4 ms·

The UK society and policies are very strongly property oriented. Additionally the traditional phyche looks at people in classes, upper and lower class (the midd

The UK society and policies are very strongly property oriented. Additionally the traditional phyche looks at people in classes, upper and lower class (the middle class is negligible compared to wealthy European countries and is neglected, no help and not enough power for them, it is a transient space between lower and upper classes). Those who have something they worth something and they must be protected. Regardless if they have so much they have trouble knowing what to do with it. Social care is kept on a level that it could be pointed at by policy makers 'see, we have some!', being an excuse, kept on a bare minimum (unemployment and all other social benefits are a joke), keeping the lower classes content enough to operate the country, but no more! (they should know their place anyway) Private matters have much higher priority than common matters (e.g. in building infrastructure), public policies are the manifestation of many private interests. No social housing and all housing matters are submissive to the need of investors and developers (including housing standards and regulations), not for those who use it. Basically the country still formed of the important people and those who work for them. Kingdom all along, this democracy thing, and all collaborations, are mostly in the way, still something to get a grasp on for all.

denton-scratch 4y ago
> the middle class is negligible compared to wealthy European countries Really? Most britons are middle-class. The people who used to be peasants are now farmer-landowners, and machinery enables them to work their land with very few workers. There are no more huge crowds of factory workers. People use the term "upper class" in different ways. Sometimes it just means "rich", but I don't think class is about money. If you describe someone as "classy", you're saying they're educated, mannered and refined. You're not saying they're rich. To be clear, I think of the upper class as the aristocracy and their offspring. The rich guys are probably in the class known as "nouveau riche". Increasingly, the nouveau riche seem to be immigrants, such as the recently-dismissed Tory chairman. The UK has for decades been penalizing the middle class, which is the majority of the population. They aren't unionized, and they don't even have much solidarity: politicians can easily set the middle classes at one-another's throats. And yet most of us are middle-class.
- mihaaly 4y ago
  It's more like Germany that is formed of stable middle class. UK has wealthy and poorer (worker?) people, these are the stable classes. Others in between sooner or later slide down if not hanging on tirelessly to the supposedly middle class status with small mistakes/misfurtune fail that, or need to push pretty hard (still no guarantee) to raise to a self sustaining wealthy class. The middle is an unstable place. Unlike in other countries where the middle is the stable bulk, given for average (not the extreme).
  - simonbarker87 4y ago
    The UK middle class is large and stable. It’s not a particularly wealthy middle class compared to other nations but it’s easily over 50% of the country. Perhaps we have a different definition of middle class but if you do it based soley on income then it would be a household salary (pre tax) if between £50k and £200k I would say.
    - mihaaly 4y ago
      A household with 50k is middle? Come on, don't joke with me man! Why don't you start from 20k instead, then the middle class is huge then! :DD Try being 'stable' on 50k, or even 70-80k without having a sum to start with from others (e.g. parents) and want to get ahead with decent housing that you can rely on well before you get retired, rely on even when interim hardship comes, without fear of loosing any of you your jobs just temporarily (beacuse naturally you both must work, no choice in that!), try it! Preferably in a medium expensive area. .... stable ... you are funny!
      - simonbarker87 4y ago
        I have many friends at the lower end of that range as a household income (£60k) without family help and I myself fall well within the range I gave and all are comfortably and stably in the middle. Would we like more money? Sure. Are we fearful of sliding into the oblivion you describe? Not at all. Outside London this range is very much the middle. I’m not saying life can’t be better and that wages should climb (in fact I whole heartedly agree) but the picture of a non-existent middle class and those that are there are unstable and days from sliding into poverty just isn’t true.
simonbarker87 4y ago
> No social housing This is demonstrably untrue. Social housing is run by housing associations which are ALMOs (arms length management orgs) rather than central government but they are still large and numerous (Clarion appears to be the largest now with over 100,000 properties and there are over 1,500 HAs in the UK). All new housing projects must have a portion for social housing along with (and I may get this number wrong) 106 money which is an investment in local services that must be built first/early so they don’t do the old “whoops we ran out of money just after we sold the last house and now can’t build that parade of shops and community Center we said we would”
- mihaaly 4y ago
  Sorry, misspoke. I ment community housing. Owned and maintained by the community for anyone, like in Sweden. Did not mean the subsidised basic housing for the use of the most miserable to conserve their status, taking their money with market rates when they start to earn above low miserable level, prohibiting a raise in living standard or savings. Whenever you'd get a glance at breaking out of the 30k-40k kind of household income level you'd be hit with market rent which will push you right back to social housing. This serves more like an other kind of of inadequate social benefits, something to point at: 'see, we have social something!' while it's just conserving the situation for the poor, no real chance getting into a non-existent middle class. More like a life raft for those having no other choice than a community centric housing approach for the population. The 100,000 is both inadequate number - not enought because there are more who'd need it, so it is mandated on the private sector to build more - and also too high: showing how big the poor class is...

denton-scratch 4y ago

> the middle class is negligible compared to wealthy European countries Really? Most britons are middle-class. The people who used to be peasants are now farmer-landowners, and machinery enables them to work their land with very few workers. There are no more huge crowds of factory workers. People use the term "upper class" in different ways. Sometimes it just means "rich", but I don't think class is about money. If you describe someone as "classy", you're saying they're educated, mannered and refined. You're not saying they're rich. To be clear, I think of the upper class as the aristocracy and their offspring. The rich guys are probably in the class known as "nouveau riche". Increasingly, the nouveau riche seem to be immigrants, such as the recently-dismissed Tory chairman. The UK has for decades been penalizing the middle class, which is the majority of the population. They aren't unionized, and they don't even have much solidarity: politicians can easily set the middle classes at one-another's throats. And yet most of us are middle-class.

mihaaly 4y ago
It's more like Germany that is formed of stable middle class. UK has wealthy and poorer (worker?) people, these are the stable classes. Others in between sooner or later slide down if not hanging on tirelessly to the supposedly middle class status with small mistakes/misfurtune fail that, or need to push pretty hard (still no guarantee) to raise to a self sustaining wealthy class. The middle is an unstable place. Unlike in other countries where the middle is the stable bulk, given for average (not the extreme).
- simonbarker87 4y ago
  The UK middle class is large and stable. It’s not a particularly wealthy middle class compared to other nations but it’s easily over 50% of the country. Perhaps we have a different definition of middle class but if you do it based soley on income then it would be a household salary (pre tax) if between £50k and £200k I would say.
  - mihaaly 4y ago
    A household with 50k is middle? Come on, don't joke with me man! Why don't you start from 20k instead, then the middle class is huge then! :DD Try being 'stable' on 50k, or even 70-80k without having a sum to start with from others (e.g. parents) and want to get ahead with decent housing that you can rely on well before you get retired, rely on even when interim hardship comes, without fear of loosing any of you your jobs just temporarily (beacuse naturally you both must work, no choice in that!), try it! Preferably in a medium expensive area. .... stable ... you are funny!
    - simonbarker87 4y ago
      I have many friends at the lower end of that range as a household income (£60k) without family help and I myself fall well within the range I gave and all are comfortably and stably in the middle. Would we like more money? Sure. Are we fearful of sliding into the oblivion you describe? Not at all. Outside London this range is very much the middle. I’m not saying life can’t be better and that wages should climb (in fact I whole heartedly agree) but the picture of a non-existent middle class and those that are there are unstable and days from sliding into poverty just isn’t true.

simonbarker87 4y ago

> No social housing This is demonstrably untrue. Social housing is run by housing associations which are ALMOs (arms length management orgs) rather than central government but they are still large and numerous (Clarion appears to be the largest now with over 100,000 properties and there are over 1,500 HAs in the UK). All new housing projects must have a portion for social housing along with (and I may get this number wrong) 106 money which is an investment in local services that must be built first/early so they don’t do the old “whoops we ran out of money just after we sold the last house and now can’t build that parade of shops and community Center we said we would”

mihaaly 4y ago
Sorry, misspoke. I ment community housing. Owned and maintained by the community for anyone, like in Sweden. Did not mean the subsidised basic housing for the use of the most miserable to conserve their status, taking their money with market rates when they start to earn above low miserable level, prohibiting a raise in living standard or savings. Whenever you'd get a glance at breaking out of the 30k-40k kind of household income level you'd be hit with market rent which will push you right back to social housing. This serves more like an other kind of of inadequate social benefits, something to point at: 'see, we have social something!' while it's just conserving the situation for the poor, no real chance getting into a non-existent middle class. More like a life raft for those having no other choice than a community centric housing approach for the population. The 100,000 is both inadequate number - not enought because there are more who'd need it, so it is mandated on the private sector to build more - and also too high: showing how big the poor class is...