Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
21 December 2010
22:0885988#21
I think you will find Morrisons pay for that to be done.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
22 December 2010
12:1886045#22
It seems we should all be clearing it. This 'big society' idea is really taking off.
We have the exciting possibility of buying our port, from ourselves; Our forests are to sold off because they are not making enough money; 'free' schools that will rely on people turning a profit and cuts to the NHS.
Now we have the joy of paying for services from the council yet should be doing the work ourselves. Don't forget the rise in VAT and our friends in the private sector raising the price of heating our homes.
Big Society=Big Con. Pay more, get less.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336320/UK-weather-DIY-salting-Big-Society-says-transport-minister.html
Tell me Conservatives, will you be clearing paths for everyone, or just the routes you use? This idea isn't about society, but individuals with a 'sod you jack, I'm alright' attitude.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
22 December 2010
12:3086046#23
your last like DT1 says it all
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
22 December 2010
14:3086062#24
As a relative newcomer to the forum I have a question. Everyone has a name except it seems DT1, can I ask who he/she is and why the special treatment?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
22 December 2010
14:3586066#25
jan
presume one of our leading lights from the dizzy heights will reply
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
22 December 2010
14:4086067#26
i think it is because of his job jan.
interesting post from him though, looks to me that the "big society" means the strongest survive and the weakest will go to the wall.
we all know that most voluntary work in communities is carried out by a few people, does this mean that councils and government departments expect these few people to carry out tasks previously carried out by them?
a few of us cleared snow in belgrave road the other day but absolutely nothing was done in surrounding roads.
what happens in a road populated mostly by elderly people?
many more questions will be asked as we discover more about the "big society".
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
22 December 2010
15:4886077#27
howard two words spring to mind, SMOKE,SCREEN.
oh dear found another two,BULL,S**t.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
23 December 2010
09:3486151#28
Sorry Jan, yes I do use DT1 as a name of here, I always think I have a responsibility to separate my political views from my professional. Although most of the time they marry up beautifully. If teachers subscribed to 'big society' children from underprivileged backgrounds would be teaching themselves.
The sooner we all realise 'big society' is a way of enforcing the idea 'it's not my fault, you should have done it yourself' the sooner we can stop it. I'm still waiting for anybody to unify David Cameron's 'big society' with Margaret Thatcher's 'no society'. Either the party has no ideology, or we are just being fed soundbites, that have very little relation to actual actions. I personally believe it's the latter, as Conservative ideology is generally painfully obvious.
If only it was survival of the fittest Howard, this is far cruder. This is survival of the richest.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
23 December 2010
09:4186153#29
i think we could all hide behind our proffessions
my feelings is that everyone as a forum member should have there identity known i did think that paulb had given that as an instruction.
i recall many changed to there names when this was enforced.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
23 December 2010
09:5086158#30
There are still a few initials inherited from the old days. DT is here from the old days and has been a thought provoking contributor for ages as you can see above, and also has a special exemption because of his work. Nothing further to add so just enjoy the debate.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
23 December 2010
10:1086161#31
I'm not hiding behind my profession Keith, if anything the other way round. Additionally Keith, as many here know, my name is Darren...which I hate. I used to be 'Dreary' on the forum before, and actually many of my friends call me this, I prefer it to Darren and it suits my persona.
It's funny how I have just outlined words/names becoming meaningless and now you jump on this Keith. If I changed my identity name to 'David Thomas' you would be happy? For that fact how do I know you actually Keith, and if it is, is it you posting? Which just exemplifies what a waste of time this argument is. This may not even be DT1 writing this now.
I never make personal attacks on people, just ideas. I don't see the problem. Would a Rose by any other name smell as sweet? ...if only I smelt like one.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
23 December 2010
10:1186162#32
Thanks Paul.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
23 December 2010
15:0686181#33
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
23 December 2010
15:0886182#34
jan
iv never been happier
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
24 December 2010
08:2186295#35
DT1
I don't think the Big Society is a con at all; I do believe it is trying to get away from Big Government.
Too many people have become dependant on the State for almost everything with very few people now taking responsibility for anything - even clearing the snow from outside their house.
The Big Society (as I see it) is about Society - the local community itself, taking more responsibility, nothing to do with being rich at all.
As I'm sure you know Darren, that "No such thing as Society" bit was taken completely out of context - I reproduced the whole piece a year or two ago, so no need to do so again.
Roger
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
24 December 2010
08:3086297#36
Roger
It's strange cos we 'society' always look to the govt in times of need..ie health education crime even bad weather so we are all guilty of wanting a nanny state for either guidance or indeed to blame when things go wrong but yet the Tories keep telling us to take more responsibilty for our own lives.However on many issues like the above and energy,immigration,climate contol,law and order etc we must have a strong govt that will make firm and fair decisions based not upon one's selfish motives but those for the common good.
Hence my continued support for the Labour party who attempt to help those that can't help themselves and put others first before their own interests.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
24 December 2010
08:5686306#37
Marek has hit it on the head again: personal responsibility is indeed the aspiration, but "local communities" cannot, and should not, control the wider and more inflammable issues such as immigration, nuclear power (or not!), law and order. Thses, and other issues, have National and Global impact and are open to abuse and self interest. Government, elected by us, has a duty to manage many similar things. Answerable to us, accountable, but ultimately where the buck stops, that's responsible government.
PS - DT1, please may I call you Rose?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
24 December 2010
09:0986311#38
I wasn't referring to those Nationally important issues, but ones where local people and communities can and should be involved.
Horses for courses.
Roger
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
24 December 2010
09:5186319#39
Margaret Thatcher's 'no society' isn't taken out of context, it is a comment promoting individualism, as is David Cameron's 'big society'. Which is why it's such a joke.
Roger, nationally important issues are defined by society, macro and micro, which is why DC is speaking out of his bum. Surely he understands what society is! After all, his parents did pay for his education, so it must be the best!
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
24 December 2010
09:5186320#40
Bern, call me what you like!
