"Big Society"

[Westdene Seagull]

and locals get more of a say I'm guessing local busy bodies will get more control. This is just a potential problem I'm guessing at....no one seems to really know what 'Big Society' means.

You're right and it's because many people complain about government interference and lack of people being allowed a say but when it comes down to it very few people step up and take part. Unfortunately that leaves the door open for busy bodies.

A comparision might be the Scout and Guide movements. Many parents send their kids to these organisations, complain about this that and another but never actually volunteer their own time.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Thanks. I'd go for the 'Benefit taking council estate'. I think they'd be more true to the job and have a better grasp of reality.

Really ?? *still playing DA* - you would prefer people who can't/won't get a job, to people striving to improve themselves and their surroundings working in their spare time ? I agree the busybody/superior generalisation does grate a bit (a lot), but I respect people willing to give it a try, I know I wouldn't, even if I had time.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Really ?? *still playing DA* - you would prefer people who can't/won't get a job, to people striving to improve themselves and their surroundings working in their spare time ? I agree the busybody/superior generalisation does grate a bit (a lot), but I respect people willing to give it a try, I know I wouldn't, even if I had time.

Personally I do not believe that everyone on benefits is work shy. And maybe if you give people a genuine outlet to improve themselves and their surroundings they might take up the offer. I'd prefer this than maintaining a status quo and promoting busy bodies.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Really ?? *still playing DA* - you would prefer people who can't/won't get a job, to people striving to improve themselves and their surroundings working in their spare time ? I agree the busybody/superior generalisation does grate a bit (a lot), but I respect people willing to give it a try, I know I wouldn't, even if I had time.

Maybe I should walk-the-talk and set up my own free school or something? It could be fun.

 

[beorhthelm]

Thanks. I'd go for the 'Benefit taking council estate'. I think they'd be more true to the job and have a better grasp of reality.

who's reality is that? the benefit chav who got no GSCEs, lives in a sink estate with no prospects and has a "us against them" mentality; or the Jones with ambition who works hard, understands how to get things done by working with others?
which is actually going to have the ability to *change* something?

the problem with the typical benefit soaking layabout chavs is they dont have the wit, experience or training to do anything. those on sink estates that are so inclinded to work get off their arses and do so, and move out asap. often those left need some aspirational people probably from outside to raise their game. leaving it to Frank Gallagher and it will be free drink and drugs for everyone.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Maybe I should walk-the-talk and set up my own free school or something? It could be fun.

Tee, hee. Clearly both extremes are generaisations and as such, both miss the mark. Some "benefit" type people want to work, clearly, and could be very good (while some don't and would be terrible, but I guess they wouldn't volunteer). Similarly, your middle-class "apirs" are not all busybodies, some will be well meaning, very capable, successul people.

 

[Simster]

who's reality is that? the benefit chav who got no GSCEs, lives in a sink estate with no prospects and has a "us against them" mentality; or the Jones with ambition who works hard, understands how to get things done by working with others?
which is actually going to have the ability to *change* something?

the problem with the typical benefit soaking layabout chavs is they dont have the wit, experience or training to do anything. those on sink estates that are so inclinded to work get off their arses and do so, and move out asap. often those left need some aspirational people probably from outside to raise their game. leaving it to Frank Gallagher and it will be free drink and drugs for everyone.

But he's not arguing with any of that. He's actually saying that in his opinion, most people on benefits aren't that type of person at all.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

But he's not arguing with any of that. He's actually saying that in his opinion, most people on benefits aren't that type of person at all.

The bits on local BBC news last week regarding Whitehawk last week were quite interesting. Despite what the media would have you believe, the people interviewed were very positive about the place, saying how little trouble there was in reality, and how much of a community spirit there was there. I don't know the truth, I have no experience, and the people could have been had-picked and heavily edited - but it was interesting.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Tee, hee. Clearly both extremes are generaisations and as such, both miss the mark. Some "benefit" type people want to work, clearly, and could be very good (while some don't and would be terrible, but I guess they wouldn't volunteer). Similarly, your middle-class "apirs" are not all busybodies, some will be well meaning, very capable, successul people.

I am generalising a bit, but I think you can get the gist of what I'm saying and where my thoughts lie.

Maybe 'Big Society' would work better if it reached out and engaged a genuine cross-section of society. There would need to be some infrastructure and support in place to achieve this though....and given that services are being cut I doubt there will be.

But, as I've said we're only guessing as to what this all means.

But, Herr Tubthumper's Free School of Hove has a ring about it dont you think? And all will be welcome to be instructed in the ways of the Thumper.

 

[The Spanish]

if it reached out and engaged a genuine cross-section of society.

not having a pop at you, but coincidentally its exactly that sort of wording in these things that make people think - CNTS (cameron and co, not you) and switch off.

 

[Simster]

not having a pop at you, but coincidentally its exactly that sort of wording in these things that make people think - CNTS (cameron and co, not you) and switch off.

I tend to agree with this, probably because the people pontificating with these words are not from a "cross section of society" themselves.

Maybe the whole "Big Society" label should be dropped. It's not even a descriptive term, it's totally meaningless. I'd have more respect for politicians who simply campaigned on a ticket that encouraged more people to help out in society, and which didn't necessarily involve money or the state of public services. Get people engaged in their surroundings and the idea of responsibility might return to those who seem to have forgotten what it means.

 

[Digweeds Trousers]

Why does everyone seem to think that the vast majority of people on benefit are 'not like that'.

It's a very difficult and unpopular thing to say but the system needs a complete overhaul.

And with that there willbe some casualties that are not deserving of such treatment. But if we agree on the premise that the Labour approach of borrow, borrow, borrow, handout, fund quango, borrow borrow does not work, then what are the options.

As always people are quick to say something won't work but there is an absence of coherent suggestions as to what would.

If you dont want to work, you fake illness, you drain society of resource and are incapable or unwilling to do something with your life then perhaps you should be left to fend for yourselves.

I have been through redundancies, lost a house, slept on a friends floor, worked nightshifts to get some money in, kept the bank from the door and finally found a new job which means travelling 600 miles a week......but sacrifices need to be made. meanwhile there are hundreds of thousands of people who sit and do nothing and who, for some time were better off than me.

I'm passed caring about the fall out of who gets affected. for every genuine case there are probably dozens of scrounging bastards taking, taking, taking.

If economic darwinism is the natural course of events then just batton down the hatches, take a deep breath and work your arse off.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Why does everyone seem to think that the vast majority of people on benefit are 'not like that'.

It's a very difficult and unpopular thing to say but the system needs a complete overhaul.

And with that there willbe some casualties that are not deserving of such treatment. But if we agree on the premise that the Labour approach of borrow, borrow, borrow, handout, fund quango, borrow borrow does not work, then what are the options.

As always people are quick to say something won't work but there is an absence of coherent suggestions as to what would.

If you dont want to work, you fake illness, you drain society of resource and are incapable or unwilling to do something with your life then perhaps you should be left to fend for yourselves.

I have been through redundancies, lost a house, slept on a friends floor, worked nightshifts to get some money in, kept the bank from the door and finally found a new job which means travelling 600 miles a week......but sacrifices need to be made. meanwhile there are hundreds of thousands of people who sit and do nothing and who, for some time were better off than me.

I'm passed caring about the fall out of who gets affected. for every genuine case there are probably dozens of scrounging bastards taking, taking, taking.

If economic darwinism is the natural course of events then just batton down the hatches, take a deep breath and work your arse off.

You can be the stick to my carrot then.

 

[Pavilionaire]

A comparision might be the Scout and Guide movements. Many parents send their kids to these organisations, complain about this that and another but never actually volunteer their own time.

Very true. The bloke next door runs the local scout troop because no one else would do it, and he doesn't even have any boys of his own.

His wife is chairperson of the local village Playschool, a voluntary unpaid organisation who actually manage the salaried staff.

In towns and villages up and down the country it is the same story - a dedicated minority of people who "step into the breach", while the vast majority stand on the sidelines and take.

I'm sure there are plenty of people on this board who know of kids football teams that struggle to find parents to run sides or ferry the kids around, not to mention the whole CRB side of things.

If nothing else, the "Big Society" should be about getting some of the takers and turning them into givers.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

In towns and villages up and down the country it is the same story - a dedicated minority of people who "step into the breach", while the vast majority stand on the sidelines and take.

Undoubtedly some truth in that. One of my neighbours commutes every day to London with me, gets home at 7:30/8 PM, then volunteers at the local CAB til who knows when. I don't have the energy (or probably enthusiasm) to do that.

 

[Simster]

Good post pav, and one that I agree with. I help out at the local rugby and cricket clubs when I can, and I'm also active on the PSA at one of our kids schools.

In all of these cases, it is the same old faces you find doing all the work. Some more offers of help would be most welcome in many of these cases. Some parents just use sports clubs as free/cheap child care by f***ing off every single week and doing their shopping or whatever. Personally, I have a major problem with that sort of behaviour.

 

[looney]

It may be part to change the culture of the country.

Tories have long held a facination with US style volunateerism and philanthropy, you dont have to go far till you find one tory mp or the other writing about it.

Its the juxtaposed idea to "the state should provide and someone else should pay for it".

Port Harbour authorities are also self financed from docking fees, thats one communitarian costless quango, why not make others and save on beaurocracy? It doesn't always have to be free/cheap labour.

It is more democratic/ probably more tory. With this system there wont be some Grauniad reader from the political beureu to show up to "make sure its all correct". It'll be up to the people running it, who ever they are.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

With this system there wont be some Grauniad reader from the political beureu to show up to "make sure its all correct".

Probably with an NVQ in clipboard management!

 

[looney]

Good post pav, and one that I agree with. I help out at the local rugby and cricket clubs when I can, and I'm also active on the PSA at one of our kids schools.

In all of these cases, it is the same old faces you find doing all the work. Some more offers of help would be most welcome in many of these cases. Some parents just use sports clubs as free/cheap child care by f***ing off every single week and doing their shopping or whatever. Personally, I have a major problem with that sort of behaviour.

I think you will find there are more than you think, you, I and pav at least have done it in this thread and maybe others, usually chiming in with particular interests.

The difference is its not an instinctive response, neither is it properly organised or promoted.


Can you name of hand or give the next date for your local homeless charity, summer Fete or recruitment Fair? Or conservation group? Or groups?

 

[simonsimon]

I expect all the "ladies that lunch" doing their two hours a week social volunteering will end up being included in the "in employment" figures.