If Your Parents Work, You Will Read - Spongers Will Watch TV

11th March 2014

Why is this? I'd say it costs absolutely nothing to read, so it isn't cost. Are those who work better parents?

Please discuss.


England is suffering from a "worrying cultural divide" with poor adults much less likely to read books than their richer neighbours, a report says.

The country is divided into two nations, those who read weekly or daily, and those who prefer TV and DVDs, it says.

It finds key links between an individual's social background and how likely they are to read.

The research, from charity Booktrust, is based on a survey of 1,500 adults.

The study found that on average, the richer someone's background, the more likely they are to read.

Meanwhile a higher proportion of people from poorer backgrounds admitted they never read.

Younger people, men and those with lower levels of qualifications are also less likely to be readers.

'Get bored'

More than one in four (27%) of adults from the poorest socio-economic backgrounds said they never read books themselves, compared with just 13% of those from the richest socio-economic backgrounds.

And more than six in 10 (62%) of those from the richest backgrounds said they read daily or weekly, compared with four in 10 (42%) of those from the poorest.

"More frequent book readers tend to live in areas of lower deprivation with fewer children living in poverty, while respondents who never read books tend to live in areas of higher deprivation and more children living in poverty," the study says.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26515836

What I will say is this:

We have had 20 years where all public money has been spent on those who don't work - nationally and internationally.

What has it done? Made them lazier.

The Conservative Party wanted to reduce that money to spur them on but didn't have the guts to go through with it.

You're certainly making a very shaky correlation, Andy. Being wealthy doesn't mean you work any more than not being wealthy doesn't mean you don't work.

I know this will be a difficult one for some but try not to shy away guys.

If we're to improve the lives of all children we need to talk about the big issues.

Join me, let's make the world a better place.

BigAndy9 wrote:I know this will be a difficult one for some but try not to shy away guys.

If we're to improve the lives of all children we need to talk about the big issues.

Join me, let's make the world a better place.

Yeah, but wealth depends upon a lot more than just whether you have a job or not.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:I know this will be a difficult one for some but try not to shy away guys.

If we're to improve the lives of all children we need to talk about the big issues.

Join me, let's make the world a better place.

Yeah, but wealth depends upon a lot more than just whether you have a job or not.

Now books are free as we have libraries. You can't say the lack of funds creates this condition. Unfortunately scum begets scum. Labour encouraged the underclass not help eradicate it.

recanter wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Yeah, but wealth depends upon a lot more than just whether you have a job or not.

Now books are free as we have libraries. You can't say the lack of funds creates this condition. Unfortunately scum begets scum. Labour encouraged the underclass not help eradicate it.

Now that I see as a huge problem.

And I certainly wouldn't say the Conservatives have done much to help.

I think they wanted to, but didn't.

Yet you still haven't proven that having a job puts you in the wealthy/reading class and that not having a job puts you in the poor/watching TV class.

Plenty of poor people have jobs.

Plenty of rich people don't.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yet you still haven't proven that having a job puts you in the wealthy/reading class and that not having a job puts you in the poor/watching TV class.

Plenty of poor people have jobs.

Plenty of rich people don't.

Excellent point Ben. I think it's an important one indeed.

So, if a couple of chavs are brought up by lazy families who scrounge, they meet and breed 4 kids while sitting at home watching TV...


...they then win the National Lottery when their kids are around 4 - 10 years old - will their kids still grow up to be scum? I think they would.


I think we need to say this:

As a whole, if your parents work hard - and in most modern societies, those who work are classed (they bloody well should be) as better off than those who don't - you will be raised better than if your parents scrounge.

BigAndy9 also wants to add that if a hard working couple were bringing up 2 great little kiddies and then were in a horrible car accident and ended up in wheelchairs, they'd still bring up 2 great little kiddies.

Yeah, so basically there goes your entire premise down the toilet. Reading or not reading is obviously a function of how you were raised than of how much money your parents had.

I used to tutor kids and I can tell you that plenty of their parents had money and parked in front of the TV all night. Society overall is reading less and less and it's a phenomenon that holds true regardless of whether you get benefits.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, so basically there goes your entire premise down the toilet. Reading or not reading is obviously a function of how you were raised than of how much money your parents had.

I used to tutor kids and I can tell you that plenty of their parents had money and parked in front of the TV all night. Society overall is reading less and less and it's a phenomenon that holds true regardless of whether you get benefits.

So Ben - in the OP I ask a few questions then invite a discussion.

Later on you ask my opinion, I give it and it kind of agrees with your opinion. And you say "your entire premise goes down the toilet".

Ben, do you have an opinion of me which you have formed without actually knowing anything about me?

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, so basically there goes your entire premise down the toilet. Reading or not reading is obviously a function of how you were raised than of how much money your parents had.

I used to tutor kids and I can tell you that plenty of their parents had money and parked in front of the TV all night. Society overall is reading less and less and it's a phenomenon that holds true regardless of whether you get benefits.

So Ben - in the OP I ask a few questions then invite a discussion.

Later on you ask my opinion, I give it and it kind of agrees with your opinion.  And you say "your entire premise goes down the toilet".

Ben, do you have an opinion of me which you have formed without actually knowing anything about me?

All I know about you is what I see here, and from what I've seen here, you will find any excuse to label someone who is not white, native British and employed as inferior to yourself and come up with all sorts of pseudo-scientific reasons to justify it. Oh, and you blow things way out of proportion, like comparing the presence of anti-Western Muslims in England to the Battle of Britain.

(Also, you don't write informative headings and you don't put news in the right category.)

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


So Ben - in the OP I ask a few questions then invite a discussion.

Later on you ask my opinion, I give it and it kind of agrees with your opinion.  And you say "your entire premise goes down the toilet".

Ben, do you have an opinion of me which you have formed without actually knowing anything about me?

All I know about you is what I see here, and from what I've seen here, you will find any excuse to label someone who is not white, native British and employed as inferior to yourself and come up with all sorts of pseudo-scientific reasons to justify it. Oh, and you blow things way out of proportion, like comparing the presence of anti-Western Muslims in England to the Battle of Britain.

(Also, you don't write informative headings and you don't put news in the right category.)

I will mainly post about non-British criminals and lazy people.

Everybody is inferior to myself, therefore I'm not racist, homophobic, anything else.

Yes, i'll use my imagination with titles - isn't that good writing?

Sorry if I get them in the wrong category - doesn't everything revolve around the UK (and it's white, English citizens) - that's a joke - stick it up your bum!   

There are families literally on the breadline with excellent caring parents. As you say Ben you can have wealthy parents who don't care. However statistically middle class parents are generally considerably more active in encouraging learning. Statistically trailer trash are almost exclusively producing more generations of Trailer trash.

My point is rather than liberating these people and creating social mobility Labour created even more trailer trash underclass. There is considerable evidence to show social mobility diminished under Labour.

What we need to do is take some of the money away from benefits seekers - we need to make working "work".

Being in work has so many benefits - less likely to go in to crime, less likely to split up - work is everything!

And that's why I changed the title from "rich", or "wealthy" to "work"!

The story is rubbish. I know plenty of working parents whose kids read and plenty who don't. I can't say I know too many scroungers though tbh but clearly on the side of working parents it is neither here nor there.

Eilzel wrote:The story is rubbish. I know plenty of working parents whose kids read and plenty who don't. I can't say I know too many scroungers though tbh but clearly on the side of working parents it is neither here nor there.

Well it was a survey of 1,500 adults, so maybe a bigger survey is required.

I would also say, from what I've seen over the past 20 years or so, I'd have to agree with the survey's findings.

recanter wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Yeah, but wealth depends upon a lot more than just whether you have a job or not.

Now books are free as we have libraries. You can't say the lack of funds creates this condition. Unfortunately scum begets scum. Labour encouraged the underclass not help eradicate it.

We did, until this lot got in.

UK lost more than 200 libraries in 2012
Amid a continuing fight to keep public libraries open, figures show an increase in the rate of closure

The fight to keep libraries open has dominated the headlines but the UK has quietly lost more than 200 branches over the past year, according to a detailed national survey.

The rate of library closures has increased, reveals the annual report from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy: 146 branches closed between 2010 and 2011, with the number stepping up to 201 this year. The UK now has 4,265 libraries, compared with 4,612 two years ago, and the number of closures is likely to grow. Campaigners in Newcastle are currently fighting plans to close 10 out of the city's 18 libraries, with Billy Elliot playwright Lee Hall calling on the council to protect the city's heritage last month.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/dec/10/uk-lost-200-libraries-2012

Library campaigners predict 1,000 closures by 2016
The Library Campaign says closures amounting to a quarter of UK libraries have been hidden by 'patchwork nature' of local government decisions

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/12/library-campaigners-1000-closures-2016

Come on Sassy, second hand books cost nothing now anyway.

Are you trying to tell me people can't afford books?

My kids can change a book every day in school for god's sake.

As I've said - it has nothing to do with money, it's parenting, and parent's who don't have to get up at 7, get dressed and have a purpose in life also don't give a damn about their kids!

BigAndy9 wrote:Come on Sassy, second hand books cost nothing now anyway.

Are you trying to tell me people can't afford books?

My kids can change a book every day in school for god's sake.

As I've said - it has nothing to do with money, it's parenting, and parent's who don't have to get up at 7, get dressed and have a purpose in life also don't give a damn about their kids!

Rubbish.   When you have people having to use food banks because they can't feed their children, they can't even afford 50p for a book.   Now, if they went out and spent £5 a week on books, you would say that they can't afford luxuries, what the hell are they doing.   Yep, there are loads of people in such dire straights that they can't afford books, even second hand, they are a luxury.   Schools have cut back on their books as well.   My eldest daught, when she was in infant school, had read every book in the infant library, was allowed to use the junior one and read all those as well while still in the infants.   Luckily, we had a very good library, because I wouldn't have been able to keep up with her bookwise even though we weren't badly off.

The closures of our libraries is a disgrace, but when councils have to chose between closing old peoples homes, keeping street lights on etc etc, libraries are seen as a luxury unfortunately.   I think they are an essential, but then, I couldn't live without books.

Sassy, when I say books cost nothing - I really do mean nothing!

Sassy wrote:
UK lost more than 200 libraries in 2012
Amid a continuing fight to keep public libraries open, figures show an increase in the rate of closure

The fight to keep libraries open has dominated the headlines but the UK has quietly lost more than 200 branches over the past year, according to a detailed national survey.

The rate of library closures has increased, reveals the annual report from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy: 146 branches closed between 2010 and 2011, with the number stepping up to 201 this year. The UK now has 4,265 libraries, compared with 4,612 two years ago, and the number of closures is likely to grow. Campaigners in Newcastle are currently fighting plans to close 10 out of the city's 18 libraries, with Billy Elliot playwright Lee Hall calling on the council to protect the city's heritage last month.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/dec/10/uk-lost-200-libraries-2012



Library campaigners predict 1,000 closures by 2016
The Library Campaign says closures amounting to a quarter of UK libraries have been hidden by 'patchwork nature' of local government decisions

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/12/library-campaigners-1000-closures-2016

From the horse's mouth:

■In the year ending September 2013, 15% of adults had visited a library website in the last 12 months, a significant increase from 9% in 2005/6
■40 new libraries opened in 2012 and 2013
■There are 33,808 library volunteers, an increase of 113% since 2008-9, and 44% since 2011-12 when there were 23,397

http://readingagency.org.uk/news/library-facts004/

Eilzel wrote:The story is rubbish. I know plenty of working parents whose kids read and plenty who don't. I can't say I know too many scroungers though tbh but clearly on the side of working parents it is neither here nor there.

I agree Eilzel,  yet another piece of drivel  



...I know a song for Any about that!....the drivel inside , the drivel inside,every single one of us the drivel inside   


Inxs would be proud of Andy !! 

Tess. wrote:

Sassy wrote:
UK lost more than 200 libraries in 2012
Amid a continuing fight to keep public libraries open, figures show an increase in the rate of closure

The fight to keep libraries open has dominated the headlines but the UK has quietly lost more than 200 branches over the past year, according to a detailed national survey.

The rate of library closures has increased, reveals the annual report from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy: 146 branches closed between 2010 and 2011, with the number stepping up to 201 this year. The UK now has 4,265 libraries, compared with 4,612 two years ago, and the number of closures is likely to grow. Campaigners in Newcastle are currently fighting plans to close 10 out of the city's 18 libraries, with Billy Elliot playwright Lee Hall calling on the council to protect the city's heritage last month.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/dec/10/uk-lost-200-libraries-2012



Library campaigners predict 1,000 closures by 2016
The Library Campaign says closures amounting to a quarter of UK libraries have been hidden by 'patchwork nature' of local government decisions

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/12/library-campaigners-1000-closures-2016

From the horse's mouth:

■In the year ending September 2013, 15% of adults had visited a library website in the last 12 months, a significant increase from 9% in 2005/6
■40 new libraries opened in 2012 and 2013
■There are 33,808 library volunteers, an increase of 113% since 2008-9, and 44% since 2011-12 when there were 23,397

http://readingagency.org.uk/news/library-facts004/

It's good that resources are going where they are needed most.

well not everyone reads at the rate I do...i read all 3 books of the lord of the rings in 4hrs 20 mins...
so your average paperback is hardly long term entertainment.

if I'm reading to find information i can scan pages looking for relevent keywords at the rate of 1 page every 2 seconds
note this isnt "reading" as such..but searching for specific words and phrases

if I'm looking for something specific in a book i read perhaps a couple of years back (like in technical books) i can scan a page a second...

how? i dunno...i think its more to do with pattern recognition than reading per se, and being a bit longsighted has its compensations, since the field of view that is in focus is larger in long sighted people than others, so more of the page is clearly visible at once.
But it might also help that I was taught to read by my parents at 4 years old...BEFORE i went to school.

my sons were also taught by me at that age...and by six both had an understanding of algebra, by nine BOTH could do calculus (I concentrated on calculus because thats far more stimulating than geometry etc. though they also knew the basics of that too...)

And heres the point, the OP is MORE to do with your social status than anything else...if you are the kid of scroats then theres little hope for you unfortunately, unless and untill you are old enough to pull yourself out of the mess...

Agreed Victor, I was always a fast reader but was taught speed reading (more or less what you describe) for research.   It means I'm quite happy to read a book in a couple of hours.   My eldest bought herself Wind in the Willows (hardback) with her birthday money for her third birthday and read it from cover to cover.   If reading is part of family life, you automatically take it up.   If there are no books in the house, the less likely you are to do so, and the further down the scale you are, the more books are seen as a luxury or just for school, and the less likely you are to be around them.

There are always exceptions to that of course.

not all scroats are poor sassy, though there is some truth in what you say....

Very true victor, and that's what I'm saying.

A chav will breed chavs.

aye, and i know of plenty of "rich" chavs too....Its an attitude rather than a social position thing

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

All I know about you is what I see here, and from what I've seen here, you will find any excuse to label someone who is not white, native British and employed as inferior to yourself and come up with all sorts of pseudo-scientific reasons to justify it. Oh, and you blow things way out of proportion, like comparing the presence of anti-Western Muslims in England to the Battle of Britain.

(Also, you don't write informative headings and you don't put news in the right category.)

I will mainly post about non-British criminals and lazy people.

Everybody is inferior to myself, therefore I'm not racist, homophobic, anything else.

Yes, i'll use my imagination with titles - isn't that good writing?

Sorry if I get them in the wrong category - doesn't everything revolve around the UK (and it's white, English citizens) - that's a joke - stick it up your bum!    

@ben
if you imagine BA as Basil Faulty it is really funny. and makes a lot more sense     

BigAndy9 wrote:Very true victor, and that's what I'm saying.

A chav will breed chavs.

true, we call them bogans but they're the same thing. I think Australia's issue with them is limited because we have enough immigrants to balance out the naturally lazy and incompetent Anglo. All those hard working Industrious Asian and Indian peoples really carry the load (and pay the taxes) and enable the dole bludging Anglo Bogan to live the off the public purse.

You see like 4th generation Anglo dole bludgers (scroungers as you call them)        it's Bred into them, I say it's something about the racial heritage that just make incompetence and laziness an innate attribute of the Anglo.

Spot on!   

trust veya to make this a racist theme
and trust sassy to agree with him.....  

victorismyhero wrote:trust veya to make this a racist theme
and trust sassy to agree with him.....  

I'm sorry, it was just sooooooooo accurate where BA is concerned!

BigAndy9 wrote:Very true victor, and that's what I'm saying.

A chav will breed chavs.

Boys need to be taught how to tie a tie, chavs need to be shown how to wear a hoody............... I do not let the said item into the house BTW.

victorismyhero wrote:trust veya to make this a racist theme
and trust sassy to agree with him.....  

Hey Mum's Anglo so bit hard to be racist on half of myself        And if the Shoe Fits wear it...             


You don't see me calling for them to be exterminated or deported back to England where they came from       
But it is pretty clear like the killings and mugging in London this is almost exclusive to ONE RACE.           


What? you don't think YOU should be held responsible for the Actions of Some of your Race???       but that is the standards the RW applies to others?

victorismyhero wrote:trust veya to make this a racist theme
and trust sassy to agree with him.....  

If you imagine me as John Clarke.....

recanter wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Yeah, but wealth depends upon a lot more than just whether you have a job or not.

Now books are free as we have libraries. You can't say the lack of funds creates this condition. Unfortunately scum begets scum. Labour encouraged the underclass not help eradicate it.

  

IS THIS Drinky back again !

Or Puerile, or "My_IQ=56_Kevin", or H_f, or one of their equally-demented fascist cohorts from the last 3 months ?

Misbegotten Tory_fascist 'DumbFucks' one and all..   

BigAndy9 wrote:.................

Being in work has so many benefits - less likely to go in to crime, less likely to split up - work is everything!

And that's why I changed the title from "rich", or "wealthy" to "work"!

  

AND the first thing you have to do is provide the JOBS to put those unemployed back into Andy !!!

IF ONLY your lords and masters would come onboard..

Show us the JOBS first, Andy !    

BigAndy9 wrote:
Sassy, when I say books cost nothing - I really do mean nothing!

 

DON'T even need to visit a library these days, to find "free" books...

Over 42,000 titles are currently available through The Gutenberg Project..

http://www.gutenberg.org/

gerber wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:
Very true victor, and that's what I'm saying.

A chav will breed chavs.

Boys need to be taught how to tie a tie, chavs need to be shown how to wear a hoody...............  I do not let the said item into the house BTW.

  

I have quite a few jumpers (sweaters), sloppyjoes (sweat tops), hiking and ski jackets, and casual jackets...

Many of which are fitted with hoods of various descriptions, styles and sizes..

And none of which gerber would let through the front door !

Discrimination, I says !  ::hndbg:: 

Joy Division wrote:

Eilzel wrote:
The story is rubbish. I know plenty of working parents whose kids read and plenty who don't. I can't say I know too many scroungers though tbh but clearly on the side of working parents it is neither here nor there.

I agree Eilzel,  yet another piece of drivel  

...I know a song for Any about that!....the drivel inside , the drivel inside,every single one of us the drivel inside   

Inxs would be proud of Andy !! 

 

Yep...

As always, there are no correlations to back up Andy's fairytales...

I too know of well-off people who don't ever read whenever they can avoid it..

And poor people who go out of there way to encourage reading, arts, games and sports.

As others have said before ~ It's all a state of mind ! And not wealth..  :-:bravo:-: 

Lone Wolf wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:
Sassy, when I say books cost nothing - I really do mean nothing!

 

DON'T even need to visit a library these days, to find "free" books...

Over 42,000 titles are currently available through The Gutenberg Project..

http://www.gutenberg.org/

Well pointed out LW.