Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Herbert Anchovy on December 03, 2019, 12:08:50 pm
-
Whilst waiting endlessly in the Dentist waiting room, I read an absolutely fascinating article about peoples perceptions of the UK's 'Golden Age' and specifically when people believe this was.
An academic study took place a couple of years ago where people were questioned on whether they felt that the UK was better now than in the past. The study showed that the majority of those questioned felt that the UK was 'worse now than in the past'. Probably no surprise there. They were then asked when the felt that the UK was 'at it's best'. What the report showed was that, generally speaking, people felt that the UK was better when they were in their 20's. So, people in their 20's in the 60's thought it was at its best then, people in their 20's in the 70's thought that was best etc..etc... The overall feeling was that the country was wealthier, more tolerant, more peaceful, less crime ridden and less stressful during these specific decades.
The study then grouped together those people who felt that the UK was a much better place to live in the 80's and 90's. The group were presented with the claim that the UK had made huge improvements over the past 20, 30 and 40 years within a number of metrics. Again, unsurprisingly, the group en masse, disagreed with this statement. They were then presented with a range of facts and statistical evidence to support this theory that compared the country 20-30 years ago to today:
Median income has increased considerably, particularly for Pensioners
The proportion of the UK living in absolute poverty has decreased by a third
The proportion of children growing up in households where nobody works has halved
Life expectancy in the UK has increased by 5 years since the 90's
Infant mortality has fallen by 40%
Consumption of cigarettes, drugs and alcohol in young people has significantly reduced
Teen pregnancies are at their lowest level since 1969
Not only are young people better behaved, they're also better educated with a record high number of 'disadvantaged students' going to University
Society is much more tolerant. In 1990 58% of people were against civil partnerships between two adults of the same sex. In 2013 it was 15%
The UK is safer from terrorism than ever before. The number of people killed by terrorism between 2002 and 2017 was less than the average number killed by terrorists each year between 1968 and 2001
Overall crime has fallen by two thirds
A record low number of adults (two in every 100) are likely to be a victim of violent crime
Fewer people than ever are killed on Britains roads
When these facts were presented to the group and were then asked if they STILL felt that the country was better 20-30 years ago, only 10% changed their view! A psychologist blames this on something called 'Availability heuristic' (I think!!) where humans are more likely to remember negative news, rather than good news. Consequently, when the media and their endless tales of death and destruction, telling us the country is going to hell in a handcart, they're onto something. They know that bad news sells!
So, it seems that nostalgia blinds us all when the fact is that, overall, Britain is less dangerous, less poverty stricken and more tolerant than how we perhaps may remember it!
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
Dead right BST about people getting more right wing the older they get, although we'd probably disagree about the reasons for it. You'd put it down to those stupid facts and figures quoted above whereas I know that it's down to life experience and wisdom.
Children better behaved nowadays? Have you heard the vile language they use in the street? It was an unwritten rule when I was a young bloke that you never swore in front of women and kids. Now they're worse than us.
It all boils down to the obsession many of you on here have with statistics, which can be manipulated to suit any argument or agenda. Like I've said many times, I view the world with MY eyes, and think about it with MY brain.
Some of you need to walk round the town centre a bit more.
-
It’s true that many people move to a more right wing view point as they get older. I heard a man on the radio explain why he was voting Tory. “ When i was a young man, living on a council estate, no job and no money then I needed Labour. Now I’m retired, have a nice house and good pension I don’t need them anymore, so I’m voting Conservative.”
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
Dead right BST about people getting more right wing the older they get, although we'd probably disagree about the reasons for it. You'd put it down to those stupid facts and figures quoted above whereas I know that it's down to life experience and wisdom.
Children more polite nowadays? Have you heard the vile language they use in the street? It was an unwritten rule when I was a young bloke that you never swore in front of women and kids. Now they're worse than us.
It all boils down to the obsession many of you on here have with statistics, which can be manipulated to suit any argument or agenda. Like I've said many times, I view the world with MY eyes, and think about it with MY brain.
Some of you need to walk round the town centre a bit more.
As the article says SS, you remember bad examples more than good. You won’t remember the countless young people who you walk past everyday who haven’t caused a problem.
As for the stats, well I believe them more than I believe you...no offence though.
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
Dead right BST about people getting more right wing the older they get, although we'd probably disagree about the reasons for it. You'd put it down to those stupid facts and figures quoted above whereas I know that it's down to life experience and wisdom.
Children more polite nowadays? Have you heard the vile language they use in the street? It was an unwritten rule when I was a young bloke that you never swore in front of women and kids. Now they're worse than us.
It all boils down to the obsession many of you on here have with statistics, which can be manipulated to suit any argument or agenda. Like I've said many times, I view the world with MY eyes, and think about it with MY brain.
Some of you need to walk round the town centre a bit more.
As the article says SS, you remember bad examples more than good. You won’t remember the countless young people who you walk past everyday who haven’t caused a problem.
As for the stats, well I believe them more than I believe you...no offence though.
That's fine Herbert, I don't need you to believe me.
Have a nice day.x
-
It’s true that many people move to a more right wing view point as they get older. I heard a man on the radio explain why he was voting Tory. “ When i was a young man, living on a council estate, no job and no money then I needed Labour. Now I’m retired, have a nice house and good pension I don’t need them anymore, so I’m voting Conservative.”
People getting more right-wing as they get older doesn't necessarily mean they are getting more selfish. They are no more selfish than when they were young and poorer. Back in the days when they were less well off, they wanted a share in rich people's wealth just like the new generation of youngsters do now.
-
Stupid facts and figures...
Dear God up above.
I'm not dealing with shite like facts! I've got my own prejudices to tell ME what's happening.
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
Just imagine this forum in twenty years time.
BST posting loads of links telling us how good the Torys are.
-
It’s true that many people move to a more right wing view point as they get older. I heard a man on the radio explain why he was voting Tory. “ When i was a young man, living on a council estate, no job and no money then I needed Labour. Now I’m retired, have a nice house and good pension I don’t need them anymore, so I’m voting Conservative.”
People getting more right-wing as they get older doesn't necessarily mean they are getting more selfish. They are no more selfish than when they were young and poorer. Back in the days when they were less well off, they wanted a share in rich people's wealth just like the new generation of youngsters do now.
...From the man who voted Remain for selfish reasons then switched to Leave when it suited.
Me? I've got more left wing as I enter my dotage despite being comfortable.
Is there summat wrong wi me?
Yeah I want everyone to be better off and no-one living in poverty.
Ordinary working people will be FAR better off if this lousy Tory Government is shown the door.
And it's starting to look like it just might happen.
-
I want everyone to be better off too, it's how we go about it that causes differing opinions.
-
How do you think everyone can be better off BB?
-
Back to HA's OP, I would encourage people to read Raymond William's The Country & The City.
He says pretty much what HA says although takes it back further. Every generation since the 16th century has thought that life was better 'back then' and society has declined during their lifetime.
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/documents/innervate/11-12/1112rosiemodbritfict.pdf
-
How do you think everyone can be better off BB?
Better education? higher employment? More selective immigration?
How do you think everyone can be better off Wilts?
-
I am a school governor BB, have been for 8 years now. I have seen 4 heads come and go and am doing the current head's appraisal next week (it will be good, he's well clued in). In all that time the school's results have not improved at all although the teaching has.
I said to the current head a couple of years ago what is the biggest difference between the high and low achievers. He said the biggest difference is the help they get at home. We have 40% of pupils who from socially deprived households (FSM) who are below the poverty index. And apparently we have full employment.
By creating a fairer funded socially responsible society that has a mixed economy not entirely service based.
-
That goes a long way to explaining why people tend to get more right wing the older they get.
Dead right BST about people getting more right wing the older they get, although we'd probably disagree about the reasons for it. You'd put it down to those stupid facts and figures quoted above whereas I know that it's down to life experience and wisdom.
Children more polite nowadays? Have you heard the vile language they use in the street? It was an unwritten rule when I was a young bloke that you never swore in front of women and kids. Now they're worse than us.
It all boils down to the obsession many of you on here have with statistics, which can be manipulated to suit any argument or agenda. Like I've said many times, I view the world with MY eyes, and think about it with MY brain.
Some of you need to walk round the town centre a bit more.
As the article says SS, you remember bad examples more than good. You won’t remember the countless young people who you walk past everyday who haven’t caused a problem.
As for the stats, well I believe them more than I believe you...no offence though.
That's fine Herbert, I don't need you to believe me.
Have a nice day.x
Thanks SS, i always do.
-
Why people vote right wing when they become 'rich'
"Does Money Make People Right-Wing and Inegalitarian? A Longitudinal Study of Lottery Winners''
https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/workingpapers/2014/twerp_1039_oswald.pdf
-
Stupid facts and figures...
Dear God up above.
I'm not dealing with shite like facts! I've got my own prejudices to tell ME what's happening.
I can't believe that someone with a mind as brilliant as your's doesn't trust it above those who are quoting facts that could come from anywhere.
I'll bet that most of those who collated those facts that Herbert quoted are too young to even remember the 60s, whereas I was there.
How many times have you had a completely different take on a Rovers match than what the DFP has reported?
-
SS.
All of those are verified facts
See, there ARE things out there in the world that are objectively true. Facts. Genuine, correct facts.
God help us if we lived in a world where everyone just lived on their prejudices and refused to believe in objective truth.
-
SS.
All of those are verified facts
See, there ARE things out there in the world that are objectively true. Facts. Genuine, correct facts.
God help us if we lived in a world where everyone just lived on their prejudices and refused to believe in objective truth.
How do you know that those facts are verified, objectively true, genuine, and correct?
Is it me being stubborn, or you being naive?
-
Stupid facts and figures...
Dear God up above.
I'm not dealing with shite like facts! I've got my own prejudices to tell ME what's happening.
I can't believe that someone with a mind as brilliant as your's doesn't trust it above those who are quoting facts that could come from anywhere.
I'll bet that most of those who collated those facts that Herbert quoted are too young to even remember the 60s, whereas I was there.
How many times have you had a completely different take on a Rovers match than what the DFP has reported?
SS, i think that the primary point of the report was to project how people’s perceptions of a particular time period is heavily influenced by their own circumstance. Hence, people view the decade in which they were in their 20’s as ‘the best’. It was also to show that, when presented with hard facts and evidence, people are still extremely reluctant to change their view. Human nature I’d guess. Maybe the 1960’s were great for you. However that doesn’t disguise the fact that statistical assessment tells us we are now a richer, more peaceful and more tolerant society.
-
Around 1965, there was a murder in Balby. It was the TV news headline for a week. Nowadays a murder in Doncaster might not even hit the front page of the Doncaster Free Press.
That is a fact that goes against statistics.
-
Stupid facts and figures...
Dear God up above.
I'm not dealing with shite like facts! I've got my own prejudices to tell ME what's happening.
I can't believe that someone with a mind as brilliant as your's doesn't trust it above those who are quoting facts that could come from anywhere.
I'll bet that most of those who collated those facts that Herbert quoted are too young to even remember the 60s, whereas I was there.
How many times have you had a completely different take on a Rovers match than what the DFP has reported?
SS, i think that the primary point of the report was to project how people’s perceptions of a particular time period is heavily influenced by their own circumstance. Hence, people view the decade in which they were in their 20’s as ‘the best’. It was also to show that, when presented with hard facts and evidence, people are still extremely reluctant to change their view. Human nature I’d guess. Maybe the 1960’s were great for you. However that doesn’t disguise the fact that statistical assessment tells us we are now a richer, more peaceful and more tolerant society.
Richer? Then how come there are foodbanks and people sleeping in doorways? There was none of that in the 60s.
More peaceful? Have a walk round the town centre on a Friday or Saturday night.
More tolerant? Have you seen the attitude of Remainers over the last 3 years?
-
Around 1965, there was a murder in Balby. It was the TV news headline for a week. Nowadays a murder in Doncaster might not even hit the front page of the Doncaster Free Press.
That is a fact that goes against statistics.
Right on BB. The same thing happened after the murder behind the Adam and Eve in 1967. Never out of the news all week; such was the rarity of murders in those days compared with now.
-
SS.
Yes we are richer than we were 50 years ago. Miles richer. Allowing for inflation, our GDP is about 2.5 times what it was in 1970.
So why are there food banks and homeless? Because for the last 40 years, since Thatcher's time, we've allowed the very richest to cream off almost all of that growth. And by crushing the unions, we've ended up with poverty wages for the very poorest workers that were never allowed in 1970.
Talking to you is utterly depressing. You SEE the problems. And you utterly refuse to consider voting for the one party that wants to change society BACK to the sort of equality we had in 1970. But with the wealth we have in 2020!
Do you really, honestly think Farage gives a f**k about any of that? Really? Honestly?
-
Go on lads. Go on.
What was the last murder in Donny that didn't make the headlines?
Go on. At your leisure.
-
If it didn’t make the headlines then we probably wouldn’t know about it, would we?
-
Sweet f**king Jesus, BB is being cloned.
-
I don't know. It probably didn't make the headlines. I'll try and find one.
-
But I am right aren’t I.
-
Sweet f**king Jesus, BB is being cloned.
Thanks BST, but I'm not quite up to Jesus's eminence.
-
Well then go and look at police records and compare them to the headlines. And let me know when you've found one that matches the shite thesis that BB has decided to offer us tonight.
-
But I am right aren’t I.
Yes, you are Hound. So am I!
-
Around 1965, there was a murder in Balby. It was the TV news headline for a week. Nowadays a murder in Doncaster might not even hit the front page of the Doncaster Free Press.
That is a fact that goes against statistics.
If that is the case then it says more about the paper than any blasé attitude to murder.
According to the Office of National Statistics, In 1967 there were 7.4 incidents of homicide per million people in England & Wales. In 2015 there were 8.9 incidents per million people. Not a huge difference.
-
HA.
Yeah but you're cheating bringing facts into the discussion.
-
This may give an understanding for some?
Scholarpedia
False memory refers to cases in which people remember events differently from the way they happened or, in the most dramatic case, remember events that never happened at all. False memories can be very vivid and held with high confidence, and it can be difficult to convince someone that the memory in question is wrong. Psychologists have studied false memories in laboratory situations in which events are well controlled and it can be known exactly what transpired. Such experiments have uncovered a number of factors that are responsible for creating false memories. In the next few paragraphs some of these factors will be reviewed.
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/False_memory
-
BST, you see this is where you let yourself down. I present you with a fact, and you get all hot and bothered and start getting aggressive. Then, you have the cheek to order ME to look at records to prove me wrong! The whole point of my post is to point out that actual facts can go against statistics and you want ME to look at some f**king stats!
It's also interesting how your first thought is to compare the standards of living back then by the amount of cash we had. It seems that money is of more importance to you than it is to us tight old bas**rds who have "pulled the rope up".
I don't care what you can find statistically to prove your point, it is far, FAR more dangerous to walk down the streets of Doncaster now than it was 40 years ago.
-
BB
You didn't present me with a "fact". You presented me with an unsubstantiated opinion.
I didn't ask you for statistics. I asked you for examples of murders that had happened and not made the headlines.
Crack on. You're doing well tonight.
-
Stupid facts and figures...
Dear God up above.
I'm not dealing with shite like facts! I've got my own prejudices to tell ME what's happening.
I can't believe that someone with a mind as brilliant as your's doesn't trust it above those who are quoting facts that could come from anywhere.
I'll bet that most of those who collated those facts that Herbert quoted are too young to even remember the 60s, whereas I was there.
How many times have you had a completely different take on a Rovers match than what the DFP has reported?
SS, i think that the primary point of the report was to project how people’s perceptions of a particular time period is heavily influenced by their own circumstance. Hence, people view the decade in which they were in their 20’s as ‘the best’. It was also to show that, when presented with hard facts and evidence, people are still extremely reluctant to change their view. Human nature I’d guess. Maybe the 1960’s were great for you. However that doesn’t disguise the fact that statistical assessment tells us we are now a richer, more peaceful and more tolerant society.
Richer? Then how come there are foodbanks and people sleeping in doorways? There was none of that in the 60s.
More peaceful? Have a walk round the town centre on a Friday or Saturday night.
More tolerant? Have you seen the attitude of Remainers over the last 3 years?
SS, Are you saying that your research of wondering around town is more accurate than that carried out by academic researches, utilising a number of different sources and carried out over a number of years? By the way, my OP said the comparison was between now and the 80’s and 90’s. The 60’s aren’t mentioned.
-
BST, you see this is where you let yourself down. I present you with a fact, and you get all hot and bothered and start getting aggressive. Then, you have the cheek to order ME to look at records to prove me wrong! The whole point of my post is to point out that actual facts can go against statistics and you want ME to look at some f**king stats!
It's also interesting how your first thought is to compare the standards of living back then by the amount of cash we had. It seems that money is of more importance to you than it is to us tight old bas**rds who have "pulled the rope up".
I don't care what you can find statistically to prove your point, it is far, FAR more dangerous to walk down the streets of Doncaster now than it was 40 years ago.
BB, What is your last paragraph based on?
-
:whistle:
-
It happens quite regularly where murders don't make the front page of the Free Press, and even less regular when they are headlined on TV.
-
BST, you see this is where you let yourself down. I present you with a fact, and you get all hot and bothered and start getting aggressive. Then, you have the cheek to order ME to look at records to prove me wrong! The whole point of my post is to point out that actual facts can go against statistics and you want ME to look at some f**king stats!
It's also interesting how your first thought is to compare the standards of living back then by the amount of cash we had. It seems that money is of more importance to you than it is to us tight old bas**rds who have "pulled the rope up".
I don't care what you can find statistically to prove your point, it is far, FAR more dangerous to walk down the streets of Doncaster now than it was 40 years ago.
BB, What is your last paragraph based on?
Walking down the streets of Doncaster. Hearing of attacks from witnesses, and reading of them, usually in the inside pages of the Doncaster Free Press.
-
It happens quite regularly where murders don't make the front page of the Free Press, and even less regular when they are headlined on TV.
I’ve no reason to doubt or disbelieve you there BB, but surely that says more about the media than the numbers of murders taking place? The fact is, the murder rate now is only slightly higher than in the late 60’s and less than much of the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s.
-
Herbert, are those stats based on the Doncaster area?
-
It happens quite regularly where murders don't make the front page of the Free Press, and even less regular when they are headlined on TV.
Then you'll be able to find some examples really easily.
-
You can find them yourself, probably in the next issue of the free press, in the inside pages.
-
Night night BB.
-
The League Table shows that the Rovers are 14th. However, I saw just how shit we were on Sunday so I’m going to ignore facts and statistics and instead believe that we’re bottom of the table.
-
What, bottom of the FA cup table?
-
Homicide rose from 7.3 per million population in 1967 to 17.9 per million in 2003. Between then and 2016 there was a decline in homicides, from 17.9 PM to 9.9 in 2016. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/compendium/focusonviolentcrimeandsexualoffences/yearendingmarch2016/homicide
However, since then .......
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/25/homicides-in-england-and-wales-hit-highest-level-in-a-decade
-
Right. And how many of them were in Donny and not reported by the DfP?
-
Now, you see, this is where Scawsby is right. Your obsession with stats to manipulate an argument is rife. Some things don't have available stats for you to manipulate. Like the one you're requesting above. Like SS says, sometimes you should view the world with your eyes and think about it with your brain without relying on others to do it for you.
-
Well I was walking home down Poplar Road in Skellow in 1967 when two lads got out of a van and assaulted me. I was in me Percy Jackson uniform and they beat me up coz I was a grammar school kid.
I've never been attacked since so using BB's rules I can categorically state that things were much worse then than now.
-
BB.
Once again. I've not mentioned anything about stats on the issue of the DfP reporting murders. I've asked you to provide an example of a murder in Donny that wasn't reported in the DfP.
Clear enough? Or do you need me to explain it to you again?
-
TT.
Aye. Last time I got chinned was in the ginnel than ran down from Conaby to the Crags by Northcliffe School. That was 1985. I can categorically state that things were far more violent then than they have been since that specific day.
-
If it didn’t make the headlines then we probably wouldn’t know about it, would we?
Somebody must know about them otherwise they wouldn't be so stupid as to go round saying that these murders don't make the headlines, would they?
-
BST, What exactly are you asking me to do to prove that the DFP doesn't always put local murders on the front page?
-
HA.
Yeah but you're cheating bringing facts into the discussion.
No BST, he was cheating by manipulating them to strengthen his side of the argument.
-
I told you last night. Get a list of recent Doncaster murders. Compare it against DfP front pages from the time of the murder.
You're so certain that murders don't get properly reported, it must be a doddle. In fact, you're SO certain, I assume you have a few specific ones in mind?
-
So you want me to provide statistics?
I KNOW that in the past, I say in the past because I don't buy the Free Press now, that it didn't always put local murders on the front page.
-
No BB.
I've not asked for statistics. Statistics are aggregates of lots of specific individual items of information. I've asked for specific individual examples.
Let me give you an example.
Saying a specific person was born on a specific date is not a statistic. It's a specific individual piece of information. Saying that on average, 3,000 people are born in any given date...THAT is a statistic. I'm not asking for a statistic. I'm asking for a specific example.
-
If you know, then give me an example.
-
It's obvious that you have more time than me, so, seeing as it's you who needs convincing of my claim that not all local murders make the Doncaster Free Press front page, YOU give me a list of all the local murders and show me the Free Press front-page headline of them all.
-
I don't think you quite get how this making an astonishing claim thing works do you BB? If you're acting like a grown up, when you make an astonishing claim, you don't then turn round and say, "YOU prove it's not true!"
If that's where we've got to, I assume it's another cul de sac where we can now stop.
-
What I say is true, although I can't prove it. Perhaps you can prove your claim that it is untrue by proving it?
-
Bye bye BB.
-
BST, the next time you post anything about your own experience I will ask you to prove it.
Are you OK with that?
-
To be clear, the original OP refers to comparison between the 80’s and now. Not the 60’s. However, using the logic used by some on here, my old man and his pal had the shit kicked out of them by a group of thugs in the southern bus station in 1968 and my uncle was put in hospital following an unprovoked attack where he was hit in the face with a pint pot in the Top Rank in ‘71. Neither of them have ever been in the receiving end of violent assaults since then. I’ve had 2 kickings in my life; once outside Rossington Labour Club in 1980 and once in Romeo & Juliet in Donny in 1982. Both unprovoked. Nothing has happened to me since. Going to the football was more dangerous in the 70’s and 80’s. I was at the FA Cup semi final reply in ‘85 between Man Utd and Liverpool and the amount of violence I witnessed was terrifying. Gigs were riddled with violence. I saw trouble at gigs by The Police, The Specials, Sham 69 and Dexys amongst others. When I first moved to London in the early 80’s I remember seeing a huge NF demo marching through East London with thugs putting the windows through of shops run by Asians. The very few police who were on hand did absolutely nothing. Using some people’s logic, that must mean they were more dangerous times than now.
-
Was that a party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative party? ;)
-
Was that a party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative party? ;)
Busted 😂
-
I think the point is that no-one is shocked by a murder taking place in the locality any more. It's now accepted as part of life (and death).
-
Slightly diverting off subject, in the 60's we used to leave our house without locking the door. Perhaps the only time it was locked was on a couple of occasions when we went on a family holiday. Maybe the number one rule of the time - Nobody pinches from their own class of people - was observed mainly because no one had owt worth nicking, more than any form of mutual respect.
-
That's odd though AL, because the prevalence of murder isn't much higher now than it was 50 years ago. And it's a lot, lot lower than it was 20 years ago.
Here's a thought. Maybe YOU have got older. Maybe YOU were shocked as a 14 year old to hear about murder, just as I was. Then as you get older, there's a cumulative effect that numbs you.
Just a thought.
-
There is a new underclass of scum populating the country now who are breeding like rats. Their role in life is to claim benefits, thieve and breed.
-
No-one had owt worth nicking eh?
Kind of refutes your claim that things were better back then BB.
-
That's odd though AL, because the prevalence of murder isn't much higher now than it was 50 years ago. And it's a lot, lot lower than it was 20 years ago.
Here's a thought. Maybe YOU have got older. Maybe YOU were shocked as a 14 year old to hear about murder, just as I was. Then as you get older, there's a cumulative effect that numbs you.
Just a thought.
But a murder in the local area used to be big news. Now it's just chip wrappings the day after.
-
Have you wondered if the reason for the drop in the number of murders now might be down to fewer people going out, rendering village streets virtually empty?
-
That's odd though AL, because the prevalence of murder isn't much higher now than it was 50 years ago. And it's a lot, lot lower than it was 20 years ago.
Here's a thought. Maybe YOU have got older. Maybe YOU were shocked as a 14 year old to hear about murder, just as I was. Then as you get older, there's a cumulative effect that numbs you.
Just a thought.
But a murder in the local area used to be big news. Now it's just chip wrappings the day after.
......And not always front-page chip wrappings.
-
There is some merit to the points mentioned,and if you dont read it in the paper or see it on tv sometimes you dont know it's happening unless you know people involved.I'm told by one of my friends with lets just say friends in low places that for the last few months there has been a gypsy/gang war going off in Doncaster which has resulted in quite a few shootings and missing people..Now that might be exagerated hearsay but just because i've not read anything about in the free press doesn't mean it's not happening..
-
No-one had owt worth nicking eh?
Kind of refutes your claim that things were better back then BB.
Why do you socialists think everything has to be about how much money we have? We might have been poorer financially back then but people, in general, seemed happier despite having nowt worth nicking. Most of us have a better standard of living nowadays, but a lot less value of it.
-
BB You're the one who voted Remain as you thought your pension might go down with Brexit. Then changed your mind.
Me? I would probably pay more tax under Labour but that's Ok if everybody else was happier and better off because of it
-
Really amusing that you think we Socialists only care about money.
Yeah when millions of kids are living in poverty. When the North has been starved of money for the last 10 years, so the infrastructure had gone to pot. When Brexiteers blame the EU for all this, rather than look at how the Tories have operated and then swallowed their lies hook line and sinker and voted to Make things worse.
-
There's no probably about it TT, you WILL pay more tax if your pension goes over £14k P.A.
Regarding my original vote for Brexit, yes, fear of my pension taking a hit did sway me to vote remain, but it wasn't purely a selfish decision. I wanted to leave as much as possible to my family when I popped my clogs, and still do!
As always, I have accepted the results of elections and referendums whether my vote won or lost, and I did exactly the same after the EU referendum. To become a Remoaner would have meant I'd changed my mind over a principle that I'd always stuck to previously.
Listening to the outrageous insults dished out to the Leavers by the Remainers made it easy for me to change alliance and support the Leavers. I didn't want to be on the same side as the Remainers. Still don't.
-
Really amusing that you think we Socialists only care about money.
Yeah when millions of kids are living in poverty. When the North has been starved of money for the last 10 years, so the infrastructure had gone to pot. When Brexiteers blame the EU for all this, rather than look at how the Tories have operated and then swallowed their lies hook line and sinker and voted to Make things worse.
What do you mean the North starved of money over the last ten years? What did the North have prior to that?
-
Really amusing that you think we Socialists only care about money.
Yeah when millions of kids are living in poverty. When the North has been starved of money for the last 10 years, so the infrastructure had gone to pot. When Brexiteers blame the EU for all this, rather than look at how the Tories have operated and then swallowed their lies hook line and sinker and voted to Make things worse.
What do you class as poverty though? If you have an iPhone you're not in poverty.
-
No-one had owt worth nicking eh?
Kind of refutes your claim that things were better back then BB.
Why do you socialists think everything has to be about how much money we have? We might have been poorer financially back then but people, in general, seemed happier despite having nowt worth nicking. Most of us have a better standard of living nowadays, but a lot less value of it.
Couldn't agree more. That's one of the major long term problems. Society is not as welcoming a place as it used to be. I fully agree.
Of course, it was Thatcher who said there's no such thing as society.
-
Have you wondered if the reason for the drop in the number of murders now might be down to fewer people going out, rendering village streets virtually empty?
I doubt it. A large majority of murders are committed by someone who knows the victim well.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2017#how-are-victims-and-suspects-related
-
Strange isn't it. How often you hear people complaining about insults from folk they call "Remaoners". Eeh well. Takes all sorts.
-
I use both Remainer and Remoaner terms in order to differentiate between the likes of me and you. I was a Remainer and you are a Remoaner. I find it of great importance that we are not put in the same category.
I also think being called a Remoaner is far less insulting than being called a tight racist thick old berk who pulled up the ladder to protect his wealth!
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
-
No-one had owt worth nicking eh?
Kind of refutes your claim that things were better back then BB.
Why do you socialists think everything has to be about how much money we have? We might have been poorer financially back then but people, in general, seemed happier despite having nowt worth nicking. Most of us have a better standard of living nowadays, but a lot less value of it.
Having loads of money doesn't mean that you will have a good quality of life. I'd rather live in the countryside ( if there's any left that we haven't built on ) and have less money than be loaded in the city.
-
If it didn’t make the headlines then we probably wouldn’t know about it, would we?
Somebody must know about them otherwise they wouldn't be so stupid as to go round saying that these murders don't make the headlines, would they?
I don’t know, do you.
-
I use both Remainer and Remoaner terms in order to differentiate between the likes of me and you. I was a Remainer and you are a Remoaner. I find it of great importance that we are not put in the same category.
I also think being called a Remoaner is far less insulting than being called a tight racist thick old berk who pulled up the ladder to protect his wealth!
Wrong again as usual BB, you're comparing apples with lemons. Remoaner is just an insult, the other is a fact.
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
No I don't, so why do so many of you knock the 60s? We won the World Cup, had zero unemployment, and working class pleasures were cheap. What was there not to like?
-
I use both Remainer and Remoaner terms in order to differentiate between the likes of me and you. I was a Remainer and you are a Remoaner. I find it of great importance that we are not put in the same category.
I also think being called a Remoaner is far less insulting than being called a tight racist thick old berk who pulled up the ladder to protect his wealth!
Wrong again as usual BB, you're comparing apples with lemons. Remoaner is just an insult, the other is a fact.
Well, you must surely be the bitter Lemon then, You're much too sour for the Apple pies.
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
No I don't, so why do so many of you knock the 60s? We won the World Cup, had zero unemployment, and working class pleasures were cheap. What was there not to like?
I’ve not seen anybody knock the 60’s SS. As I’ve said twice before, the OP referred to the 80’s and 90’s. You brought up the 60’s. The point that’s being made is that many aspects of life in the UK have improved over the past 30-40 years. The statistical comparison showed that murder rates in 1967 and 2015 weren’t too different.
-
http://www.murderuk.com/misc_crime_stats.html
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
No I don't, so why do so many of you knock the 60s? We won the World Cup, had zero unemployment, and working class pleasures were cheap. What was there not to like?
I’ve not seen anybody knock the 60’s SS. As I’ve said twice before, the OP referred to the 80’s and 90’s. You brought up the 60’s. The point that’s being made is that many aspects of life in the UK have improved over the past 30-40 years. The statistical comparison showed that murder rates in 1967 and 2015 weren’t too different.
I wasn't just referring to this thread Herbert. There have been one or two other threads on the same subject, with references to tin baths and outside toilets.
-
I use both Remainer and Remoaner terms in order to differentiate between the likes of me and you. I was a Remainer and you are a Remoaner. I find it of great importance that we are not put in the same category.
I also think being called a Remoaner is far less insulting than being called a tight racist thick old berk who pulled up the ladder to protect his wealth!
I suppose it's up to you to prove that you're not according to your own rules :)
-
I couldn't prove it even if I wanted to. This is what we hit on earlier. Somethings can't be proved by links because they don't always exist. So, I reckon you'll have to continue shitting in my shoe and I'll carry on pissing in your Bovril.
Not long to go now anyway!
-
I couldn't prove it even if I wanted to. This is what we hit on earlier. Somethings can't be proved by links because they don't always exist. So, I reckon you'll have to continue shitting in my shoe and I'll carry on pissing in your Bovril.
Not long to go now anyway!
That Billy Connolly story was a good one BB.
-
Ahaaaaa! I pinched that one Hound!
-
Oh it's tiring BB but what the hell.
This thread started off on the topic of how, as folk get older, they tend to prefer their prejudices and often imperfect recollection (because we ALL have imperfect recollection) to facts. And they won't change these opinions even when presented with facts. Especially on the subject of how much better it was in the Good Old Days.
You gave us a, frankly, incredible opinion. That "Nowadays a murder in Doncaster might not even hit the front page of the Doncaster Free Press." I say it's incredible, because local newspapers are fighting for their very existence, and need every bit of "grab 'em" news they can find.
In that context, I don't think it's unreasonable for you to be asked to provide some evidence of that claim. But you don't. Instead you get arsey when asked to deal with facts. Which kind of nicely reinforces the content of the OP.
-
Because I haven't got any evidence, BST. But the fact is I know that it is true because I've seen evidence of it.
-
Proving a negative? :)
-
Don't be too hard-on Sydney's comment that has been removed along with ours Hound. He might be an embarrassment to us but he's probably huge down under.
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
No I don't, so why do so many of you knock the 60s? We won the World Cup, had zero unemployment, and working class pleasures were cheap. What was there not to like?
I’ve not seen anybody knock the 60’s SS. As I’ve said twice before, the OP referred to the 80’s and 90’s. You brought up the 60’s. The point that’s being made is that many aspects of life in the UK have improved over the past 30-40 years. The statistical comparison showed that murder rates in 1967 and 2015 weren’t too different.
I wasn't just referring to this thread Herbert. There have been one or two other threads on the same subject, with references to tin baths and outside toilets.
I remember that discussion SS and think it was me who brought up the example of outside toilets among others. But it was a discussion nothing more as far as I was concerned, certainly not knocking the 60s. So, there you go twisting the facts once again. You'd make a fully fledged Tory if you could up your game.
-
Right guys, I've been giving this some thought and have realised how deeply paradoxical this whole thing is. For most of the 1960s we were under the rule of Harold Wilson's Labour Government, and you lot say those times were sh*te. For the last 9 years we've been under the rule of the Tories, and you say times are better now than they've ever been; richer, more peaceful, more tolerant. Can you see where this is going?
So come on guys, what's it to be? Are you having your cake or eating it?
It's not hard SS.
There is a general trend towards improvement.
In health standards. In educational standards. In housing standards. In environmental standards. In the quality of cars and communications. In efficient wealth production through productivity improvements.
Much of that is driven by technical improvement. The internet would have been developed whether Thatcher or Kinnock was PM in the 1980s.
The political question is whether the proceeds of those improvements have been managed sensibly and fairly.
It is an unarguable fact that today, after 40 years of a more or less market-dominated political environment, far, FAR more proceeds of that improvement go to the richest and far fewer to the rest than was the case in the 1960s. We were poorer then but we distributed the proceeds more equitably.
The change over the past 40-50 years didn't inevitably have to happen. It was a political choice.
My argument is not that we should chuck away all the improvements of the last half century. I just want them more evenly spread.
Combine the best of both. The overall wealth of today with the equitable spirit we had in the 1960s.
Do you disagree with that?
No I don't, so why do so many of you knock the 60s? We won the World Cup, had zero unemployment, and working class pleasures were cheap. What was there not to like?
I’ve not seen anybody knock the 60’s SS. As I’ve said twice before, the OP referred to the 80’s and 90’s. You brought up the 60’s. The point that’s being made is that many aspects of life in the UK have improved over the past 30-40 years. The statistical comparison showed that murder rates in 1967 and 2015 weren’t too different.
I wasn't just referring to this thread Herbert. There have been one or two other threads on the same subject, with references to tin baths and outside toilets.
I remember that discussion SS and think it was me who brought up the example of outside toilets among others. But it was a discussion nothing more as far as I was concerned, certainly not knocking the 60s. So, there you go twisting the facts once again. You'd make a fully fledged Tory if you could up your game.
Wrong again mate. I'm not twisting the facts at all. Some other posters criticised the 60s, citing things like racism and intolerance.
However, I'm not going to accuse you of twisting the facts. I mean, socialists never do that do they?
-
SS.
There WERE tin baths and outside toilets in Denaby in 1975. Fact. Whether you like it or not.
-
What did you expect under a Labour government?
-
SS.
There WERE tin baths and outside toilets in Denaby in 1975. Fact. Whether you like it or not.
BST, you're inadvertently making my point for me. Mr Pies accused me of twisting the facts by claiming some people on here knocked the 60s.
You've just confirmed that I was telling the truth. Thanks for that.
-
Twist & Shout SS, you're doing it again. You're just plain wrong trying to make out that giving examples of conditions that existed in the 60s is knocking it. You're being f**king ridiculous.
-
Pies.
Precisely.
I'm staying a fact. That is value free. There WERE tin baths and outside toilets in Denaby in 1975. People might very well interpret that as meaning that life wasn't all that good in the 1960s, but simply stating that fact is not in itself knocking anything.
-
Twist & Shout SS, you're doing it again. You're just plain wrong trying to make out that giving examples of conditions that existed in the 60s is knocking it. You're being f**king ridiculous.
Examples of conditions? Don't you mean examples of bad conditions, as BST was alluding to? Either you're twisting words, or you don't understand semantics. I think the latter is the most likely, if you can't see that some people on here have knocked the 60s.
I'd give this up if I were you, because you're starting to embarrass yourself.
-
Pies.
Precisely.
I'm staying a fact. That is value free. There WERE tin baths and outside toilets in Denaby in 1975. People might very well interpret that as meaning that life wasn't all that good in the 1960s, but simply stating that fact is not in itself knocking anything.
OK BST, I thought you were leaning towards my point of view on this, but obviously not; so I'll have to refer to the fact that you've also mentioned things like racism and intolerance that existed in the 60s.
If that's not knocking the 60s I don't know what is.
-
It's just another fact to put into the discussion SS.
Crude racism was endemic in popular culture in the 1960s and early 70s, and tolerated compared to today.
Just a fact.
-
It's just another fact to put into the discussion SS.
Crude racism was endemic in popular culture in the 1960s and early 70s, and tolerated compared to today.
Just a fact.
BST, I've no idea why you're doing this. Your understanding of semantics is enough to know what "knocking" means; it means criticising something in a negative way. You and others on here did that by claiming that things are better nowadays, and citing negative things about the 60s to endorse that opinion.
What part of all that are you not getting?
-
Twist & Shout SS, you're doing it again. You're just plain wrong trying to make out that giving examples of conditions that existed in the 60s is knocking it. You're being f**king ridiculous.
Examples of conditions? Don't you mean examples of bad conditions, as BST was alluding to? Either you're twisting words, or you don't understand semantics. I think the latter is the most likely, if you can't see that some people on here have knocked the 60s.
I'd give this up if I were you, because you're starting to embarrass yourself.
I don't embarrass easily Steve. I'll bring you back to the discussion we were having when the outside toilets and tin baths were mentioned. It was about how living conditions today are incomparably different to back in the sixties for the common man. You was trying to say that what we have now you had back then. I think I know who should be embarrassed in this conversation.
-
Twist & Shout SS, you're doing it again. You're just plain wrong trying to make out that giving examples of conditions that existed in the 60s is knocking it. You're being f**king ridiculous.
Examples of conditions? Don't you mean examples of bad conditions, as BST was alluding to? Either you're twisting words, or you don't understand semantics. I think the latter is the most likely, if you can't see that some people on here have knocked the 60s.
I'd give this up if I were you, because you're starting to embarrass yourself.
I don't embarrass easily Steve. I'll bring you back to the discussion we were having when the outside toilets and tin baths were mentioned. It was about how living conditions today are incomparably different to back in the sixties for the common man. You was trying to say that what we have now you had back then. I think I know who should be embarrassed in this conversation.
What we have now? I wasn't talking about technology, I was talking about colour TV, double glazing, and central heating, all of which were available in the late 60s; go check.
The problem here is that you keep mentioning your part in the conversation, when the biggest criticisms came from BST, who mentioned things like racism and intolerance; if they're not criticisms, then the pair of you clearly have a problem with semantics.
That's my explanation, and it's honest, and it's my last word on the subject.