Today's news from London

by Tommy Monk Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:18 pm

First topic message reminder :

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/gang-member-who-donned-clown-mask-while-waving-shotgun-during-east-london-police-chase-faces-jail-a4053316.html

A loaded shotgun was found in the car, while cartridges were discovered on the ground nearby. Forensic testing showed it had not been fired on the night of July 26 last year.

Akinsoji was on trial alongside Nathaniel Lewis, 23, Darnell Joseph-Newill, 21, and Troy Ifill, 22, who were also said to be associated with east London gangs, who had formed an alliance under the name "Northside Newham".

Today's news from London - Page 6 Mugshots

Today's news from London - Page 6 Mugshots

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-47058948

Worcester acid attack accused sent 'nailed it!' text

More about this story here...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6619069/Father-organised-ACID-attack-three-year-old-son-Home-Bargains.html

Father 'organised ACID attack on his three-year-old son in Home Bargains to ruin wife's divorce bid by making her appear an unfit mother - after he asked imam whether it was Islamic to murder her and their three children'

Today's news from London - Page 6 8847434-6619069-image-m-2_1548178677579

Today's news from London - Page 6 8847434-6619069-image-m-2_1548178677579

A court sketch today showing (left to right) Norbert Pulko, Saied Hussini, the father of the boy (who cannot be identified), Martina Badiova, Adam Cech, Jabar Paktia and Jan Dudi

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47045490

Three teenagers have been arrested after a 17-year-old boy was stabbed to death in a street attack in north London.

The victim, who died at the scene on Caledonian Road, Islington, on Tuesday, has been named as Nedim Bilgin.

Two male suspects, aged 16 and 17, were arrested nearby on suspicion of murder, and an 18-year-old man was arrested at an address in Islington, the Met Police said.

All three remain in custody.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-47061701

Gang 'smuggled immigrants in dinghy' into Kent

Thomas Mason, 36, Hoa Thi Nguyen, 49, and Chi Tan Huynh, 41...

And...

Nazmi Velia, 32, of Park Street Lane, St Albans
Egert Kajaci, 35, of Turner Drive, Oxford
Erald Gapi, 27, of Marine Tower, Deptford
Wayne Lee, 46, of Grasmere Close, Watford

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-47054348

Croydon 'zombie knife' sentence overturned

Today's news from London - Page 6 _105396339_gardner-1

Today's news from London - Page 6 _105396339_gardner-1

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47059020

Park Lane doorman murder accused appear in court

Haroon Akram, 25, Adham Khalil, 20, and Adham Elshalakany, 23, appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court earlier.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:05 am

Lord Foul wrote: Of course he;s feckin advantaged you gert dope....thats why he's richer...jesus it aint rocket science, either he's inherited OR he had a better chance than me at some time or whatever.....and, without a huge dollop of sheer luck there aint no way I'm gonna catch him up, well thats tough for me....and good luck to him.....I dont spend my life consumed by jealousy of someone who has more than me.....there are more important things than "things" nope I aint ever going to have his "advantage" whatever it was (and tbf i'm not sure i would necessarily want it anyway.....)

his sole redeeming feature is that he's an otherwise decent sort of chap, and I'm gradually converting him into the jed clampit MkII of the area (me being MkI)

nothing to do with hate...crimes of avarice and greed, spurred on be jealousy are exactly that....... crimes...and require no understanding

Oh dear the poor over privilged now acting like an immature child, still cannot see, what he is wrong over

You dont spend your life consumed, as you live in the country and have never faced the situations that others have come to grow up with. Never faced prejudice for your skin colour, nor being male, poor etc.

Its what is so comical about your reply, that you went to great lenghs to explain what a priviliged life you have led

Though I was hoping you would actually answer my questions or at least have a basic understanding of them

I mean you are the person that wants to nuke cities, because of failing to understandinf the big problem of inequality of wealth

So lets further dumb this down for you

How and why did many people go from never wanting to murder Jews, to then murdering them and doing so with a passion?

How did say for example in Russia the Bolshiviks take power?

How about the French Revolution?

Do you want me to continue to bring up history to really make you look very embarressed on this?

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:13 am

Thor wrote:
Lord Foul wrote: Of course he;s feckin advantaged you gert dope....thats why he's richer...jesus it aint rocket science, either he's inherited OR he had a better chance than me at some time or whatever.....and, without a huge dollop of sheer luck there aint no way I'm gonna catch him up, well thats tough for me....and good luck to him.....I dont spend my life consumed by jealousy of someone who has more than me.....there are more important things than "things" nope I aint ever going to have his "advantage" whatever it was (and tbf i'm not sure i would necessarily want it anyway.....)

his sole redeeming feature is that he's an otherwise decent sort of chap, and I'm gradually converting him into the jed clampit MkII of the area (me being MkI)

nothing to do with hate...crimes of avarice and greed, spurred on be jealousy are exactly that....... crimes...and require no understanding

Oh dear the poor over privilged now acting like an immature child, still cannot see, what he is wrong over

You dont spend your life consumed, as you live in the country and have never faced the situations that others have come to grow up with. Never faced prejudice for your skin colour, nor being male, poor etc.

Its what is so comical about your reply, that you went to great lenghs to explain what a priviliged life you have led

Though I was hoping you would actually answer my questions or at least have a basic understanding of them

I mean you are the person that wants to nuke cities, because of failing to understandinf the big problem of inequality of wealth

So lets further dumb this down for you

How and why did many people go from never wanting to murder Jews, to then murdering them and doing so with a passion?

How did say for example in Russia the Bolshiviks take power?

How about the French Revolution?

Do you want me to continue to bring up history to really make you look stupid on this?

Perhaps if the French Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks (and their armies of supporters) had simply been told "jealousy will get you nowhere, just work harder!" then they would have realised they were just being silly little plebs and gone back home Laughing

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:15 am

Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:

Oh dear the poor over privilged now acting like an immature child, still cannot see, what he is wrong over

You dont spend your life consumed, as you live in the country and have never faced the situations that others have come to grow up with. Never faced prejudice for your skin colour, nor being male, poor etc.

Its what is so comical about your reply, that you went to great lenghs to explain what a priviliged life you have led

Though I was hoping you would actually answer my questions or at least have a basic understanding of them

I mean you are the person that wants to nuke cities, because of failing to understandinf the big problem of inequality of wealth

So lets further dumb this down for you

How and why did many people go from never wanting to murder Jews, to then murdering them and doing so with a passion?

How did say for example in Russia the Bolshiviks take power?

How about the French Revolution?

Do you want me to continue to bring up history to really make you look stupid on this?

Perhaps if the French Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks (and their armies of supporters) had simply been told "jealousy will get you nowhere, just work harder!" then they would have realised they were just being silly little plebs and gone back home

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:15 pm

Dodge and les are apologists for evil...!

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:25 pm

Its a load of bull shit i'll tell you ...comparing the boilsheviks and french revolutionaries to the criminal gangs in our cities

most of thge historical types bolsheviks etc lived in grinding poverty where they didnt know where their next meal was coming from,their children starving to death, often had no homes etc etc ...THATS REAL poverty

most of these criminal gang types now are concerned where their next bmw is coming from or the next and latest i phone whatever
to compare the two is idiocy. Its all very well to fight for change when your survival is a stake, its totally another when all thats driving you is jealousy and greed.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:35 pm

Why go to work for £50 a day, when you can sell drugs and earn £500 a day...!?

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:39 pm

Lord Foul wrote:Its a load of bull shit i'll tell you ...comparing the boilsheviks and french revolutionaries to the criminal gangs in our cities

most of thge historical types bolsheviks etc lived in grinding poverty where they didnt know where their next meal was coming from,their children starving to death, often had no homes etc etc ...THATS REAL poverty

most of these criminal gang types now are concerned where their next bmw is coming from or the next and latest i phone whatever
to compare the two is idiocy. Its all very well to fight for change when your survival is a stake, its totally another when all thats driving you is jealousy and greed.

But according to you they were jealous, right?

You see how its you presenting the ridiculous counter argument here

I can as stated give you plenty of examples, but you will continue to shout bullshit it seems

Most gangs in london follow an ideology, as well as the lure of easy money. So they pray on recuiting kids within the system of relative poverty that are clearly vunerable to get out of the rat trap they often find themselves in. So with gangs its the sense of being a part of something. In fact there is a number of lures and reasons why. Your simplistic idiot view, based around jealousy, is simple bollocks. Its how many gangs have operated from time immoral. Including the many Italian, irish, Jewish, Black, Hispanic etc gangs have acted within history. All of them drew people from the poorest areas within cities, that had high levels of inequality. It was not jealousy or greed that drove them in many cases. Only those who were at the top, was greed the ultimate factor

So you have not a clue what you are talking about

You see your clueless view to, punish, punish, punish, fails to get to the root cause of crime and the lure to them

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:45 pm

Recruited by other blacks and Muslim criminal scum bags...

Why don't they just go and do a hard day's work for a living...!?

Plenty of others seem to manage it...!

These choose not to do that because they are criminal scum bags... they are not victims...!

So stop making excuses!!!

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:48 pm

So what if people join a gang, for protection Tommy? If you are living in a community with high gang activity. Its a no brainer some with live in daily fear and seek protection by joining a gang.

There is 6 main risk factors for why there is higher gang activity within cities and again around inequality levels.

Lack of jobs for youth
Poverty compounded by social isolation
Domestic violence
Negative peer networks
Lack of parental supervision
Early academic failure and lack of school attachment

I dont make excuses, i simple use my brain, (which you are incapable of it seems) by researching and understanding gang activity and through its history

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:50 pm

More excuses...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:53 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

More excuses...

Its actually called having an understanding of the problem, which has been basically the same factors for centuries and no matter the country.

So the only excuses are actually coming from your failure to learn something basic about gangs

Here is the known reasons why people join gangs, in order that we might educate that simple mind of yours

A Sense of "Family" - Young people might feel that they don't receive enough support or attention at home. They may be trying to escape a negative home life, or may be looking for a father figure. Gangs often make promises to give unconditional support, and to become the "family" they never had.

Need for food or money - Gangs may present themselves as a means of survival to youth who lack basic essentials such as food, clothing and shelter. More and more, gang members use their affiliation to make a profit through illegal activities, such as selling drugs and auto theft.

Desire for protection - Communities with high gang activity often see young people join a gang just to survive. It is often easier to join the gang than to remain vulnerable and unprotected in their neighborhoods.

Peer Pressure - Kids and teens face constant pressure to fit in, and they may not have the support they need to avoid the pressures to join a gang. Peer pressure can come in the form of intimidation, coercion, a dare, harassment, friendly persuasion, or repetitious begging.

Family history or tradition - Families can have gang involvement spanning over multiple generations. This is one of the toughest forms of pressure to escape, as the gang lifestyle is deeply rooted in family traditions and values.

Excitement - Some young people get a rush out of defying authority, or committing crimes. They may be attracted to the gang lifestyle, as it lives outside the law and participates in many illicit behaviors.

To Appear Cool - Gangs have mastered the art of manipulation to attract potential recruits. They wear the latest fashion trends, throw the hottest parties, and drive the coolest cars. They can appear to have the 'perfect' lifestyle to a young kid who's looking to fit in somewhere. The offer an image of "cool" that has been glorified by the media and entertainment industry.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:56 pm

More excuses...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:02 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

More excuses...

I guess this is the new Default Tommybot

Laughing

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:04 pm

Thor wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

More excuses...

I guess this is the new Default Tommybot

2.0

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:07 pm

While you two twats keep making your excuses... people keep on being murdered...

But... you just carry on...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:09 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:

I guess this is the new Default Tommybot

2.0

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:09 pm

Lord Foul wrote:Its a load of bull shit i'll tell you ...comparing the boilsheviks and french revolutionaries to the criminal gangs in our cities

most of thge historical types bolsheviks etc lived in grinding poverty where they didnt know where their next meal was coming from,their children starving to death, often had no homes etc etc ...THATS REAL poverty

most of these criminal gang types now are concerned where their next bmw is coming from or the next and latest i phone whatever
to compare the two is idiocy. Its all very well to fight for change when your survival is a stake, its totally another when all thats driving you is jealousy and greed.

The conditions for the Bolsheviks were better than of the French Revolutionaries. The conditions of the poor today are indeed much better, by far, than post-Tsar/pre-Soviet Russia. Incomprably so.

The point is not to say they are the same, but to point out that economic inequality cannot and should not be dismissed lightly. And if I'm right, income inequality is growing in the UK, and will be most obvious in London - unsurprisingly a place where crime is particularly high.

So 1789, 1917 and 2019 are obviously not entirely comparable, but not without any comparisons either.

Do you honestly think this issue has NOTHING to do with crime rates?

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:10 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

While you two twats keep making your excuses... people keep on being murdered...

But... you just carry on...

You don't want to solve the problem.

We do.

You just want to point fingers.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:11 pm

Making excuses doesn't solve anything...

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:13 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Making excuses doesn't solve anything...

Neither does pointing fingers.

Actually addressing income inequality and improving education WOULD do something.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:14 pm

Waffle...

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:15 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Waffle...

Racist moron.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:16 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Its a load of bull shit i'll tell you ...comparing the boilsheviks and french revolutionaries to the criminal gangs in our cities

most of thge historical types bolsheviks etc lived in grinding poverty where they didnt know where their next meal was coming from,their children starving to death, often had no homes etc etc ...THATS REAL poverty

most of these criminal gang types now are concerned where their next bmw is coming from or the next and latest i phone whatever
to compare the two is idiocy. Its all very well to fight for change when your survival is a stake, its totally another when all thats driving you is jealousy and greed.

The conditions for the Bolsheviks were better than of the French Revolutionaries. The conditions of the poor today are indeed much better, by far, than post-Tsar/pre-Soviet Russia. Incomprably so.

The point is not to say they are the same, but to point out that economic inequality cannot and should not be dismissed lightly. And if I'm right, income inequality is growing in the UK, and will be most obvious in London - unsurprisingly a place where crime is particularly high.

So 1789, 1917 and 2019 are obviously not entirely comparable, but not without any comparisons either.

Do you honestly think this issue has NOTHING to do with crime rates?

Inequality explains the incongruence between two pictures of London: one of the booming centre of global finance and home to many of the world’s rich, and the other of a city with high levels of poverty and deprivation.

Income inequality is significantly greater in London than elsewhere in England. In the three years to 2015/2016, the income of someone just inside the top 10% was eight times higher than someone just inside the bottom 10% of earners, and the top 10% earned more than the bottom 50%. However, the lowest 10% of earners have seen their wages increase since 2011, while median earners and the top 10% have experienced declines.

Wealth inequality is far wider than income inequality in London. 50% of London’s wealth is earned by the richest 10% of its households, while the bottom 50% own just over 5%. And someone just inside the top 10% in terms of wealth owns 295 times more than someone just inside the bottom 10%. This trend is becoming more extreme in London, with the least wealthy 10% of people losing 32% of their wealth over the last two years, compared to a 2% drop across Great Britain. Meanwhile, the wealth of the top 10% in London has increased by 25%.

https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/topics/inequality/

Thought this would interest you mate

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:17 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Waffle...

Racist moron.

Apologist for evil...!

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:19 pm

Thor wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Its a load of bull shit i'll tell you ...comparing the boilsheviks and french revolutionaries to the criminal gangs in our cities

most of thge historical types bolsheviks etc lived in grinding poverty where they didnt know where their next meal was coming from,their children starving to death, often had no homes etc etc ...THATS REAL poverty

most of these criminal gang types now are concerned where their next bmw is coming from or the next and latest i phone whatever
to compare the two is idiocy. Its all very well to fight for change when your survival is a stake, its totally another when all thats driving you is jealousy and greed.

The conditions for the Bolsheviks were better than of the French Revolutionaries. The conditions of the poor today are indeed much better, by far, than post-Tsar/pre-Soviet Russia. Incomprably so.

The point is not to say they are the same, but to point out that economic inequality cannot and should not be dismissed lightly. And if I'm right, income inequality is growing in the UK, and will be most obvious in London - unsurprisingly a place where crime is particularly high.

So 1789, 1917 and 2019 are obviously not entirely comparable, but not without any comparisons either.

Do you honestly think this issue has NOTHING to do with crime rates?

Inequality explains the incongruence between two pictures of London: one of the booming centre of global finance and home to many of the world’s rich, and the other of a city with high levels of poverty and deprivation.

Income inequality is significantly greater in London than elsewhere in England. In the three years to 2015/2016, the income of someone just inside the top 10% was eight times higher than someone just inside the bottom 10% of earners, and the top 10% earned more than the bottom 50%. However, the lowest 10% of earners have seen their wages increase since 2011, while median earners and the top 10% have experienced declines.

Wealth inequality is far wider than income inequality in London. 50% of London’s wealth is earned by the richest 10% of its households, while the bottom 50% own just over 5%. And someone just inside the top 10% in terms of wealth owns 295 times more than someone just inside the bottom 10%. This trend is becoming more extreme in London, with the least wealthy 10% of people losing 32% of their wealth over the last two years, compared to a 2% drop across Great Britain. Meanwhile, the wealth of the top 10% in London has increased by 25%.

https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/topics/inequality/

Thought this would interest you mate

Staggering isn't it?

That some can't join the basic dots tells me education has been lacking in some areas for a while...

It can only reach so far before there is a breaking point too.

by Eilzel Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:22 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Waffle...

Racist moron.

Apologist for evil...!

Today's news from London - Page 6 Images10

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:23 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

While you two twats keep making your excuses... people keep on being murdered...

But... you just carry on...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:27 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:

Inequality explains the incongruence between two pictures of London: one of the booming centre of global finance and home to many of the world’s rich, and the other of a city with high levels of poverty and deprivation.

Income inequality is significantly greater in London than elsewhere in England. In the three years to 2015/2016, the income of someone just inside the top 10% was eight times higher than someone just inside the bottom 10% of earners, and the top 10% earned more than the bottom 50%. However, the lowest 10% of earners have seen their wages increase since 2011, while median earners and the top 10% have experienced declines.

Wealth inequality is far wider than income inequality in London. 50% of London’s wealth is earned by the richest 10% of its households, while the bottom 50% own just over 5%. And someone just inside the top 10% in terms of wealth owns 295 times more than someone just inside the bottom 10%. This trend is becoming more extreme in London, with the least wealthy 10% of people losing 32% of their wealth over the last two years, compared to a 2% drop across Great Britain. Meanwhile, the wealth of the top 10% in London has increased by 25%.

https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/topics/inequality/

Thought this would interest you mate

Staggering isn't it?

That some can't join the basic dots tells me education has been lacking in some areas for a while...

It can only reach so far before there is a breaking point too.

Indeed and by looking at what factors lead to higher levels of crime

Then the most important factor is to tackle these factors, to then help reduce the levels of crime

We already know, where there is less inequality, there is lower crime levels

Its really a no brainer to understand this and as seen some of the worst levels of inequality in history have gotten so bad. It led to revolutions.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:30 pm

The more blacks and Muslims... the more crime... because that is what many of them prefer to do rather than get up and do a hard day's work...!

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:35 pm

It is acknowledged that columnists like Afua Hirsch (Rod Liddle is wrong about black deaths, 16 January) write stuff that is a reflection of their views; what is harder to accept is when those views are informed only by intellectual or prejudicial positions. Both Hirsch and Liddle arrive at conclusions about the causes of black teenage deaths (predominantly in London) without having had adequate (or perhaps any) experience of this tragedy on the ground.

Although the majority of black boys in London achieve well in school and thereafter, a few things cannot be denied: black boys in London are massively over-represented in stabbings; black-on-black violence is significantly gang-related; gangs in London are crime-focused; the age of recruitment and grooming of young people for gang activity is dropping to primary school levels. Poverty and deprivation (of life chances and opportunity) can drive boys and young men into violent criminal activity. When male role models for these boys are neighbourhood gang elders (often replacing absent fathers) and a “gangsta” culture prevails, the boys stand little chance of escaping.

Agencies must collaborate and intervene. When they do, and if it’s done right, the success and achievement of these young people can be breathtaking. Without exception, there are no lost causes, as long as we keep them alive.

Afua Hirsch is right to focus on the self-blaming narrative that has taken hold in some sections of the black community in relation to knife crime and black-on-black violence. However, when she states “most violent crime is conducted by white people and the majority of stabbing victims in Britain are white. But as long as any black children are tragically dying on the streets, it is hugely important to debate the causes”, she buys into the same narrative.

Black-on-black violence is a myth created by a section of the law and order lobby to facilitate an acceptance by the black community of intrusive policing techniques. The causes of black-on-black knife crime are the same as those of white-on-white knife crime – but we do not speak of white-on-white violence.

Knife crime results from fear, social insecurity, and the development of a drugs-based counter-economy which fills the gaps caused by austerity. We should focus on the issue of knife crime per se and abandon the racialisation of it (not least because it is important to debate the causes whoever is the victim).

The construct of black-on-black crime was developed to allow Operation Trident a foothold in the black community. Operation Trident was initially focused on supposed Yardie gun violence– another racialised policing construct. It has been repackaged to deal with black-on-black crime – a term which implies there is something peculiarly pathological about crime within the black community.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/20/perspective-on-black-knife

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:45 pm

The guardian is a left wing wank rag...

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:39 pm

so...as ever.. the cure it seems is to throw yet MORE (non existent) money at the supposedly "underprivileged" minorities in cities..well OK as long as that money, which needs be raised SOMEWHERE is raised soley on property taxes, transport taxes and luxury taxes....WITHIN the cities affected, Because I'm damned if I can see why the shires should continue to prop up failed and failing cities via the income tax of their citizens OR via cuts to THEIR local authority funding. Why should we pay £££££££££££££s to put right the ghastly consequences of city life when our own disabled and pensioners without a car cannot get around because the dial a ride has been discontinued due to cuts to the local authority budget?

ESPECIALLY when according to that article "the majority of black boys in London achieve well in school and thereafter"

the problem my friends...is cities

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:46 pm

Lord Foul wrote:so...as ever.. the cure it seems is to throw yet MORE (non existent) money at the supposedly "underprivileged" minorities in cities..well OK as long as that money, which needs be raised SOMEWHERE is raised soley on property taxes, transport taxes and luxury taxes....WITHIN the cities affected, Because I'm damned if I can see why the shires should continue to prop up failed and failing cities via the income tax of their citizens OR via cuts to THEIR local authority funding. Why should we pay £££££££££££££s to put right the ghastly consequences of city life when our own disabled and pensioners without a car cannot get around because the dial a ride has been discontinued due to cuts to the local authority budget?

ESPECIALLY when according to that article "the majority of black boys in London achieve well in school and thereafter"

the problem my friends...is cities

And yet again we are subjected to the Cathy Newman false premise.
Where nobody made any such claim to throw money at the underprivileged

You know when someone has a poor argument, is when they make unfounded assumptions not based on anything anyone said, but what they themselves hold a poor belief in

What was rightly stated here was about helping bridge the gap on relative poverty. Being as its a very clear factor on what leads to higher crime levels.

Do you not understand, that again the problem is within the distribution of wealth inequality. Where that those in such areas, are more prone to falling into crime, than those in areas, that have less relative poverty?

Thes failed and falling cities (as you cast them) prop up the country by the way economically, by the top earners. Which of course pay for your grandchildren to have an education and access to health. Not the minisucle and pitiful amount of tax, you ever paid into the system

So how about you stop being pig headed here and recognise there is a correlation and actually offering up something sensible instead of something really dimwitted as nuking cities. As by doing that, you condemn your grand children to a very harsh future. One where they will have to continuall struggle to survive.

by Tommy Monk Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:59 pm

More dodge waffle...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:01 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

More dodge waffle...

Tommybot 2.1 version engaged Laughing

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:35 pm

more nonsense...there is NOTHING done in cities nowadays that couldnt in reality be done from out of the cities....

also...IF you are going to "bridge that ~~jealousy~~ relative poverty" thing then it stands to reason you are going to HAVE to spend ££££££s on it. either to create jobs (hmmm as if thats going to work, for the very reason tommy moots.....) or to just give em money, you know cash hand outs, which of course no-one else will get...oooo look you gonna get 50% more in your benefits cheque...OR you are going to have to say to those rich ones...OK mate...you are too rich and you are inciteing the poor to riot...we are going to cut your income 70% yep that will work ok......

Perhaps Boris' odious pollution charge could be suborned to pay these sadly deprived types a bonus....?????

and IF I'm NOT right in the above then YOU say where the "evening out and reduction of relative poverty" is going to come from

All I see is Les and didge wallowing in the usual L/W pointlessness of seeing a problem, giving it a new trendy name and ideology and demanding that something be done about it.........But having no idea WHAT to do about it.....

I mean I have no idea either. there are a few suggestions I could make, but the leftys would melt in their thousands...

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:45 pm

Lord Foul wrote:more nonsense...there is NOTHING done in cities nowadays that couldnt in reality be done from out of the cities....

also...IF you are going to "bridge that ~~jealousy~~ relative poverty" thing then it stands to reason you are going to HAVE to spend ££££££s on it. either to create jobs (hmmm as if thats going to work, for the very reason tommy moots.....) or to just give em money, you know cash hand outs, which of course no-one else will get...oooo look you gonna get 50% more in your benefits cheque...OR you are going to have to say to those rich ones...OK mate...you are too rich and you are inciteing the poor to riot...we are going to cut your income 70% yep that will work ok......

Perhaps Boris' odious pollution charge could be suborned to pay these sadly deprived types a bonus....?????

and IF I'm NOT right in the above then YOU say where the "evening out and reduction of relative poverty" is going to come from

All I see is Les and didge wallowing in the usual L/W pointlessness of seeing a problem, giving it a new trendy name and ideology and demanding that something be done about it.........But having no idea WHAT to do about it.....

I mean I have no idea either. there are a few suggestions I could make, but the leftys would melt in their thousands...

Yes that is all you see I guess, even when you fasely made claims to things we never said

Even when we presented countless evidence to rubbish your immature claims

You even claim its down to jealousy again, showing your complete ignorane on the driving factors that lead to higher crime levls and what leads people into said gangs in the first place.

Sadly people like you Victor, live in a bubble, one of a view of punishment is the cure to crime. Its this same ignorance that never looks to countries where crimes has been reduced and in countries that has tackled wealth inequality. Like the Dutch for example. Who have ended up closing more prisons, as they actually look after their people with a high living wage and good benefits

Yet you want to rant and rave like a petualant child, because you have been shown for once to be wrong

Which is a near impossibility, based on yourwealth of knowledge, which I often concede too

You are one person I respect more than most, alongside Fred. Two people I have always looked up too and always have learnt from, but you cannot even surrender the view here to you being wrong. Which you emphatically so much so on. Its made me strive even more to better educate myself and why even more I hate being at odds with either of you, as i respect you both that much

So explain to me, why The Dutch have by closing the gap of inequality in wealth, helped also dramatically reducing crime rates?

They are actually having to close prisons, due to there now being less people in custody

What does that tell you?

All I see here, is you not listening to two people you actually respect and actually have a better insight on this issue than you

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:48 pm

and you havnt even tried to answer my point

and IF I'm NOT right in the above then YOU say where the "evening out and reduction of relative poverty" is going to come from

All I see is Les and didge wallowing in the usual L/W pointlessness of seeing a problem, giving it a new trendy name and ideology and demanding that something be done about it.........But having no idea WHAT to do about it.....

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:51 pm

Lord Foul wrote:and you havnt even tried to answer my point

and IF I'm NOT right in the above then YOU say where the "evening out and reduction of relative poverty" is going to come from

All I see is Les and didge wallowing in the usual L/W pointlessness of seeing a problem, giving it a new trendy name and ideology and demanding that something be done about it.........But having no idea WHAT to do about it.....

i actually easily rubbished your argument

The dutch have been able to reduce wealth inequality

By doing so, they have also thus reduce dramatically crime levels

I would say, you are being stubborn and pig headed here

I am neither left wing or right wing, and where you never like people trying to place you into a box, stop being pathetic sterotyping me, with false accusations

I have more of an idea on this, as you are too pig headed in your ways on this and the reason

As seen, your answer to crime, is violence, with nukes it seems

Its why, your old fashioned barbarity, is in the end utterly clueless

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:07 pm

the falsity of "high living wage" is obvious

it leads to a high cost of living ...so you are back to square 1

since if you have a high imposed minimum wage (a high living wage ) then whats the point of striving UNLESS the next level is ALSO that much higher???

as in

when I was working as a chief electronics engineer (fiel) I was on roughly £25/hr inc benefits ..ie medical cover pension etc... (and that was 20 odd years ago) so waaay above the "minimum wage rate"..BUT that was fixed at a 40hr week...no overtime....we were paid "to do a job" not count hours (so effectively I could work 80 hours one week and get the time back later...but I still only got 40 x £25 for that week)

now tell me...what would be the point of me working all hours, which we did, in a subject that required immense physical skills, and a LOT of intellectual knowlege and understanding if I could earn the same per week working on an inflated minimum wage, for the same crazy hours shelf stacking in tescos????? where would be the incentive to have a constant barrage of "shit catching (my unofficial job title was "chief crap catcher" since I had to handle all the problems real and imaginary caused to extremely fragile managers by failures in the systems that we installed, each one of which (the managers) was a darling prima donna who thought the world revolved around him. Rolling Eyes

)

AND if that scenario WAS to happen and the tesco shelf stackers minimum living wage rose to such dizzy heights...or even a bit......what do you call a high living wage????...........YOU and I and everyone else would end up paying tescos more in our shopping bill...and the same in everything......and then YOU and I and everyone else would complain and demand more.....so the living wage would have to rise OR overall standards of living would have to fall.....

runaway inflation anyone?????? a sudden race to the bottom in the urge to share the misery equally?????

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:10 pm

Thor wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:and you havnt even tried to answer my point

and IF I'm NOT right in the above then YOU say where the "evening out and reduction of relative poverty" is going to come from

All I see is Les and didge wallowing in the usual L/W pointlessness of seeing a problem, giving it a new trendy name and ideology and demanding that something be done about it.........But having no idea WHAT to do about it.....

i actually easily rubbished your argument

The dutch have been able to reduce wealth inequality

By doing so, they have also thus reduce dramatically crime levels

I would say, you are being stubborn and pig headed here

I am neither left wing or right wing, and where you never like people trying to place you into a box, stop being pathetic sterotyping me, with false accusations

I have more of an idea on this, as you are too pig headed in your ways on this and the reason

As seen, your answer to crime, is violence, with nukes it seems

Its why, your old fashioned barbarity, is in the end utterly clueless

YOU still havnt said what your answer is....I suspect because you havnt actually got one.....

HOW are you going to achieve this?

by what means would YOU reduce wealth inequality????

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:14 pm

Lord Foul wrote:the falsity of "high living wage" is obvious

it leads to a high cost of living ...so you are back to square 1

since if you have a high imposed minimum wage (a high living wage ) then whats the point of striving UNLESS the next level is ALSO that much higher???

It leas to lower crime rates

So what is it to be a higher cost of living, which with a better quality of life for people and less crime

Or your way of life, that is low cost, less wages, and more crime and unhappiness

Its why your argument fell apart in your first few sentences

Again they are closing prisons in Holland, due to low crime

Its had low wealth inequality for 20 years

So the rest of your post never need to be answered as it had the intellect of of a 8 year old

Ho about you actually address the point

I think everyone here would be happy to pay more in cost, to have lower wealth inequality, lower crime rates and a better quality of life.

So I really do not care about paying more and if you do, then it shows what a tight fisted selfish bastard you really are

May I suggest you stick a lump of coal up your arse and weight a million years, by then, it maybe a diamond

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:17 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Thor wrote:

i actually easily rubbished your argument

The dutch have been able to reduce wealth inequality

By doing so, they have also thus reduce dramatically crime levels

I would say, you are being stubborn and pig headed here

I am neither left wing or right wing, and where you never like people trying to place you into a box, stop being pathetic sterotyping me, with false accusations

I have more of an idea on this, as you are too pig headed in your ways on this and the reason

As seen, your answer to crime, is violence, with nukes it seems

Its why, your old fashioned barbarity, is in the end utterly clueless

YOU still havnt said what your answer is....I suspect because you havnt actually got one.....

HOW are you going to achieve this?

by what means would YOU reduce wealth inequality????

Just as the dutch have

By increasing the living wage, better benefits for everyone for example

This will mean higher costs of living of course, but then nobody will need food banks will they, s they do now in the UK?

They will all be able to afford food

So yes I have plenty of answers

Would you like some more, or are you going to continue to be an cantankerous moaner

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:33 pm

ok, so basic economics

how does a higher cost of living work then???

surely if the wages rise then the cost of living rises......and then folks are back to square one....except that the amount of £s is higher but they are worth less in real terms (inflation)

UNLESS you are talking about SELECTIVE wage rises....in which case you are going to have to have enforced holding down of the top wages.....good luck with that....so what will happen is the the next layer down has their wages held down by legislation......and once again the "middle" gets squeezed to save the "poor" from the excesses of the top.....

I'm not that well off that I can pay fred a wage rise because sid is 10 times richer than me and 50 times richer than fred

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:42 pm

and, as a general rule you CANNOT cite Denmark and import its methods here directly......

they are a different society, with different social (as opposed to personal) values (not hugely but still different).
They started from a different point and place society wise than we are in now
and most tellingly, Sweden, which is a similar nation with similar wages and living costs is in as big a mess as us in its citys ditto for holland

and one of the biggest factors that you haven't mentioned yet ...social media and communications, which facilitates gangs immensely......dunno what you can do about that Today's news from London - Page 6 2190311264

Today's news from London - Page 6 2190311264

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:44 pm

Lord Foul wrote:ok, so basic economics

how does a higher cost of living work then???

surely if the wages rise then the cost of living rises......and then folks are back to square one....except that the amount of £s is higher but they are worth less in real terms (inflation)

UNLESS you are talking about SELECTIVE wage rises....in which case you are going to have to have enforced holding down of the top wages.....good luck with that....so what will happen is the the next layer down has their wages held down by legislation......and once again the "middle" gets squeezed to save the "poor" from the excesses of the top.....

I'm not that well off that I can pay fred a wage rise because sid is 10 times richer than me and 50 times richer than fred...all that happens is that fred doesnt actually become as rich as me....I become as poor as fred......the race to the bottom.....

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:57 pm

If a company employs a lot of people on national living wage, sure it would be great if their pay went up massively, but then the people who are earning more than that in the company will want massive pay rise too, otherwise they'd say that they're not paid what they're worth.

The best thing is to sort out housing costs - they're much too high in relation to pay.

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:11 pm

agreed Ragga , and there are a number of ways to help that problem
primarily ...give one years notice of the govts intent to seize without compensation ALL buildings suitable for habitation and land designated as building land, then make it law that ANY such that is held for more than 5 years without continuous occupation/activity will likewise be seized..... that would stop "land banking"

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 10:04 pm

Lord Foul wrote:ok, so basic economics

how does a higher cost of living work then???

surely if the wages rise then the cost of living rises......and then folks are back to square one....except that the amount of £s is higher but they are worth less in real terms (inflation)

UNLESS you are talking about SELECTIVE wage rises....in which case you are going to have to have enforced holding down of the top wages.....good luck with that....so what will happen is the the next layer down has their wages held down by legislation......and once again the "middle" gets squeezed to save the "poor" from the excesses of the top.....

I'm not that well off that I can pay fred a wage rise because sid is 10 times richer than me and 50 times richer than fred

All subjectiive bullshit

How about you actually answer the many points I made instead of engineering up nonsense?

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 10:06 pm

Lord Foul wrote:and, as a general rule you CANNOT cite Denmark and import its methods here directly......

they are a different society, with different social (as opposed to personal) values (not hugely but still different).
They started from a different point and place society wise than we are in now
and most tellingly, Sweden, which is a similar nation with similar wages and living costs is in as big a mess as us in its citys ditto for holland

and one of the biggest factors that you haven't mentioned yet ...social media and communications, which facilitates gangs immensely......dunno what you can do about that

More subjective bullshit

All I see is you actually recognizing the point made about low wealth inequality and crime, by the above, where this is a reality in Holland

by Sponsored content