed that the extremely vast majority of white people agree with me, in practise if not openly.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

My problem is he just tosses it off with the label "blacks" or "black jobs." That kind of commentary all too easily trends towards stereotyping.

You, in three sentences, addressed the socio-cultural issues and spotlighted the potential downside of a co-culture developing in this fashion. If he'd done it that way, I would not have griped -- THAT kind of commentary leads people to think and evaluate.

Kad sounds like my Dad two drinks in - I assume Kad has been drinking - I don't believe he posts sober often.

Anyway - I got it, so he must be making some sense.

Blacks and IQ tests are also an interesting topic - and this is where Kad and I part company somewhat, because I see correlation there but not necessarily causation. Conversely, people who say there's "no difference" between different racial groups have never seen Usain Bolt.

It's also worth pointing out that IQ tests were designed for white people, by white people, against the backdrop of a white education system. We know that early education of toddlers etc has a profound impact on later development - so it's virtually impossible to test for a "stupid gene" between groups who are sufficiently insular culturally that they can be identified as genetically distinct.

Going back to Papa for a moment - he once told me that it went "Chinese, Japanese, Europeans, Arabs, Blacks". He wasn't totally clear on the last two - but having travelled the world and seen these people in their home ports, quite literally, he was disgusted by Africans in particular. You can argue for historic cultural abuses etc., but here we are now, this is the reality we inhabit and it's one where, across Europe and the US, Africans and Afro-Caribbeans devalue education as a "white man's game".

Personally, I think it's cultural - but that's hardly better.

[Kadagar_AV]

Kad sounds like my Dad two drinks in - I assume Kad has been drinking - I don't believe he posts sober often.

Anyway - I got it, so he must be making some sense.

Blacks and IQ tests are also an interesting topic - and this is where Kad and I part company somewhat, because I see correlation there but not necessarily causation. Conversely, people who say there's "no difference" between different racial groups have never seen Usain Bolt.

It's also worth pointing out that IQ tests were designed for white people, by white people, against the backdrop of a white education system. We know that early education of toddlers etc has a profound impact on later development - so it's virtually impossible to test for a "stupid gene" between groups who are sufficiently insular culturally that they can be identified as genetically distinct.

Going back to Papa for a moment - he once told me that it went "Chinese, Japanese, Europeans, Arabs, Blacks". He wasn't totally clear on the last two - but having travelled the world and seen these people in their home ports, quite literally, he was disgusted by Africans in particular. You can argue for historic cultural abuses etc., but here we are now, this is the reality we inhabit and it's one where, across Europe and the US, Africans and Afro-Caribbeans devalue education as a "white man's game".

Personally, I think it's cultural - but that's hardly better.

I post sober!! *occasionally*

You are right that we haven't found a "stupid gene", we have however found that excellent students often share some successful genes when it comes to learning... We have also seen what races, or ethnic groups, have them and to what extent. This line of research is hard to criticize, and it has showed the exact results that would have been expected. The spread more or less equals the spread on IQ tests...

So so much for them being biased.

Also, black USAnian students are closer to Africans in results than white Americans, so there is some weight to the nature over nurture argument... But of course, both nature and nurture plays in.

As to your last thing about you thinking it's cultural... Remember that cultural tendencies can have, and have, a direct impact on the genetics at times. IE, a culture who allows inbreeding will show detrimental results over time compared to a culture that doesn't.

Guess what cultures are into cousin hide-the-willy-fun...



Kudos for reading what I write instead of jumping on some PC bandwagon where you get your knickers in a twist over words put in my mouth... I wish more members here would have the same open mindedness.

[HoreTore]

This line of research is hard to criticize

lolwut?

Every single one of these "studies" have been picked apart, laying bare their flawed methodologies, cherry picked sources and other calling cards of pseudoscience.

There absolutely is no scientific consensus saying what you believe it does, heck there isn't even enough research done to draw hard conclusions in either direction.

The Bell Curve has been chopped up and dismissed as nonsense, while Richard Lynn has been properly put in the same category of cranks as Andrew Wakefield. Only white power groups pay attention to him nowadays. Oh, and that parapsychologist (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Parapsychologist)you sourced in an earlier thread was hilarious, and a good example of the type of cranks who pushes these sorts of ideas.

[Kadagar_AV]

Hore, haven't you noticed yet that I don't reply to your arguments? Heck, I don't even read your posts.

I quite frankly don't give a **** about what you think, feel, or write. So stop following me around like some bitch in heat, would you so mind?




If any other members feel like discussing this topic I am of course up for it.

[Tuuvi]

lolwut?

Every single one of these "studies" have been picked apart, laying bare their flawed methodologies, cherry picked sources and other calling cards of pseudoscience.

There absolutely is no scientific consensus saying what you believe it does, heck there isn't even enough research done to draw hard conclusions in either direction.

The Bell Curve has been chopped up and dismissed as nonsense, while Richard Lynn has been properly put in the same category of cranks as Andrew Wakefield. Only white power groups pay attention to him nowadays. Oh, and that parapsychologist you sourced in an earlier thread was hilarious, and a good example of the type of cranks who pushes these sorts of ideas.

Anytime a scientist or other academic argues that there are no differences between races, their arguments can automatically be dismissed because they are just being politically correct. Good scientists are the ones who know how to think for themselves and go against the mainstream.

If you want to know if a source is credible or not, there's no need to check facts or evaluate the arguments. Just see how the author feels about global warming, evolution and human biodiversity. If he or she knows global warming is a hoax, that life was created 5,000 years ago, and that there are real differences between the races, chances are the author is a credible scientist.

[HoreTore]

Hore, haven't you noticed yet that I don't reply to your arguments?

Good, that means I can point out those of your ridiculous errors I wish, without having to deal with page after page of brain-dead attempts to back up your errors.

As for the actual consensus on race and iq, have some APA (http://www.apa.org/research/action/intelligence-testing.aspx). Needless to say, they* are unimpressed by your conclusions.


*and by "they", I am of course referring to the world's number one institution on this field.

[Kralizec]

I have a totally different experience to Kadagar when it comes to immigrants, because the demographics in the two places where I have lived (Scotland and Northern Ireland) are evidently very different from Sweden.

I've never seen a non-white cleaner in all my time at school or at work. Or a non-white bus driver. The people I see doing the lower-end jobs are always white. Go to a council estate and it will probably be 100% white. I see very few non-white people in general.

The handful of blacks, Arabs, Asians etc that I see tend to be well-off looking business people, that you would only see much in the commercial parts of the city centre.

So if I was just to go off this evidence, I would have to conclude that blacks, Arabs etc are the master race and whites are just poor untermenschen.

Same here. In the area where I grew up, there's plenty of poverty (for first world standards) and juvenile delinquents - almost all of whom are white. And ironicly, the PVV (i.e. Geert Wilders) is a popular party among those people. Maybe they're afraid of the competition or something.

[Kadagar_AV]

Hore, still writing to me? I saw you quote me. What part of "don't follow me like some bitch in heat" did you misread?



Tuuvi, You seem to gather quite a lot of fields under one roof there... It is of course a scientists job to question things, but some moderation is in order.

Either you are trolling, or I am quite worried about you mate.

[HoreTore]

Hore, still writing to me? I saw you quote me. What part of "don't follow me like some bitch in heat" did you misread

Report your grievances to the proper authorities (http://nexua.org/niji/butthurt-form/), and they will surely take the proper action.

[Kralizec]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=768h3Tz4Qik

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As to your last thing about you thinking it's cultural... Remember that cultural tendencies can have, and have, a direct impact on the genetics at times. IE, a culture who allows inbreeding will show detrimental results over time compared to a culture that doesn't.

Well, in the UK, poor white boys now underperform poor black kids, even in the same school. That's apparently due to them indulging in "yoof" culture and the whole "school is run by the MAN" crap.

Correlation vs Causation - black boys perform poorly at school and share genetic markers - does not mean those markers are responsible for them choosing to be morons - because a lot of this is application.

Compare to actual Africans in Africa - or first-generation immigrant children from Africa. They are much more successful in the UK than the second or third generation immigrants.

[/quote]Kudos for reading what I write instead of jumping on some PC bandwagon where you get your knickers in a twist over words put in my mouth... I wish more members here would have the same open mindedness.[/QUOTE]

I read most people's posts here - even HoreTore's and Beskar's!

[Tuuvi]

Tuuvi, You seem to gather quite a lot of fields under one roof there... It is of course a scientists job to question things, but some moderation is in order.

Either you are trolling, or I am quite worried about you mate.

I was trolling, but I had a point I was trying to make. To me it seems like this is how people who believe in fringe theories decide what sources of information to trust. If a source confirms their beliefs then it is considered a trustworthy source, but the scientific consensus which contradicts their beliefs is dismissed as just "political correctness" or a "conspiracy" or what have you.

Maybe my memory is off but I remember you stated in a religion thread once that you trust in science above all else. However whenever someone tries to point out to you that the scientific consensus is that there are no biological human races, and thus no genetically determined differences between Blacks, Arabs, and others, you just dismiss it as political correctness, and that frustrates me a bit.

To back up my statement about the scientific consensus on race, here is the statement on biological aspects of race (http://www.physanth.org/association/position-statements/biological-aspects-of-race/) from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

[Strike For The South]

Can we define "races" please? Every couple of months we have this arguement and simply take race as something concrete and resolute. But the way "blacks" and "Africa" are being thrown around here shows we are simply painting the "other" with a broad brush. It's insulting to an area larger than Europe to be treated as such a monolith.

I don't believe in all this 19th century racial hokum. It's simply another boogeyman continental Europe can sink its teeth into. I will, however, say this. I am firm proponent of the superiority of an Anglo cultural tradition that stretches back as far as the property rights of pre Norman England or as recently as Fairfax and Cromwell.

Some "cultures" are best left to the trash heap of history. The German penchant for autocracy, The French fetish for tyrannical freedom, Russian barbarism, and the Irish and general are things best to be avoided for the sake of good government. Likewise an upper class with no sense of noblesse oblige and a lower class who has been deprived of all it's dignity.

I blame a lot of things for this (at least from an American perspective). The marginalization of mainline Protestantism in favor of Evangelicalism and Catholicism has led to a worship of worldly prosperity and a desire to be led by a strongman. This bleeds into the class warfare where the ultra rich become deified for what basically amounts (past a certain point) to luck. Identity politics eschews comprise and piecemeal solutions in favor of unworkable ideological purity.

And here we are blaming the browns. Sad.

[Husar]

*I guess I just have a problem with the idea that there's really an anglo-tradition at all.

Your humbleness is just more proof for the inherent superiority of the anglo master race. :bow:

[Kadagar_AV]

Poor whites blame immigrants for the fact that they have crappy jobs. Then, when immigrants come and replace them (which of course does occasionally happen in the course of the economy, ignorant rhetoric aside) they blame them for that too.

The only thing important here is the sense of the "other," and how it is being cultivated and by whom. Immigration policy is a magnet for the worst crazies.

White people blame immigration more than the immigrants, from what I have seen. "We shouldn't accept this many" is a far, FAR, more common thing to hear than "I blame the black people".

Me, I'm somewhere in between. I dislike the amount of immigration and the politics, but I also think that the majority of people from some ethnic groups don't really do their best to fit in nor advance the society further.


I was trolling, but I had a point I was trying to make. To me it seems like this is how people who believe in fringe theories decide what sources of information to trust. If a source confirms their beliefs then it is considered a trustworthy source, but the scientific consensus which contradicts their beliefs is dismissed as just "political correctness" or a "conspiracy" or what have you.

Maybe my memory is off but I remember you stated in a religion thread once that you trust in science above all else. However whenever someone tries to point out to you that the scientific consensus is that there are no biological human races, and thus no genetically determined differences between Blacks, Arabs, and others, you just dismiss it as political correctness, and that frustrates me a bit.

To back up my statement about the scientific consensus on race, here is the statement on biological aspects of race (http://www.physanth.org/association/position-statements/biological-aspects-of-race/) from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

Fair point, how do you read your own source there?

point 2 in your own source: 2. Biological differences between human beings reflect both hereditary factors and the influence of natural and social environments. In most cases, these differences are due to the interaction of both. The degree to which environment or heredity affects any particular trait varies greatly.

point 4: There are obvious physical differences between populations living in different geographic areas of the world. Some of these differences are strongly inherited and others, such as body size and shape, are strongly influenced by nutrition, way of life, and other aspects of the environment. Genetic differences between populations commonly consist of differences in the frequencies of all inherited traits, including those that are environmentally malleable

Yadda yadda...

I never said we have clear cut races, less intelligent members on this board might have read it so though.

I have attacked certain ethnicities and cultures over my time on these boards. I don't think I ever talked about a white master race or any such hogwash.

To accept differences in humans based on genetics, ethnicity and culture does not = racism.

I posted somewhere on these boards a study about what groups of people have what genes to excel as students, as an example.

It is of course important to be open to science, heck, that's why I like to read on the subject (I find it interesting). The science world acknowledge more ethnic differences than you seem to believe.

Discovery channel ran a program on it some time ago, with Morgan Freeman as narrator. Was quite interesting, and the view they showed there mirrored my own.

In short: Yes there are differences but let's not go to war over it, mmmmkay?



And here we are blaming the browns. Sad.

Indian people are brown, ever seen me attack them? it's a little more complex than that.

[Greyblades]

*I guess I just have a problem with the idea that there's really an anglo-tradition at all.

How so?

[Papewaio]

So I think KAV wants a higher bar set for the standard of immigrants.

He probably would chuck at the worst of the worst including the white ones if somewhere else would take them.

[HoreTore]

I posted somewhere on these boards a study about what groups of people have what genes to excel as students, as an example.

Written by a parapsychologist. A wonderful source. And for the record, it wasn't a study, either.


Discovery channel ran a program on it some time ago, with Morgan Freeman as narrator. Was quite interesting, and the view they showed there mirrored my own.

Was that on after the show about the guy who drinks his own pee? Yet another brilliant source, well done.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Can we define "races" please? Every couple of months we have this arguement and simply take race as something concrete and resolute. But the way "blacks" and "Africa" are being thrown around here shows we are simply painting the "other" with a broad brush. It's insulting to an area larger than Europe to be treated as such a monolith.

With relation to Europe we're talking about a specific class of socio-economic immigrant. With relation to Africa itself we're talking about a continent generally similar enough as the "the West" or at least "Western Europe", and can be grouped together in the same way.


I don't believe in all this 19th century racial hokum. It's simply another boogeyman continental Europe can sink its teeth into. I will, however, say this. I am firm proponent of the superiority of an Anglo cultural tradition that stretches back as far as the property rights of pre Norman England or as recently as Fairfax and Cromwell.

Some "cultures" are best left to the trash heap of history. The German penchant for autocracy, The French fetish for tyrannical freedom, Russian barbarism, and the Irish and general are things best to be avoided for the sake of good government. Likewise an upper class with no sense of noblesse oblige and a lower class who has been deprived of all it's dignity.

I blame a lot of things for this (at least from an American perspective). The marginalization of mainline Protestantism in favor of Evangelicalism and Catholicism has led to a worship of worldly prosperity and a desire to be led by a strongman. This bleeds into the class warfare where the ultra rich become deified for what basically amounts (past a certain point) to luck. Identity politics eschews comprise and piecemeal solutions in favor of unworkable ideological purity.

And here we are blaming the browns. Sad.

So you blame the French rather than the "browns".

How on earth is that better?

[Kadagar_AV]

Hore,

*sigh*

Again, stop pestering me. You want to make a fan club, or what?

I will explain it again: I don't give a rats *** what you think or write, and will not reply to any points you make. So you might as well not bother.

But then again, it seems like you really do act like a bitch in heat with me as the only dog around, so I guess I can see it as purely amusing.







Everyone else: I would welcome a discussion on the topic, but preferably in some other thread. The discussion on genetic differences is an interesting one, although of course of less direct value than a discussion on culture.

There have come quite a few interesting sources the last ten years or so, don't know if everyone is kept up with it.

[Kralizec]

I don't believe in all this 19th century racial hokum. It's simply another boogeyman continental Europe can sink its teeth into. I will, however, say this. I am firm proponent of the superiority of an Anglo cultural tradition that stretches back as far as the property rights of pre Norman England or as recently as Fairfax and Cromwell.

Locke is a second-tier philosopher who’s more famous than he should be because he happened to speak English. In all fairness, he deserves at least a footnote or two in any book about society and philosophy.


Some "cultures" are best left to the trash heap of history. The German penchant for autocracy, The French fetish for tyrannical freedom, Russian barbarism, and the Irish and general are things best to be avoided for the sake of good government. Likewise an upper class with no sense of noblesse oblige and a lower class who has been deprived of all it's dignity.

I was going to write something to defend the French and the Germans from this, but then realized I couldn’t think of anything in defense of the Irish or Russians…so never mind.

[HoreTore]

With relation to Europe we're talking about a specific class of socio-economic immigrant. With relation to Africa itself we're talking about a continent generally similar enough as the "the West" or at least "Western Europe", and can be grouped together in the same way.

How is Ghana similar to Egypt? How is CAR similar to Namibia?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

How is Ghana similar to Egypt? How is CAR similar to Namibia?

How is Italy similar to Norway?

[Kadagar_AV]

How is Italy similar to Norway?

I always separate sub-Sahara Africans from the northern part, who are more middle eastern in their ways.

From that perspective it's rather fair to clump them together much like we do "Europeans" or even "the West".

Hmmm, is it racist to talk about "the West" when we just mean white people not from eastern europe.

[HoreTore]

How is Italy similar to Norway?

Never said it was?

Still, we have, at least, had contact with each other for more than a century. CAR and Namibia has not. Further, our influential national figures(Grieg, Ibsen, Bjørnson, Michelsen, etc) went to the same schools and academies as the influential national figures of Italy. They read the same books, discussed the same ideas. Ghanian and Egyptian figures? Not so much.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Never said it was?

Still, we have, at least, had contact with each other for more than a century. CAR and Namibia has not.

And yet the countries are in the same economic bracket and share similar economic, social, and political problems.

[HoreTore]

And yet the countries are in the same economic bracket and share similar economic, social, and political problems.

What? No? How?

1. What are the common economic problems CAR and Namibia have?
2. What are the common political problems CAR and Namibia have?
3. What are the common social problems CAR and Namibia have?

EDIT: to give you an idea of the economic differences, the difference in GDP between CAR and Namibia is much, much greater than the difference between Norway and Namibia.

(Namibia is 11 times greater than CAR, while Norway is 6 times greater than Namibia)

[Husar]

What? No? How?

1. What are the common economic problems CAR and Namibia have?
2. What are the common political problems CAR and Namibia have?
3. What are the common social problems CAR and Namibia have?

EDIT: to give you an idea of the economic differences, the difference in GPP between CAR and Namibia is much, much greater than the difference between Norway and Namibia.

(Namibia is 11 times greater than CAR, while Norway is 6 times greater than Namibia)

What's a GPP and where are the numbers from?

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)) shows me the GDP and there Norway is around 500,000 Mio. $, Namibia around 12,000 Mio. $ and CAR around 2,000 Mio. $.

To me 11 x 2k is 22k and 6 x 12k is 72k. But even then only the relative difference between Norway and Namibia would be smaller, not the absolute difference.
Of course you may be talking about general physical preparedness or graph partitioning problems per country instead of the GDP, but at the moment your numbers seem a bit confusing.

[HoreTore]

What's a GPP and where are the numbers from?

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)) shows me the GDP and there Norway is around 500,000 Mio. $, Namibia around 12,000 Mio. $ and CAR around 2,000 Mio. $.

To me 11 x 2k is 22k and 6 x 12k is 72k. But even then only the relative difference between Norway and Namibia would be smaller, not the absolute difference.
Of course you may be talking about general physical preparedness or graph partitioning problems per country instead of the GDP, but at the moment your numbers seem a bit confusing.

Typo aside, GDP makes little sense unless counted per capita. Wiki is bs, CIA is what it's at(unless searching for WMD stats). The factbook gives 55.400 per capita for Norway (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/no.html), 8.200 for Namibia (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/wa.html)and 700 for CAR (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ct.html).

55400/8200≈6
8200/700≈11

(all rounded down)

[Husar]

Typo aside, GDP makes little sense unless counted per capita.

Depends on what you want to say, if you don't say per capita, I assume you do not mean per capita.


Wiki is bs, CIA is what it's at(unless searching for WMD stats). The factbook gives 55.400 per capita for Norway (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/no.html), 8.200 for Namibia (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/wa.html)and 700 for CAR (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ct.html).

55400/8200≈6
8200/700≈11

(all rounded down)

That makes perfect sense, especially the part that wiki is bs given that wiki offers the values from the CIA World Factbook and the overall GDP listed ion Wiki is the same as on the CIA site for all three countries you linked. :dizzy2:

As for expressing yourself clearly, Namibia is not closer to Norway as you claimed, it's closer to the CAR in absolute terms. I would not use the relative differences for classification here. Those numbers very much allow the claim that Namibia and the CAR are in the same economic bracket while Norway is in a different bracket. Depending on how narrow one defines the brackets of course. If you take brackets of 10k then Namibia and the CAR are in the first bracket while Norway is in the sixth bracket and thus quite far away from both. And neither is a country in the first bracket closer to one in the sixth bracket than to another country in the first bracket.

[HoreTore]

If you wish to express general economic weight, you would be spot on. If you wish to express general level of wealth, you need to go per capita to make sense of it.


The more general point, however, was that there's an ocean between the wealth level of Namibia and the wealth level of CAR. The former is well on its way to become an industrial nation, with exports and some high tech industry. The latter is almost exclusively subsistence farming.


EDIT: doing brackets can be useful, but you need to define useful brackets first. I am rather unsure that lumping 700 usd and 8200 usd together makes sense.

EDIT2: Further, bringing up gdp comparisons was just a general means of giving a brief oversight. It was not meant to represent any kind of absolute truth, as comparing two countries with wildly different gdp's have limited use. This is due to countries with a low gdp having a massive informal sector(like kids looking after their elderly parents, instead of sending them to a home), which is usually not counted in statistics. Still, the size of the informal sector is itself an indicator of general levels of wealth.

EDIT3: To sum things up, CAR is the Africa from the 80's Live Aid videos, while Namibia is the "Highest predicted growth countries in the world"-Africa. (http://www.ventures-africa.com/2014/02/angola-namibia-nigeria-fastest-growing-countries-in-africa-report/)

[HoreTore]

Well, think about it. He's positing that, relative to other "traditions," there is an anglo tradition that surpasses all the rest in productivity, governability (is that a word? It is now!) political awareness, and all sorts of other factors that go into good government (or rather a good society capable of being governed). All based on a relatively short period of success from the British Empire onward (I don't know why you would say the old Anglo-Saxons were so special relative to other cultures, even contemporary ones). Its a very contrived thing that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Prosperity can certainly cause a society to develop certain habits, and those habits have certain characteristics to be sure, but there are no race bonuses!

It takes less than a generation to change the entire character of a society, and that's the uncomfortable truth that people don't like when you start talking about things like Ukraine, or anywhere in the Middle East. There is a common misconception that peoples and cultures, nations and countries, all have these permanent abstract characteristics like some kind of 4x game. That's just not so. What you see is what you get, and when peoples' fundamental needs are screwed with things change fast. This is also why the Marshal Plan was so, so important after WW2.

:book2:

For further examples, compare post-ww2 Britain with Maggie, and Roosevelt with Reagan.

[Papewaio]

Compare Germany post WWI & post WWII
or Germany when the wall fell. It wasn't like the standard of living was identical in East and West Germany.

[Husar]

Compare Germany post WWI & post WWII
or Germany when the wall fell. It wasn't like the standard of living was identical in East and West Germany.

It was much better in the East, people had more free time and more money to spend on playing with their kids and their lead-coloured toys.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, think about it. He's positing that, relative to other "traditions," there is an anglo tradition that surpasses all the rest in productivity, governability (is that a word? It is now!) political awareness, and all sorts of other factors that go into good government (or rather a good society capable of being governed). All based on a relatively short period of success from the British Empire onward (I don't know why you would say the old Anglo-Saxons were so special relative to other cultures, even contemporary ones). Its a very contrived thing that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Prosperity can certainly cause a society to develop certain habits, and those habits have certain characteristics to be sure, but there are no race bonuses!

It takes less than a generation to change the entire character of a society, and that's the uncomfortable truth that people don't like when you start talking about things like Ukraine, or anywhere in the Middle East. There is a common misconception that peoples and cultures, nations and countries, all have these permanent abstract characteristics like some kind of 4x game. That's just not so. What you see is what you get, and when peoples' fundamental needs are screwed with things change fast. This is also why the Marshal Plan was so, so important after WW2.

:book2:
The problem is that cultures do not tend to up end themselves as you describe. FDR and Reagan are still bound by a view of democratic government that is Lockean in nature. There has always been cycles of liberalism and conservatism in the us back to when presidents fought to create and dismantle the national banks. This does not mean that Anglo Saxon tradition is a meaningless phrase. On the contrary, that these cycles exist and are stable is why such tradition could be declared inherently better.

[Kralizec]

It was much better in the East, people had more free time and more money to spend on playing with their kids and their lead-coloured toys.

It's true, I've even heard that East Germany had to build large concrete walls and lots of fences, to keep themselves from being overrun by illegal immigrants looking for the easy life.

[Papewaio]

It was much better in the East, people had more free time and more money to spend on playing with their kids and their lead-coloured toys.

And your neighbors always looked out for you, the Stasi were so thoughtful.