Showing posts with label middle class. Show all posts
Showing posts with label middle class. Show all posts
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Why the London Riots?
How new media, old media and rampant unemployment combined to stoke the worst riots Britain has seen in years
BY Michael Goldfarb
Global Post
LONDON, United Kingdom — I knew we were in for a rough night here in Stoke Newington in the London Borough of Hackney when my wife called me at 5 p.m. from Sainsbury’s, our local supermarket, to say she was in a lock down. They were shuttering the place and the police were telling her trouble had already started outside the Hackney Town Hall. The cops told her to go home and stay off the streets.
I took her call as I was walking into the local library to return a book. Inside, the librarians were watching a BBC live feed on their computers of action a mile and a half away. One of the librarians explained he lived over there.
This morning I awoke to learn that half a dozen or more neighborhoods in London — north to south, east to west — saw outbreaks of violence, looting and arson. In other cities around the country — Birmingham, Liverpool, Leeds and Bristol — there were also reports of youth confronting police.
This rioting is something Britain has not seen in recent years. It is a totally new expression of anger from what sociologists would call the “underclass.” That said, there are familiar elements in the build-up to last night’s anarchy that might help you understand it a little.
First, the chronology: The tension began to boil over last Thursday when police shot and killed a young black man named Mark Duggan in Tottenham, a predominantly Afro-Caribbean and African immigrant neighborhood in north London. In the mid-1980s, Tottenham was the scene of terrible race riots which culminated in a policeman being hacked to death by a group of men armed with machetes. Saturday night, following a disappointing visit to the police by Duggan’s family and community leaders, a protest about the incident turned violent.
When the smoke cleared on Sunday morning it was obvious that the violence was not about the police and racism — as it had been in the 1980s. The Duggan family were appalled by what had happened, much of it directed against shops owned by black and immigrant businessmen. Back in the 1980s, community leaders were harshly critical of the police and the government. Local black politicians used the riots to point out the institutional racism in the police force. Now the local member of parliament, David Lammy, son of Afro-Caribbean immigrants, led the criticism of the rioters.
On Sunday night, low-level looting spread to other parts of north London not far from Tottenham. The violence’s tenuous relationship to the Duggan incident disappeared. The rioters were a heterodox mix of black and white youths who did not come out on the street to demonstrate against the police. They hit the streets to take what they could: electronic goods and sneakers, and then trash the shops they had just looted.
Then last night things exploded. Why?
Partially it’s media, old and new. After getting my wife’s message I left the library and raced home to watch the 24-hour television news channels. Sky News had scrambled its helicopter and was showing a raw feed of action in Hackney. Police were clearing Mare Street, the main shopping street. As the crowds dispersed into the side streets, cars and dumpsters full of garbage were being set on fire. The police were not grabbing kids and arresting them, they were trying to clear space and hold it.
Meanwhile kids were able to evade police by texting each other meeting places where law enforcement was absent.
It isn’t hard to imagine that young people from the same social background around the city watching those pictures and getting texts from people they know in Hackney decided it was worth the risk of arrest to go out to the local shopping area and take what they wanted.
They seem to have been right. Prime Minister David Cameron said that there were 6,000 police on the streets of London last night. That sounds like a lot but London is a vast city. A few hundred people looting in Ealing in the west, a few hundred in Clapham in the south, a few hundred more in Croydon at the city’s edge, a few hundred more in Hackney, and three or four other places, all these neigborhoods separated by long distances — five to 10 miles. You can see how thinly stretched law enforcement was.
That explains why things spread so quickly last night.
The underlying causes of the rioting are difficult to determine with certainty, but one key fact must be considered: youth unemployment.
The rioters were overwhelmingly teenagers and kids in their 20s. About 20 percent of 16-24 year olds in Britain are unemployed. That figure is much, much higher on council estates — the British term for housing projects. (You can leave school at the age of 16 in this country). Unemployment statistics in Britain are sadly vague, but a reasonable estimate of youth unemployment just in Hackney is 33 percent. (Those attending college or performing any form of unpaid apprentice work are considered to be employed.) There don’t seem to be any statistics for youth unemployment on council estates. As I live in the neighborhood I would say well above 60 or 70 percent is a good guess.
The reason I say this is that unlike in Paris or New York, London doesn’t wall its poor people into ghettos or suburbs. There are streets in Hackney where very ordinary row houses cost a million bucks but on the corner there is a council estate. The kids who grow up in the million dollar houses go to college and then on to jobs; many of those in the estates leave school at 16 and find no work. If a third of Hackney’s youth is unemployed and the middle class kids are all going on to higher education, the segment of the population pulling the unemployment figure up must come from the estates.
When there are that many young men with nothing to do and no money to spend, it doesn’t take much to set off violence. The immediate flash point — in this case the death of Mark Duggan — is quickly forgotten. A group hysteria takes hold.
Having covered riots in Northern Ireland for many years I can say with certainty that this kind of hysteria can take time to burn itself out. With TV cameras focused on them and smartphones at the ready, it may be a few nights yet before the fever subsides. There is very little the police can do.
What happens after the rioting subsides is difficult to predict. Entry level jobs are in short supply these days, and as the government’s austerity measures begin to bite here, it’s not likely to get better any time soon.
But the government has to be seen to be doing something. British Prime Minister David Cameron flew back to London from his holiday in Tuscany early today to deal with the situation. He told reporters that all police leave had been canceled and that 16,000 officers will be on the streets of London tonight. Parliament has also been recalled from its recess to hold a one-day emergency debate on the rioting.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Monday, August 01, 2011
ABC 20/20 Struggling and Speaking Out
Working class working for less
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Thank You Boehner
Susan Brannon
23 July 2011
Houston, we've got a problem. Those were the days when we were mainly concerned about the space shuttles going into space. Today is a different story. The attempt to come to an agreement over the U.S. debt falls into the gutter. Republicans blame the Democrats and the Democrats blame the Republicans. Following the news of the collapse, the FAA is wiping 4,000 people from their books, Walter Reed Medical Hospital is closing its door while wall street and major corporations prepare for a possibility of default. Murdoch's reign collapses while scandals grow from sea to shining sea. No one is going to Hampton this summer.
Shuffling through all the headlines it is difficult to find out who, what, where and when. The most important words in journalism. There are threats of cutting down with Social Security and Medicare over the course of 10 years. 1 trillion in savings that would come from the "draw-down" in the wars, in the next ten years. I thought Obama said that he would withdrawal the troops by October of 2010?
The Republicans want to cut Medicaid, but Obama was not comfortable with that idea. The idea of taking from those who do not have anything is a bit impossible. If anything, if we cut down on Social Security and Medicare, we will gain in our costs of health care due to the lack of preventive care for the elderly. Did not the elderly build our country? Did not the elderly pay taxes and pensions all of their lives?
They could gain 800 Billion in revenue if they eliminated the top-end-Bush tax cuts. The Republicans did not go for that idea. We are not left with much of a choice, but to raise the debt limit without Congress and call for a 1.5 trillion in cuts. The Gang of Six wanted to slash 3.7 trillion over ten years, and gain 1 trillion through tax code reform.
It looks like Obama will have a difficult time getting re-elected next term, for it seems that he has been put between a rock and a hard place.
Here is the list of Public Debt by recent administrations...
Regan (1981-1988) - 1.26 trillion added to the debt (8 years)
BushSr (1989-1992) -0.81 trillion (4 years)
Bill Clinton (1993-2000) 0.13 Trillion (8 years)
GWBush - (2001-2008)- 2.48 trillion (8 years)
Obama (2009-2011)- 4.35 trillion (3 years)
The numbers for Obama do not look good here. He spent more money in the attempt to create more jobs by developing a stimulus plan. That did not work. Our wars continue, and the debt increases. Our Social Security debt is the same as our war debt at 701,893,976 and adding by the minute.
However, there are some different numbers since Obama's administration:
The total federal outlays for the fiscal year 2010 was 3.456 trillion, was down 64 billion from a year earlier.
Incomes were up by 58 billion, to 2.162 trillion.
The budget gap was 177 billion less than the previous estimates in July, due to lower than forecast spending and higher than expected tax collections.
Yet, the Federal Reserve attempts to support the economy more than doubles its profits to...get this...75.8 billion. The increase reflects income from its purchases of more than 1.75 trillion in Treasury debt and mortgage-backed securities.
Who has been benefiting from our spending and debt? Why the Federal Reserve of course, not to mention a few defense contractors "repairing" the war damage and feeding the troops. Oh, I forgot to mention the banks, and GE who profited from the bailouts to begin with. GE now holds 91 billion in cash, 40 billion in short term debt, compared with 16 billion in cash and 90 billion in short term debt three years ago.
Thank you Boehner for letting America down by walking out of the meeting and not solving any problems.
Recent Articles:
Tainted Water
Debt Plan Fact Sheet
Our Tax Dollars at Work
Satellite View of Foreclosures
American Struggling Middle Class (Video)
Global Confidence in Economy Collapses
Crime Against Humanity
Which Countries Have the Most Days Off?
23 July 2011
Houston, we've got a problem. Those were the days when we were mainly concerned about the space shuttles going into space. Today is a different story. The attempt to come to an agreement over the U.S. debt falls into the gutter. Republicans blame the Democrats and the Democrats blame the Republicans. Following the news of the collapse, the FAA is wiping 4,000 people from their books, Walter Reed Medical Hospital is closing its door while wall street and major corporations prepare for a possibility of default. Murdoch's reign collapses while scandals grow from sea to shining sea. No one is going to Hampton this summer.
Shuffling through all the headlines it is difficult to find out who, what, where and when. The most important words in journalism. There are threats of cutting down with Social Security and Medicare over the course of 10 years. 1 trillion in savings that would come from the "draw-down" in the wars, in the next ten years. I thought Obama said that he would withdrawal the troops by October of 2010?
The Republicans want to cut Medicaid, but Obama was not comfortable with that idea. The idea of taking from those who do not have anything is a bit impossible. If anything, if we cut down on Social Security and Medicare, we will gain in our costs of health care due to the lack of preventive care for the elderly. Did not the elderly build our country? Did not the elderly pay taxes and pensions all of their lives?
They could gain 800 Billion in revenue if they eliminated the top-end-Bush tax cuts. The Republicans did not go for that idea. We are not left with much of a choice, but to raise the debt limit without Congress and call for a 1.5 trillion in cuts. The Gang of Six wanted to slash 3.7 trillion over ten years, and gain 1 trillion through tax code reform.
It looks like Obama will have a difficult time getting re-elected next term, for it seems that he has been put between a rock and a hard place.
Here is the list of Public Debt by recent administrations...
Regan (1981-1988) - 1.26 trillion added to the debt (8 years)
BushSr (1989-1992) -0.81 trillion (4 years)
Bill Clinton (1993-2000) 0.13 Trillion (8 years)
GWBush - (2001-2008)- 2.48 trillion (8 years)
Obama (2009-2011)- 4.35 trillion (3 years)
The numbers for Obama do not look good here. He spent more money in the attempt to create more jobs by developing a stimulus plan. That did not work. Our wars continue, and the debt increases. Our Social Security debt is the same as our war debt at 701,893,976 and adding by the minute.
However, there are some different numbers since Obama's administration:
The total federal outlays for the fiscal year 2010 was 3.456 trillion, was down 64 billion from a year earlier.
Incomes were up by 58 billion, to 2.162 trillion.
The budget gap was 177 billion less than the previous estimates in July, due to lower than forecast spending and higher than expected tax collections.
Yet, the Federal Reserve attempts to support the economy more than doubles its profits to...get this...75.8 billion. The increase reflects income from its purchases of more than 1.75 trillion in Treasury debt and mortgage-backed securities.
Who has been benefiting from our spending and debt? Why the Federal Reserve of course, not to mention a few defense contractors "repairing" the war damage and feeding the troops. Oh, I forgot to mention the banks, and GE who profited from the bailouts to begin with. GE now holds 91 billion in cash, 40 billion in short term debt, compared with 16 billion in cash and 90 billion in short term debt three years ago.
Thank you Boehner for letting America down by walking out of the meeting and not solving any problems.
Recent Articles:
Tainted Water
Debt Plan Fact Sheet
Our Tax Dollars at Work
Satellite View of Foreclosures
American Struggling Middle Class (Video)
Global Confidence in Economy Collapses
Crime Against Humanity
Which Countries Have the Most Days Off?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
