Poor 'live Like Animals' Says Boris's Privately Educated Sister After Going On 'poverty Safari'

[Eddie_George]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_target

Dammit. I thought it was all my idea.

[Guest TheBlueCat]

Howe many of the 99%-ers actually agreed to be governed by the present system ?

I think I'll opt of of this "democracy" and move to Scotland if they manage to escape.

I'm not sure that the People's Democratic Republic of Scotland under the wise tutelage of president for life Laird Sir Alex of Salmond would be much of an improvement (although I really, really, hope they do vote to go).

Your consent to be governed point is an interesting one though. I think the whole business of government should be outsourced with the electors given a choice every 10 years as to who, if anyone, the contract should be given to next.

[Neverwhere]

Your consent to be governed point is an interesting one though. I think the whole business of government should be outsourced with the electors given a choice every 10 years as to who, if anyone, the contract should be given to next.

Sounds exactly like the system we already have, just with a longer term. The current contract is in the hands of the tories and liberals, the next contract could theoretically be handed to anyone willing to tender for it at a general election. All representative democracy is essentially outsourcing of governance by the electorate to a contractor for the term of the parliament.

[longgone]

smooth as a badger

[happy_renting]

smooth as a badger

"Rachel Johnson says that cricket and the cane never did her any harm "

I'd cane her.

And bowl her underarm from the pavilion end.

[Guest TheBlueCat]

Sounds exactly like the system we already have, just with a longer term. The current contract is in the hands of the tories and liberals, the next contract could theoretically be handed to anyone willing to tender for it at a general election. All representative democracy is essentially outsourcing of governance by the electorate to a contractor for the term of the parliament.

My version would involve an explicit commercial contract though. If the governing company failed to perform according to the contract then they could be sued in supreme court. I suppose similar to the current system but with a legally binding manifesto maybe.

[fluffy666]

My version would involve an explicit commercial contract though. If the governing company failed to perform according to the contract then they could be sued in supreme court. I suppose similar to the current system but with a legally binding manifesto maybe.

Excellent.

Who appoints the judges?

[Rare Bear]

In addition to having 'schooled' themselves on the ways of the poor any politician who is prepared to send our troops into a war zone should either have served in a war zone him/her self or let their children serve in the forces.

The Royals can do it so there is no excuse!!

Indeed. something I always notice. The offspring of the professional politicians never join the forces.

[BlokeInDurham]

Indeed. something I always notice. The offspring of the professional politicians never join the forces.

Any privileged status the royal family enjoys is very obviously due top sheer good fortune. In common with many of the truly 'old money' this means that they have some notion of duty, of responsibility to the society that has rewarded them so randomly and of stewardship over the great inheritance that they have been bequeathed.

The problem is with the slightly less-obviously privileged, or those who can convince themselves that were not really that privileged, as they truly believe that everything they have personally earned all they have and that they therefore owe society nothing. Take a very lucky upper-middle class Londoner with inherited privilege and give them a media job that no-one else would have been in a position to get or give them a party political position on behalf of their school tie, and suddenly someone very grateful for the lucky hand they were dealt in life turns into a person for whom society is theft. The same principle applies to those riding the back of a housing boom: "We saved hard to pay for our mortgage. Therefore, any hugely inflated pay-off we get is not a lucky quirk, but our rightful due."

[Guest TheBlueCat]

Who appoints the judges?

Me!

[Neverwhere]

My version would involve an explicit commercial contract though. If the governing company failed to perform according to the contract then they could be sued in supreme court. I suppose similar to the current system but with a legally binding manifesto maybe.

Could be an improvement but I think you would need to have some sort of sliding scale in order to allow for unforseen difficulties. Maybe the top pledges must be adhered to and the remaining pledges can be halted depending on circumstance but their order of enactment must be adhered to (so they couldn't pretend no student fees were the most important thing in the world then drop them for a pledge that was 10 places lower down in their manifesto).

Personally I would minimise the representation aspect and go for a much more direct approach. I'm sure we're techincally capable of crowd-sourcing policy from the electorate at this point.

Edit: typo

Edited March 7, 2014 by Lo-fi

[Ah-so]

The more things change the more they stay the same ...

"The train bore me away, through the monstrous scenery of slag-heaps, chimneys, piled scrap-iron, foul canals, paths of cindery mud criss-crossed by the prints of clogs. This was March, but the weather had been horribly cold and everywhere there were mounds of blackened snow. As we moved slowly through the outskirts of the town we passed row after row of little grey slum houses running at right angles to the embankment. At the back of one of the houses a young woman was kneeling on the stones, poking a stick up the leaden waste-pipe which ran from the sink inside and which I suppose was blocked. I had time to see everything about her—her sacking apron, her clumsy clogs, her arms reddened by the cold. She looked up as the train passed, and I was almost near enough to catch her eye. She had a round pale face, the usual exhausted face of the slum girl who is twenty-five and looks forty, thanks to miscarriages and drudgery; and it wore, for the second in which I saw it, the most desolate, hopeless expression I have ever-seen. It struck me then that we are mistaken when we say that 'It isn't the same for them as it would be for us,' and that people bred in the slums can imagine nothing but the slums. For what I saw in her face was not the ignorant suffering of an animal. She knew well enough what was happening to her—understood as well as I did how dreadful a destiny it was to be kneeling there in the bitter cold, on the slimy stones of a slum backyard, poking a stick up a foul drain-pipe."

― George Orwell, The Road to Wigan Pier

Old Etonian poverty tourist!

Edited March 7, 2014 by Ah-so

[steve99]

I don't think she said she'd drink less, just think about it twice before ordering?

Im sure shes moved on to soy latte, and feels much more comfortable for it.

As for the article, well she is the very tip of the pointy iceberg, we have to convince 5million others like her that most poverty isn't necessarily self induced laziness by people who dont work hard enough, like she and her class does , Then we have to convince the next 20 million Daily mail readers that they are only playing the part of 'useful idiots' by cheering on the likes of Boris and chums. The governments (both sides) are so well insulated from the realities they are clueless and suspect will never catch on and start governing for the absolute majority.

Edited March 7, 2014 by steve99

[Wurzel Of Highbridge]

smooth as a badger

"Rachel Johnson says that cricket and the cane never did her any harm "

I'd cane her.

And bowl her underarm from the pavilion end.

You guys sure about that

[spyguy]

smooth as a badger

Yep. Rather than give her comments any thought she's on my list of posh, loud mouthed milfs I am willing to get off my working class and nail.

She's behind this one mind:

(Can't get a good link to the one I want to use)

[see what I've done here? Reduced a couple of braying posh leeches informed opinion to nothing more than a teenage boy's discharge]

[iamdamosuzuki]

Any privileged status the royal family enjoys is very obviously due top sheer good fortune. In common with many of the truly 'old money' this means that they have some notion of duty, of responsibility to the society that has rewarded them so randomly and of stewardship over the great inheritance that they have been bequeathed.

The problem is with the slightly less-obviously privileged, or those who can convince themselves that were not really that privileged, as they truly believe that everything they have personally earned all they have and that they therefore owe society nothing. Take a very lucky upper-middle class Londoner with inherited privilege and give them a media job that no-one else would have been in a position to get or give them a party political position on behalf of their school tie, and suddenly someone very grateful for the lucky hand they were dealt in life turns into a person for whom society is theft. The same principle applies to those riding the back of a housing boom: "We saved hard to pay for our mortgage. Therefore, any hugely inflated pay-off we get is not a lucky quirk, but our rightful due."

Wonderful post.

[gf3]

I think getting rid of the house of Lords and replacing it with an internet vote maybe better. OK we may get a lot of things wrong but then we would only have our selves to blame. I'm pretty sure the only reason they are talking about a referendum in 2017 is because they think they can spin the media and get the vote they want by then.

[Liquid Goldfish]

“The poor people you see on the box are all fat. How, in God’s name, can you be overweight and hungry? Now I know.”

Does she explain what she means by that?

[Guest TheBlueCat]

Could be an improvement but I think you would need to have some sort of sliding scale in order to allow for unforseen difficulties. Maybe the top pledges must be adhered to and the remaining pledges can be halted depending on circumstance but their order of enactment must be adhered to (so they couldn't pretend no student fees were the most important thing in the world then drop them for a pledge that was 10 places lower down in their manifesto).

Personally I would minimise the representation aspect and go for a much more direct approach. I'm sure we're techincally capable of crowd-sourcing policy from the electorate at this point.

Edit: typo

I like the idea of much more direct democracy. We could combine the two ideas and have the governing company contracted to implement whatever was decided (along with maintaining the status quo). That way there wouldn't need to be manifesto pledges as such, just contractual offers around the quality and cost of running the government.

[Neverwhere]

I like the idea of much more direct democracy. We could combine the two ideas and have the governing company contracted to implement whatever was decided (along with maintaining the status quo). That way there wouldn't need to be manifesto pledges as such, just contractual offers around the quality and cost of running the government.

Like a more open, democratic, version of the civil service?

Might also be a good idea to vote for some kind of figurehead leader for the purposes of negotiating with other powers. And maybe replace the house of lords with an upper house comprised of (say) 25 yr terms for individuals who are outstanding in their particular fields - with more emphasis on achievements in things like engineering, science and technology than on politicians, economists or rentiers - for long term critical oversight, with at least the same ability of the direct democracy run lower house to overrule the upper house as at present.

[sf-02]

I'm sure that at least part of the post-was consensus came from the fact that there had been a degree of social mixing in WWII. So there was at least a bit of understanding or empathy.

Nowadays.. I doubt that any of the government even understand the concept of financial insecurity, or any form of insecurity, and the debilitating effect it has.

Not just ww2. Social mobility was pretty decent until the '90s.

I find it hard to believe a family have £1 to live on. Tax credits, child tax credits, child benefits and free or heavily subsidised housing and council tax mean they are doing something wrong. Plus free transport for the children in London. And they live in zone 2 London. I know many people earning less than 30k in central London that cannot afford to live in zone 2. Not even by letting an ex council flat.