My take on London's Riots

[Eagle]

Do people in China , India , Vietnam etc get benefit for doing nothing? I am not actually sure but suspect I know.

We are in direct competition with these countries.

We need of course to stop all overseas aid. Most of it is wasted by the recipient countries. Only this week the Rwanda President spending USD 12500 for one night stay in New York. We give his country GBP 80 million.
What these countries would benefit from is access to our markets for their agricultural products. The CAP makes that hard.

[sfhyouthforum]

Well it all starts at a local level. In Sydenham there are around 15,353 people living in the ward, of which around 12% are aged between 10-19. That's just over 1,840 kids. I'm not sure the breakdown in age, but say those aged between 15 and 19 are around 800, that means it would only take 800 working adults to employ them to do odd jobs each week(there are 5,527 people aged between 30-44 in Sydenham alone). Even less if you think that not all those young people are disadvantaged and need the help/cash. The younger they are the better. They learn that job means money and more importantly, they are able to earn it.
We can't easily stop our government choosing its budget, and we certainly can't stop immigration laws. But we can make a real difference in our community. As for immigrants and so on, I think this is a pointless argument. Millions of Brits emigrate to other places - http://www.byebyeblighty.com/) to work and take other peoples’ jobs, so to speak. Also what we don’t talk about is the 'choice' of companies to export services to the East to make them cheaper, because despite our savings or wealth, we all want cheap goods and services. What we don't talk about is the huge white collar crime rate and the millions it would inject monthly into our schools and infrastructure. Or the many hundreds of businesses here that earn huge profits but dodge tax by legitimate loop holes. What we hear instead is about how uncompetitive it would be to keep British people in jobs, or that if companies paid tax, they would move more than HQ out of town. Not very British if you ask me. At least the Lord of the manor had manners and believed in a certain noblesse oblige, however humiliating or patronising. While many nouveau riche live in gated communities without a single obligation to the crap that accumulates itself down the road, instead they use they wealth to buy up small pretty cottages, making it impossible for locals to afford to live in their family townships of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Cumbria...
But instead of getting on me soap box I am here to help. Like I said, £2 a month and we as a collective of organisations can help tackle these issues. It’s not more than a coffee most of us buy every morning on the way to work!

[sfhyouthforum]

[mosy]

Well it all starts at a local level. In Sydenham there are around 15,353 people living in the ward, of which around 12% are aged between 10-19. That's just over 1,840 kids. I'm not sure the breakdown in age, but say those aged between 15 and 19 are around 800, that means it would only take 800 working adults to employ them to do odd jobs each week(there are 5,527 people aged between 30-44 in Sydenham alone). ... (Clip)

sfhyouthforum: Might I ask what it is that "all starts at a local level" since policies are decided by those way up who "know what's good for us". Trying to change things at a local level is laudable provided a listening ear can be effectual and results in more than just paying lip service as in "I hear what you say...".

I read it as rather demeaning that you think that 15-19 year olds would want to do odd jobs as if they were boy scouts on bob-a-job week. Young people deserve proper jobs from which they can learn assorted skills, be it craftsmanship, a business or communicative skills and it's hard for me to see how that can be achieved with a start point of a local level. I don't pretend to have answers.

Also, I'm sure that any bob-a-jobber would be watched like a hawk. Have you ever seen the grimaces on a car owner's face when their car is being washed and possibly being scratched to death? Or someone praying that only weeds will be dug up when a garden helper might not know the difference? No-one wants to be under that sort of scrutiny and certainly not for a few pennies.

Perhaps I'm jumping the gun. What sort of odd jobs did you have in mind? Surely such should be paid for at min wage per hour or otherwise it's an insult (or cheap labour) if employed person (the employer) is relatively comfortably off? The alternative is helping those less well off and in need for little or no money. How does that get youngsters onto a job ladder though?

Whilst I understand that you are passionate in your thinking, phrases such as "While many nouveau riche live in gated communities without a single obligation to the crap that accumulates itself down the road, instead ..." I find offensive on several levels. First, all tax payers have a significant obligation. Second, it is irrelevant how anyone's wealth has been earned or perhaps received (assuming legally of course), and what does "crap that accumulates itself down the road" mean? Are you suggesting that with noblesse oblige that those with wealth should hand out tenners and ask people to clear the road so that carriages can drive through unobstructed? Or a bung to refuse collectors to remove mattresses that they're not supposed to take? Sorry but you've lost me as to your thinking. Many residents in Sydenham care about their local environment, whether they are property owners or not and whether they have Chelsea tractors or second homes elsewhere. Perhaps you should clarify what you meant and I apologise if it should have been obvious even if it wasn't to me.

[sfhyouthforum]

It depends what you are talking about. Are we talking about fixing the jobs market or are we talking about stopping young people taking part in things like looting or riots?

The former is certainly a government issue, including providing opportunities to learn a craft. The latter could be dealt with locally. Mosey you may think it demeaning at fifteen to do odd jobs but I didn't. In fact, I liked being employed to babysit, do a paper round, work in a shop. It doesn't necessarily mean that these jobs become their life chances. It means that those of us who do have resources, could as well employ young people to do small tasks, which will grow their confidence. I have worked with young people who are third generation unemployed and going straight into a course like woodwork is too far a leap. Why do they have to be bob-a-jobbers? We all have to start somewhere. And being paid low or minimum wage is not an insult, it is the beginning of learning value for money and is more than many parents can afford to give them as pocket money.

Regarding the nouveau riche - you'll have to forgive me, I was simply - again out of the post-riot debate - emulating what The Telegraph said about who is also to blame. This idea that the looters should go to prison for stealing water, and yet many who live in Kensignton and Chelsea have 'creative accountants' but this practice is simply legitimate. Is it irrelevant how wealth is earned? I don't think so. Many things emcompass being legal - for example having your company registered in Jersey or Guernsey. Doesn't make it right. You only have to pick up an issue of Private Eye to see how clearly laws favour the rich, loopholed to ensure tax dodgers are getting away with it. George Osbourne: "we will be as tough on the richest who evade tax as those who cheat on benefits' yet the law on tax evaders in Switzerland only comes into effect in 2013, as one example: 'If they move their money to one of scores of other tax havens before then, they can escape even this small bill [handing over between 19 and 34% of Swiss assets] a handy 20-month window of tax evading opportunity" (Private Eye page one, 2-15th September, issue 1296). Change from all sectors of society.

The bulk of us are sat in the middle. Doing our jobs, paying our taxes, keeping on. I don't think I was talking about residents in Sydenham handing out ten pound notes, and quite frankly, I think we are all more creative and clever in finding ways to tackle social problems. I certainly don't have all the answers. All I know is that I network many organisations who have the skills and expertise to help put on top class provision for the community and no easy way to pay for it. Giving a small donation, making charity begin at home, is a good thing. It is more like an investment in the area. As is investing your time in others less fortunate.

1. Give some time to help - reading classes with children, mentoring, volunteering in a small organisation each week.
2. Time poor? Donate £2 to the forum and we can distribute the funds.
3. Already involved in the community - then advertise what you do on our website http://www.sfhyouthforum.org.uk

[sfhyouthforum]

The other thing is if I thought Sydenham residents didn't care about their community then I would be off working full time in some big company in town instead of part time struggling to keep my £400pcm post going, working many hours each week unpaid. But before you get your violin out, grab your online banking details instead and donate! Donate! Donate!!!

I think we can all give a little and gain a lot. The locality is enriched with potential. So let's get to it!

[Tim Lund]

Are we talking about fixing the jobs market or are we talking about stopping young people taking part in things like looting or riots?

The former is certainly a government issue, including providing opportunities to learn a craft. The latter could be dealt with locally.

I'm pleased this thread is returning to the state of the labour market, but I'm not sure about this on both counts, Melissa. As far as I am concerned, governments in the first instance should be there to stop citizens exploiting other citizens - e.g. policing, dealing with crime - and to facilitate citizens in coming to mutually beneficial arrangements - e.g. making sure freely agreed, non-exploitative market contracts are adhered to. To the extent that crime is local, then so will policing be, but there has to be an ultimate central authority. When it comes to supporting markets via legal enforcement of contracts, there is similarly a role for central government as the ultimate authority, but it's only a very hands-off relationship needed. Almost always, it should be possible to leave people to come to their own agreements, and get on with it. Government fixing the jobs market should be limited to making it easier for people to exchange hours for money, and avoiding discouraging such exchanges by having benefits which reduce too quickly when people do find work, and other burdensome regulation. Why should governments be better than potential employers at identifying what crafts need to be learned? Why should potential employers and employees, who will each benefit from useful skills acquired, have the costs of acquiring these skills funded via the cumbersome and over-stretched tax system?

[mosy]

Replying to Melissa sfhyouthforum:

Thank you for explaining - I do find your posts (points made or arguments) difficult to follow sometimes. Jobs for younger teens are different from those which older teens would be happy with. Some odd jobs might give a feeling of responsibility and a knowledge that money has to be earned, self respect and a feel-good factor from altruistically helping others in some cases. All good stuff.

Compare that with the fact that there aren't such things as paper rounds, babysitting etc now and, almost echoing your words, if you've watched Donald Trump on the USA version of The Apprentice, it is the ruthless ones who progress in business, not the self respecting altruistic souls.

A youth said to me in the last week: "I wouldn't have believed that it would be this difficult to get ANY job."

Going back to your opening statement :
"It depends what you are talking about. Are we talking about fixing the jobs market or are we talking about stopping young people taking part in things like looting or riots?"

I suspect there will always be bad pennies. However, whether youth or adult it is becoming more and more difficult to voice protests - about anything - in this once proud nation that valued free speech. It is fine for The Times et al to try to tell us what to think. Governments who increasingly tell us what to think but ignore what we hoi polloi (the people) are telling them in my view is a singular cause of dissatisfaction.

It is great that the sfhyouthforum is working to try to give a voice to younger people (amongst its other purposes and activities). Let's hope someone is listening.

[Tim Lund]

it is the ruthless ones who progress in business, not the self respecting altruistic souls.

There is and always has been a middle course between these extremes, which is where good businesses build up their reputation. It's not so bad as all that - but still hard, I know, for young people to find 'proper' jobs.

[sfhyouthforum]

http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2011 ... -lewisham/

"In 2010, a TUC report showed that Job Seekers Allowance claimants in my ‘hood outnumbered overall job vacancies by almost 14:1."

"Earlier in the year the council decided to shut down the Connexions service, which played an important part in supporting workless young people along the way through learning and unemployment – and occasionally found them a job too! (I was impressed by the very kind and gentle Connexions advisor who called a couple of times last year to check that my gap-year son was doing OK and who was delighted to hear that he’d scored a temp job in John Lewis.) It was the largest cut yet made to a Connexions service anywhere and has led UNISON to explore a judicial review on the grounds that Lewisham is failing to meet its statutory obligations to provide ‘Information, Advice and Guidance’ services. Add to this the five libraries and IT centres that were closed in May, cuts to youth work, restricted access to the EMA and unimaginable university tuition fees and you can see why young people in my neck of the woods are Of course, none of these facts and figures justify the sort of wanton and personal violence meted out to hard working and terrified residents of Lewisham and elsewhere over the last couple of days. It is hard to construe the riots as the ‘moral economy’ depicted by Edward Thompson, renowned historian of the English working class. The sight of dispossessed, forgotten young people destroying the heart of their own communities is as sickening as it is saddening. But it should come as no surprise. Those who have been deprived of the chance to use their own imagination, skills and labour to find the self-respect and material comforts that we are led to consider normal in this crazy world, have been literally forced outside of society."

[Annie]

The Riots were just greedy people making the most of lawlessness,nothing to do with closing this or that.

Right from Wrong,
Knowing the difference thats whats lacking in some parts of society today

[Eagle]

Well said Annie

Not wishing to incur more Liberal abuse ,I have mentioned many times there would have been many more jobs if immigration restricted. We must be mad allowing unlimited immigration with our own people out of work.

For instance unfortunately I am a regular visitor to Lewisham Hospital and am struck by the fact that 90% of the cleaners seem to be from Francophone Africa. How are they getting here , especially in front of British workers. This is hardly a skilled job.

[michael]

Eagle,
Are you sure you are not Brian?
If not I think the two of you should be introduced, you have so many of the same interests and phobias.

http://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.ph ... 1#pid29571

[Eagle]

Not sure what you mean Michael.
My first name may or may not be Brian , could be Hans or anything else.

What do you mean by Phobia. This is a very serious subject Michael. I do feel sorry for native people who cannot get jobs because they are going to immigrants. Especially unskilled jobs where there can be no excuse to not employ natives.

I used the example of cleaners at Lewisham Hospital as many others have also mentioned it to me . There are many other examples locally.

This matter was raised by Syd youth forum and I am trying to assist.

[michael]

One minute you are complaining about the benefits system in Britain and people getting money for nothing, and the next minute you complain about people coming here to take our jobs (particularly French speaking Africans for some reason).

Thank goodness plenty of immigrants are willing to come to this country to clean our hospitals, perform the operations, and pay their taxes to keep the country going. Without immigration London would have ceased to be a world class city centuries ago.

[Annie]

Perhaps it would be prudent to make our own unemployed do the jobs that are "deemed" to beneath them? thus cutting out the need of so much unskilled labour coming from abroad no matter where they come from? what would you think of that idea Michael?

[michael]

Yes. I would definitely like to see fewer unemployed people and if there are jobs out there, even on minimum wages, then people should be encouraged to take these jobs.

But we should also recognise that immigration helps the economy to expand and people who come to this country to work are net contributors, and we have not even had to pay for their education, so those working here are net contributors from day one.

[Eagle]

Anne explains the reasons for my comments. The native unemployed should be doing the unskilled jobs.

I do agree with skilled jobs we do need some skills because of our dubious education system.

It is very sad that some people seem to be supporting immigration of unskilled workers when there are millions of native people unemployed.

[Annie]

Yes. I would definitely like to see fewer unemployed people and if there are jobs out there, even on minimum wages, then people should be encouraged to take these jobs.

But we should also recognise that immigration helps the economy to expand and people who come to this country to work are net contributors, and we have not even had to pay for their education, so those working here are net contributors from day one.

Michael, I am not against immigration as such,but I think we should get our own back to work first,
any immigrant who comes here to work and contribute to our system is welcome,but unfortunately we get the people who have no intention of working when they get here,they just what our very generous benefits, then they claim human rights crap so we cannot send them home, they are the ones I want booted out, and a cap put on the rest until we have either trained those that need training to fill the skilled jobs, or those that dont want to train made to take the menial jobs to earn their benefits.

[michael]

...then they claim human rights crap so we cannot send them home...

We all know the stories about the Human Rights Act…the illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because, and I am not making this up, he had a pet cat

Theresa May appears to have fallen for some classic Daily Mail spin (here’s the Mail’s version of the story).

Owning a pet cat was evidence of the immigrant’s long-term relationship with his girlfriend - but it was his relationship with his girlfriend - not the cat - that was being scrutinised as a reason to stay in the country.

FactCheck also understands that the man’s case had nothing to do with the Human Rights Act. The immigration judge allowed him to appeal on the basis of a former Home Office policy – as the Judicial Office confirmed to FactCheck. They also confirmed the decision had nothing to do with the cat.

Just because that is what is reported in the Daily Mail, does not mean it is true. I'm sure it is very important to have tough immigration rules, and tough benefits rules, but it is also important to have respect for legitimate human rights in this country, and to keep the problem in context. Immigration remains a net benefit to the UK economy despite all the made-up stories you read.