Neighbourhood Watched

[John Marwood]

involving a ten shilling note a packet of potato puffs and a Taylors iced roll?

i remember that on police 5

 

[basil]

more like a Bazooka Joe and a very Lucky Bag.......

 

[John Marwood]

no corona lorries were involved if i remember

just a davenports waggon

 

[Slainte]

Ha ha!

Well just finished watching it and F***ing hell. How can people live like that? Oh well, glad I told my estate agent to keep me away from social housing.

on the contrary, not all social housing is bad, and can be very good for a lot of people, unfortunately the merits of social housing are destroyed by some of the examples shown in this programme.

 

[Slainte]

Snobs.

Not at all. My point is that we shouldn't expect people who live in social housing to put up with lower standards in their neighbourhood. If some kids jumped up and down on the roof of a posh person's car then something would happen a lot sooner.

Posh people don't live near social housing - they wouldn't allow it. Hence my comment, and by avoiding social housing you are making the problem worse by ghettoisation.

What about the many decent people who live in social housing who have to put up with that kind of thing all the time, but because they live in social housing and it's confined to specific areas that aren't on anyone's doorstep no one gives a shit.

Most new social housing now is being integrated with private housing to try and eradicate this issue of gehttoisation and segregation. On the whole it generally does work well with again the few exceptions, but like in any part of life, its always the small minority that make it bad for everyone

 

[Slainte]

Not at all. My point is that we shouldn't expect people who live in social housing to put up with lower standards in their neighbourhood. If some kids jumped up and down on the roof of a posh person's car then something would happen a lot sooner.

Posh people don't live near social housing - they wouldn't allow it. Hence my comment, and by avoiding social housing you are making the problem worse by ghettoisation.

What about the many decent people who live in social housing who have to put up with that kind of thing all the time, but because they live in social housing and it's confined to specific areas that aren't on anyone's doorstep no one gives a shit.

Most new social housing now is being integrated with private housing to try and eradicate this issue of ghettoisation and segregation. On the whole it generally does work well with again the few exceptions, but like in any part of life, its always the small minority that make it bad for everyone

also it does depend on the RSL or Council that is in charge of the housing. I work with many housing associations and councils, one in particular in Birmingham that went from being one of the country's worst housing estates with 32 high rise blocks, to now having 2 high rise blocks and a fairly nice comunnity led housing estate, this has been achieved through hard work by the community pulling together and lots of regeneration in the area. It is impressive to see how this has contributed to a better estate through the sheer determination of the community involved. Another housing association I work with are the complete opposite, they have properties midlands wise including some in Stafford and generally don't give a toss about their tenants, they are just happy to have any one occupy their homes, and whilst they encourgae community working with the elderly, anyone else are seemed to be generally ignored, until the problems have escalated to such a high scale then it necessitates the need for action, being reactive rather than proactive.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Its the way of the way of the world...get used to it or do something to change it? hhmmmm maybe those in social housing should do something about it otherwise are they not helping to make the problem worse by ghettoisation? Lower standards arent just about jumping on someones car, its about litter, graffiti, dumping crap in your front garden and street so while the decent people can well be forgiven for not wanting to confront a gang of kids jumping from car to car there is no reason why they cant pick up the littler in their garden or get rid of things in the proper way instead of dumping in the street. These are all things that characterise social housing neighbour hoods. Is it sounding grim? You bet it does so why would anyone want to move there? Doesnt make us snobs though. And just so you are aware of my background and where i am coming from i grew up in social housing as a chil and lived in and around social housing at various stages of my adult life until fairly recently. I also have family who live in social housing who i see regularly so it is something i am very in touch with. I am not a snob, but i choose not to live in a grim place and that doesnt mean i have contributed to ghettoisation.

Yes it does, the definition of ghettoisation is confining one group of people to one area, and if everyone else moves elsewhere, then then people in social housing are going to be stuck in one area, a 'ghetto' if you will.

As has already been said, "If some kids jumped up and down on the roof of a posh person's car then something would happen a lot sooner." Those in 'poorer' areas are likely to find that even if they do try to do something about it, they might well be ignored.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Exactly. Social housing is not the problem, its the people in them. Many are fine, I lived in a concrete council house til I was 21 and luckily ours was a nice area. I firmly believe that was down to the mix of people we had on the street though, very few dumped washing machines or cars! 2 streets away on the other hand, you think the bin men fear to tread.

The house is not the issue, the area is not the issue, its the people. A house is just a pile of bricks, the area a collection of these. Seems to me when you have crap neighbours then standards drop, and when you have good neighbours standards improve. The issue is that people who rent care less about their houses, so areas of high rental are usually the shitholes. Still all down to the people though, not the houses.

It is not just the people's fault - I'm not going to go into all the sociology/psychology of how people develop, but it involves words like 'norms' and 'socialisation', which are decided by the society around them and the circumstances they live in. The problem is POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION, or, more accurately, inequality in society.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Spot on Tek... and my first instinct is to say "if people don't behave and act responsibly in social housing, kick the funkers out".... god knows there are plenty more people on the waiting lists...

That does tend to happen nowadays.

Problem is where do you kick them out to? The evil side of me says "don't give a sh*t, where they go is their problem, let them live on the streets"

I just know that the human rights brigade will jump on me for thinking / saying it.

Exactly. No one ever thinks to work with them to change their behaviour - they just move them on, to do exactly the same thing all over again... “The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.†- Albert Einstein

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

People live how they want to live, you can't stop that.

Do they? Do poor Africans want to live in those conditions where they have to walk miles for clean water, struggle for food, have poor medical care and live in an inadequate shack of a house? Can we not stop that? (Extreme example, rhetorical questions, I'm making a point that people don't always consciously choose how they live.)

People who don't pay anything to live in their house are very likely to have less respect for it, its just how things are. I'm not saying everyone, but certainly a much higher percentage than people who pay rent.

Firstly, this in incorrect. Social housing does charge rent, and with Stafford and Rural Homes you have to pay one week's rent up front to get the keys, whether you claim housing benefit or not. There are many people in social housing who do not get full housing benefit, or even any at all, so they have to pay rent out of their own pocket - and of course, council tax.

Kids who always get what they want usually have no respect for what they get, I suspect this trait is not grown out of. Something earned is always worth more than something given, or at least it is to me!

Eh? Apart from people who prioritise TVs and video games over food, I can't imagine kids who grow up in social housing getting everything they want (I certainly didn't, and I lived in private rented for a little while on two occasions).It sounds like you are getting the upper and lower classes confused.

 

[Gramaisc]

I think that we are, in fact, in 95% agreement here. Social housing is a necessary part of our society and we are mistaken to allow some people to abuse it to the lengths that we have seen. The disagreement is largely over what to do about it. The majority of occupants are quite reasonable people who seem to be expected to put up with lower standards than the rest of society. It's like a student house with one messy sod, eventually the others will just give up trying. It's not a simple problem and it's interlinked with many other issues. Top marks to anybody who tries, though.

 

[tek-monkey]

Exactly. Social housing is not the problem, its the people in them. Many are fine, I lived in a concrete council house til I was 21 and luckily ours was a nice area. I firmly believe that was down to the mix of people we had on the street though, very few dumped washing machines or cars! 2 streets away on the other hand, you think the bin men fear to tread.

The house is not the issue, the area is not the issue, its the people. A house is just a pile of bricks, the area a collection of these. Seems to me when you have crap neighbours then standards drop, and when you have good neighbours standards improve. The issue is that people who rent care less about their houses, so areas of high rental are usually the shitholes. Still all down to the people though, not the houses.

It is not just the people's fault - I'm not going to go into all the sociology/psychology of how people develop, but it involves words like 'norms' and 'socialisation', which are decided by the society around them and the circumstances they live in. The problem is POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION, or, more accurately, inequality in society.

And yet the people living on these estates are the society around their neighbours, they are the problems. Move them to other areas, and they bring that area down to the same level. Why is it so many people are able to grow up on these estates, yet still leave without a criminal record and get decent jobs? Some people are just *****, end of. Why should people with no regard for others be allowed to influence the very people who pay for them to live? Surely that is completely unfair on those who do better themselves?

Oh, and I'm not aware of many people deprived and in poverty that have jobs. In fact, I'm not aware of any on benefits either TBH. They get enough to live on, its how they use it thats the problem.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

... no bills ....

Well if you want to live without running water (actually, not sure if they can cut of the water for non-payment - but eventually there will be bailiffs I presume) and heating, lights, etc. then there are no bills. Otherwise, people in social housing generally have to pay their water bill, electricity and/or gas bills just like everyone else. Not forgetting phone/internet. Get your facts straight...

THOSE WHO CANNOT AND DO NOT RESPECT THE HOUSE WHICH IS GIVEN TO THEM GRATIS THEN THEY SHOULD BE DISREGARDED BY SOCIETY

Your opinion. You could substitute any number of things in there and it's still discrimination and the typical Tory 'keep the dirt hidden under the rug' type solutions to social problems, although Iain Duncan Smith (Chairman of the Centre for Social Justice) is a breath of fresh air in that respect.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Exactly. Social housing is not the problem, its the people in them. Many are fine, I lived in a concrete council house til I was 21 and luckily ours was a nice area. I firmly believe that was down to the mix of people we had on the street though, very few dumped washing machines or cars! 2 streets away on the other hand, you think the bin men fear to tread.

The house is not the issue, the area is not the issue, its the people. A house is just a pile of bricks, the area a collection of these. Seems to me when you have crap neighbours then standards drop, and when you have good neighbours standards improve. The issue is that people who rent care less about their houses, so areas of high rental are usually the shitholes. Still all down to the people though, not the houses.

It is not just the people's fault - I'm not going to go into all the sociology/psychology of how people develop, but it involves words like 'norms' and 'socialisation', which are decided by the society around them and the circumstances they live in. The problem is POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION, or, more accurately, inequality in society.

And yet the people living on these estates are the society around their neighbours, they are the problems. Move them to other areas, and they bring that area down to the same level.

Maybe because no one has tried to bring them up to their level?

Why is it so many people are able to grow up on these estates, yet still leave without a criminal record and get decent jobs? Some people are just *****, end of. Why should people with no regard for others be allowed to influence the very people who pay for them to live? Surely that is completely unfair on those who do better themselves?

Teach them to have regard for others (try having regard for them for a start - people usually act on how you approach them) then you might find that these problems start disappearing.

Oh, and I'm not aware of many people deprived and in poverty that have jobs. In fact, I'm not aware of any on benefits either TBH. They get enough to live on, its how they use it thats the problem.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but it's no one's business how they spend their money unless it is affecting someone else in a negative way. Again, I recommend some kind of educational solution (or rehab?) - it's no good criticising people if you don't try to show them a better way of doing things (that they agree to - people don't generally respond to being told what to do, even if it is "for their own good!" - to me that's as offensive as telling me I'm going to hell and the response is likely to be the same).

 

[tek-monkey]

Do they? Do poor Africans want to live in those conditions where they have to walk miles for clean water, struggle for food, have poor medical care and live in an inadequate shack of a house? Can we not stop that? (Extreme example, rhetorical questions, I'm making a point that people don't always consciously choose how they live.)

Sorry, I was thinking about our problems in the UK. If you want to go worldwide its an impossible conversation, due to differing care levels in every society.

Firstly, this in incorrect. Social housing does charge rent, and with Stafford and Rural Homes you have to pay one week's rent up front to get the keys, whether you claim housing benefit or not. There are many people in social housing who do not get full housing benefit, or even any at all, so they have to pay rent out of their own pocket - and of course, council tax.

I know this, I grew up in social housing remember. My mum still lives there, and she is one of those who pays her own way. Generally though, those that pay rent on their housing treat it better than those who don't, which is what I was trying to get across.

Eh? Apart from people who prioritise TVs and video games over food, I can't imagine kids who grow up in social housing getting everything they want (I certainly didn't, and I lived in private rented for a little while on two occasions).It sounds like you are getting the upper and lower classes confused.

I was comparing attitudes, sorry I thought that was obvious. People who don't have to work for anything, lose sight of the value of things. When housing is free, you take less pride in it. Why is it that on a single council estate you will have some good areas, and some bad? Don't know if its the norm, but on coton fields it was the areas of higher benefits claimants that ended up the worst areas. The nicer ones started getting brought up in the gov right to buy scheme, in fact I suspect my mums street is now at least 50% private ownership.

 

[tek-monkey]

Maybe because no one has tried to bring them up to their level?

Maybe they haven't tried to raise their own level?

Teach them to have regard for others (try having regard for them for a start - people usually act on how you approach them) then you might find that these problems start disappearing.

Again, you're making them out as victims. Why don't they teach themselves, learn from the situation they are in and notice what the people who have left did to better themselves. Many animals are capable of learning from the actions of others, right down to the common stickleback.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but it's no one's business how they spend their money unless it is affecting someone else in a negative way. Again, I recommend some kind of educational solution (or rehab?) - it's no good criticising people if you don't try to show them a better way of doing things (that they agree to - people don't generally respond to being told what to do, even if it is "for their own good!").

It is other peoples business when they are given money to sustain themselves, and they use it in other ways then complain they're skint. Its poor money management, yet those with the least would surely grow up being the most careful with what they have. Makes no sense to me, they are only victims of their own choosing.

 

[tek-monkey]

Anyway, why do I care, while my ants may not be monacled they at least know which cutley to use for the fish course.

 

[Gramaisc]

Things can be changed - if we decide to do it as a society. We used to have very high levels of drink-driving, until we decided to enforce the law strenuously. If we were to announce an end to the enforcement of drink-driving laws, then it wouldn't be long before we were right back where we came from. A friend of mine had his tyres slashed in Rugeley and, when he reported it, the cop said 'What do you expect if you live there?'.

 

[tek-monkey]

What punishment can we use though? People won't change without one, and monetary penalties are pointless to most as they have none. Reducing benefits would just push up crime levels, prison is the only answer and our jails are full.

Battle Royale is the only way forward.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Do they? Do poor Africans want to live in those conditions where they have to walk miles for clean water, struggle for food, have poor medical care and live in an inadequate shack of a house? Can we not stop that? (Extreme example, rhetorical questions, I'm making a point that people don't always consciously choose how they live.)

Sorry, I was thinking about our problems in the UK. If you want to go worldwide its an impossible conversation, due to differing care levels in every society.

As I said, it was an extreme example... I could have equally made it about people who live in social housing. For a start, how many people would choose to live in social housing if they had the choice to live in private rented or buy?

Again, you're making generalisations based on the popular media view of people on benefits. I know plenty of people on various benefits, and I don't tend to associate with disrespectful people (unless it's hierarchy, capitalism and consumerism that they have disrespect for).