The article would be more convincing if the author suggested some interventions to address the poverty and disadvantage he mentions.

Australians have a good welfare net, but communities like Macquarie Fields seem to indicate that throwing money at people doesn't solve the problem.

The concept that as long as you are socially disadvantaged you have the right to break the law is crazy.

What do they want? Car theft to be considered a legitimate profession governed by OH&S? police limiting investigations only to those that can afford a reasonable defense? rioting and looting to be considered as affirmative shopping?

Life isn't fair, go and vote your representative in who will take your side. The rioters did more damage to themselves than anyone else and they have no one else to blame.

There are too many simplistic throwaway lines for this to be taken as seriously as it might - just possibly - deserve.

"...Sydney’s far southwest suburb of Macquarie Fields - a long neglected suburb"

Neglected? By whom? An easy line to stick in for a bit of emotion, but does it mean anything? What exactly has this suburb been deprived of by the governments State and Federal, that it should be described as "neglected"?

Some clue should be possible from the statement "the riots [were] an issue of social disadvantage, where socio-welfare and economic policies had failed the local community."

Socio-welfare has a nice ring about it, but is it meaningful? What exactly is it about this location that makes it more deserving of "socio-welfare" than anywhere else? And it needs to be stated that the same economic policies apply to all. Having one economic policy for Macquarie Fields and another for the rest of Australia would not make much sense.

The author clearly believes that the citizens are in need of special help. "Focusing on Deborah Kelly’s response shifts away from the crucial issue of social disadvantage and instead places blame on the community"

Eh?

The "crucial issue of social disadvantage" is obviously front-and-centre here, but hasn't actually been described in any lucid way. And for heaven's sake, how can Aunt Deborah's false allegations be categorized as placing the blame on the community?

I tried to read further, but without some substance that supports the author's contention that this area of Sydney is somehow disadvantaged in relation to the rest of the city, it's just waffle.

Being able to get a four bedroomed house for $340,000 can't be that bad http://www.domain.com.au/Public/PropertyDetails.aspx?adid=2006083237

Having grown up as "socially disadvantaged" neither I nor my family ever looked on it as a great excuse to break the laws.On the contrary, it was the spur that caused us to to do our uttermost to break that disadvantage.
Today's youth does not have the get up and go to better themselves the right way. There are all sorts of ways to help yourself but you must not let your own idleness and lack of purpose stop you from finding them.Nor blame the world for not keeping you in the style you imagine should be naturally yours. It doesn't work that way.

PUBLIC misconceptions, discourses that denote Otherness through cultural demonisation practices reign in mainstream Australia, AND especially in the highest offices of administrations impacted by Party Politic's. (Consider for the record of recent attacks of just one of our most respectable female leaders in the ACT).

Basic Elementary Stuff.

In the article at hand however;

Macquarie Fields.... 'where politicians and conservative commentators criminalised the youth'... and where socio-economic and cultural policies have (still) continued to fail the local inter-community/s.

While families were mourning the deaths of two boys, conservatives and heartless Australians made simplistic use of their hateful imaginings to display how morally bankrupt we are as a "Fair-Go" Aussie nation. One only needs to see the papers and blogs on this forum as we flushed our differences and bias.

I was and still am STOUNDED.

Meanwhile, so long after this lesson... low socio-economic positions of disenfranchised youth are maintained and THEY continue to experience further exclusion from the national mainstream.

You speak for many of US. Here in Cape York it is like the system is in the game of "blind mans bluff" at all ground levels.

No wonder we are so often out of our depth in many places - in telling situations overseas. To mix this and take it one step further, I suspect the underlying factor in Australia's "wheat board" scandles (a few years ago) was also a basic misunderstanding in culture as we partly got bogged in the role of law, custom and crime makingought to . Misguided norms in wrong fee payments followed by the bogus misinterpretations of how true the policy work.

Until we step back and embrace a meaning of different culture/s we will not reduce the conflict and pain that is blocking many of us.

Excellant Paper.

What would it take to get this kind of material more widely debated.

Thank You Ryan Al-Natour .

http://www.miacat.com
.

SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE? what's that ?

1/-Having less money than others ?

2/-Single income family with lots of children ?

3/-Broken homes, single mothers..?

How many among the Macquarie fields residents who cry 'social disadvantage can find the huge amounts of money needed to fund the tobacco habit, and the alchohol habit? (same goes for anyone crying social disadvantage by the way)

Take those 2 things alone away, and there will be a LOT more available money. For the single mums who have been abandoned by irresponsible men, we do have fairly strong social assistance. (Financially)

Unemployment ? that's not something which goes by 'suburb' it goes by the (bad)luck of the draw to people who genuinely seek jobs but can't find one for the time being. Its impossible to connect that with 'suburb'.

I began with "nothing" back from overseas, at 40 and a wife and 2 children (one more later) single income, mortgage.. began with the absolute minimum, struggled, forwent all but the absolutely neccessary, and went without a lot of that at times...but solid work and persistence ultimately pay off.

I didn't blame 'society' for the few years of hardship. Why should anyone else?

The general theme of the essay and the responses seems to cater to the "poor bugger me" syndrome. Where are these people referred to as aboriginal or of any other race? Were they mainly aboriginals confronting the police or are we tiptoing around the issue, ignoring the big black elephant in the room or say "aboriginal" three times and one will appear?
For crying out loud, aboriginals are just like anyone else of every other race. They have intelligence, presentability, opportunity, charisma, adaptive capabilities and every other characteristic that enables personkind - no, stuff you, mankind - to achieve to whatever level they can. But why should they? Well, most of them do! Take a look around, open the pidgeonholed minds and have a look at the aboriginal achievers who every day outnumber "park people" a little more.
What about the ones who don't? Why should they? Hang around on my bum in my subsidised or free accommodation and wait for the Sit Down Money to arrive. Watch lots of TV so I can hang with my homies in the hood and talk like my peeps in gangsta land. Lets get my sister pregnant for the Baby Bonus. Yeah this sort of people exist and I can personally name at least nine and they are all useless white turds who do nothing except suck up my taxes and terrify local residents.
These people referred to in the essay are not socially disadvantaged, they are over indulged and have had any aspirational incentives sucked out of them by old men in cardigans, women in overalls and lefty latte lovers who thrive on outrage and write letter to their MP's. The Macquaries fields "rioters" are the minority who attract disproportionate attention and detract from the advances that aboriginals have made.

So people are bad because they are poor, eh? Just exactly who is morally bankrupt here?

C'mon, maybe, just maybe, there are criminals who commit crimes and need catching and maybe, just maybe, our police should try and catch them.

Being a bad person who does bad things has nothing to do with being poor so don't blame the disadvantaged for being unable to distinguish between right and wrong, they don't need back-handed advocates.

"The common argument that crime is caused by poverty is a kind of slander on the poor." (H. L. Mencken

What a load of rubbish.How you live your life,rich or poor,is up to you.
I grew up in a very underpriviledged family.Most of us at some stage being state wards.I have 10 siblings,some of whom are hard working and honest,some of whom are scumbag criminals or druggies because they believe the world owes them something.Maybe if the powers that be made people work for what they are given,instead of all the handouts,we wouldn't have so many xxxxholes in the country.Personal responsibility seems to be non-existant in this day and age.It's a lot easier to blame
someone else and use your situation as a crutch than to get out and make a decent life for yourself.

“A fields day for the morally bankrupt conservatives”

I suspect the moral bankruptcy belongs to those who rioted.

I would further suspect most of those who rioted were more likely to vote “socialist”, than “conservative”.

This article seeks to lay the blame on everyone and anyone, except those who actually broke the law, destroyed their neighbours property and vandalized their own community.

The first rule of morality is

accountability.

When something is promoted as Morality but lacks “accountability” it is more commonly called “hypocrisy”.

As for “In hindsight, we can learn a lot about the riots, particularly the method in which a hierarchy of the “haves” and “have nots” is maintained.”

What distinguishes “haves” from “have nots” is

the “haves” possess

1 socially valuing attitudes, which reflect pride and care for where they live
2 moral responsibility and accountability for their own actions.
3 self respect and respect for the rights of others.
4 prudence and consideration in their conduct
5 respect for the law and the police.

What the Macquarie Fields rioters displayed was

1 Complete lack of respect for the rights or property of others
2 An endless capacity to weasel up excuses for their anti-social behaviour.
3 A selfishness verging on extreme hedonism.

Macquarie Fields is a product of the people who live there, not the people who live in peace in other suburbs or happen to vote for conservative prudence and self-responsibility.

The single biggest reason for the have-nots gravitating to less desirable areas is simple, "lowest cost denominator".

Those who work harder and can afford better (the supposed "haves") choose to live elsewhere, with some sense of safety, well away from the riotous behaviour of the “have-nots”.

Well said haygirl. The test is this life is not what hand we are dealt but how we choose to play it.

Col, I actually agree with much that you say here. Unfortunately, however, your customary bellicosity again detracts from your message.

This is particularly egregious (and very likely just plain wrong):

"I would further suspect most of those who rioted were more likely to vote “socialist”, than “conservative”."

Besides the fact that Australian voters aren't typically presented with that choice, I'd be surprised if many of the rioters vote at all. Many of them would be underage anyway, and alienated young people from the benighted suburbs are not generally known for adhering to civic resposibilities like enrolling to vote when they turn 18.

Yes, I thought this article was a bit of a bleat too - but there's no need to go overboard about it.

Being polite and honest can be a difficult task, as it is hard to reconcile the two at times – particularly in responding to the comments of my article. Therefore, I will begin by politely thanking everyone for their comments, as I am open to criticism and being challenged. Now in being honest, I would respond with a basic observation – never have I seen such pathetic, uninformed criticism which only proves that morally bankrupt arguments are abundant.

In terms of productivity, Sancho’s comment raises an important aspect regarding the way forward in addressing issues of poverty. Due to the scope of the article topic, I was unable to delve into methods of addressing disadvantage – which are not simplistic as we would all hope. If Sancho reread the article, it would be evident that deconstructing stigmatisations, reviewing welfare and social policy, and examining the riots as a social problem rather than solely a law and order problem – were suggestions.

I’m not sure where Sancho’s comment got the idea that money was ‘thrown’ at Macquarie Fields, considering education institutions, local community projects, transport services, employment services were considered under funded and deteriorating.

Shadow Minister’s comments were entertaining. Not once did I suggest that breaking the law was acceptable or should be legal, and I don’t think it would suit the interests of the Mac Fields residents, rather it would be in their interests to give young people in the region employment and educational opportunities.

Continued...

(author)

The criticism offered by Pericles’ comment was rather simplistic and pointless waffle. If a community is stranded from employment, education, transport, medical and shopping services, then it is fair to say that such a region is neglected by both state and federal governments. The pointless waffle offered by Pericles’ comment has places words in my mouth – I had not suggested that separate economic policies should be implemented in Mac Fields, rather that disadvantage in the area needs to be addressed. The link posted only supports my argument, after all how could a single mother of 3 that has a child with cancer and earns approximately 400 dollars a week be able to afford a 340,000 dollar house?..... Continue waffling, my friend!

Mickijo’s comments demonstrated how an uninformed perspective lacks any serious analysis into poverty. Social disadvantage is not mathematical, therefore because one grew up in certain living conditions does not mean certain outcomes will be produced. Again, I had not suggested that it was acceptable to break the law due to ‘social disadvantage’. Haygirl’s babble presented a similar argument “I grew up in a very underprivileged family’, please read the article ‘…there exists a massive disparity between the achievements of individuals from privileged backgrounds and individuals from low socio-economic backgrounds’.

Stigmatisations were brought up by BOAZ_David’s comment of single mothers, drugs and alcoholism. I can understand why one would adopt such stereotypes as they allow simplistic thinking and a method of making sense of complex issues. Such cognitive short cuts demonstrate a lack of capacity to think beyond labels and stereotypes, benefiting the individual using them and are harmful towards social groups that are involved in the stereotypes. The ‘lack of capacity to think’ is further demonstrated in BOAZ_David’s suggestion that I blame society for years of hardship… please read the article properly and acknowledge that not everyone has fortunate life experiences as yourself

(continued)

(author)

RJA .What i said wasn't babble it was the plain unadulterated truth.Are you one of these do gooders that finds excuses for every axxxole that walks.Get a life and walk in our shoes.Choices is what it boils down to.Choices not to be a crim,choices to find some way to entertain yourself,that doesn't entail ripping off or beating up some other poor bugger.I'm sick of people finding excuses for scumbags.How did people survive in the great depression?It wasn't by rioting,beating people up,stealing or being criminals.It was by making the best of what they had and endeavouring to improve their circumstances.I lived in a commission home in a not so salubrious area, raised 3 kids on very little money and still we didn't have to behave like animals to survive.If manners and accountability were still being upheld in this day,we wouldn't have so many bludgers and people that think the world owes them a living.Stop giving people crutches and excusing the un-excusable.

RJA “Now in being honest, I would respond with a basic observation – never have I seen such pathetic, uninformed criticism which only proves that morally bankrupt arguments are abundant”

Like haygirl said, I too am “sick of people finding excuses for scumbags”

RJA the real “moral bankruptcy” is all yours..

That you cannot deal with views contrary to your own illustrates a particular narcissism and contempt for others who disagree with your own sense of omnipotence (as illustrated by the quotation of yours above).

Your sense of “honesty” seems to be as twisted as your sense of “morality”.

I see you did not get around to commenting on my post.

Probably a fortunate omission, for your own sake.

As haygirl said and I agree with, “Are you one of these do gooders that finds excuses for every axxxole that walks.”

You are basically claiming that those who manage to walk by themselves, independently, with respect for their community and others, those who walk “unaided”, are full of “pathetic uninformed criticism” and are supposedly “morally bankrupt”.

I suggest you are simply exciting yourself with self gratification and frolicking in self-righteous.

However, just like you, I too am free to be as opinionated and critical of others as I choose.

You have come here to defend the drivel you wrote originally, excusing the habits of idiots who crap in their own nest (the Macquarie fields rioters) and blame their stupidity on other people (who hold higher values which the Macquariefields dross could, if they had half a functioning brain, aspire to).

I suggest whatever you have to say to me might well be critical.

Who cares, not me.

Your views and values are so far beneath me as to not be able to even crack a shadow on my horizon.

So, bring it all on.

(My Apology, Col Rouge, I didnt mean to make you feel left out of the criticism, as much as it encouraged me to pity your approach I do appreciate your comments)

(please note that I am limited to 2 posts within 1 forum in a 24 hour time-frame)

Enkew’s comment was evidently an attempt to diagnose me with the ‘poor bugger me’ syndrome. I found this fascinating, particularly with the follow up information of Aboriginality. From the comment I can see a lot of self- confusion – where sympathy and vilification of Aboriginality demonstrates Enkew’s ‘poor bugger me’ syndrome, further evident in his racist use of ‘white turds’. Please take your enthusiastic racial vilification of either Aboriginal or white communities elsewhere. Also note that it was the Redfern riots – not Macquarie Fields – which brought up issues of Aboriginal disadvantage. Please be informed before making any criticism.

Ro’s comment has also tried to put words in my mouth. I did not suggest that being poor is an excuse for crime, after all some of the worlds famous war criminals are in fact wealthy. In response to ‘who is morally bankrupt here?’, scroll up and look at the comments put forward at the beginning of this forum.

Col Rouge’s comment has amazing incite in being able to document the voting patterns of rioters – without examining any genuine research. I beg to differ in my understandings of the ‘haves’

1. decent access to education and training
2. sufficient transport services.
3. accessibility to employment opportunities
4. access to medical services and the ability to pay for sufficient health care
Hang on! Using this analysis - if Col Rouge’s comment used this to map out the ‘have nots’, we would witness the emergence of social disadvantage.

(Continued)

(continued)

Further, if these aspects characterize the living experiences of any individual or community, it would be difficult to ‘work harder’. Yet Col Rouge’s comment has chosen not to acknowledge these factors, rather crusade on ‘individual responsibility’ rhetoric which only feeds the ego of the moral ‘crusader’. CJ Morgan’s comment was bleatingly useless agreeing with aspects of Col Rouge’s comments, acknowledging alienation of young people and withdrawing any empathy towards their plights. The lack of context and understanding of poverty by both these comments demonstrates how morally bankrupt conservative arguments are either extremely useless or harmful towards disadvantaged groups.

Once again, more babble has emerged from Haygirl’s comments, this time accusing me of being a ‘do gooder’, illustrating how unadulterated paranoid babble leads to a strange conclusion – that I was justifying criminal actions by pointing out factors of poverty. After all, it’s all about choices – which do become limited if opportunities to prosper are restricted. Rather than criminalising lower class communities perhaps it would suit their interests to examine how ‘choices’ are limited. Further, advising me to ‘get a life’ is an ad hominem attack – only demonstrating an inability to exchange your views in a respectful discursive manner. I suspect that any more of Haygirl’s post would possibly be follow up ‘ad hominems’ therefore it would be pointless for me to acknowledge them let alone respond.

Once again, in the nicest possible way I would like to thank everyone for their comments.

RJA

RJA Isn't it amazing that every post disagrees with you on this topic.You have opinions from the well to do and the strugglers and all you can do is critise our opinions.If you didn't want to hear what people had to say you shouldn't have started the discussion.I'm outta here and on to some sensible topic.It's amazing you can defend the idiots but someone who has risen above that same lifestyle,you denigrate.Poverty is no reason to be criminal,just an excuse.

It never occurred to me that the author would pop his head up to try and defend his little piece of twaddle, but hey, it's a funny old world, eh?

Hello, RJA.

>>If a community is stranded from employment, education, transport, medical and shopping services, then it is fair to say that such a region is neglected by both state and federal governments<<

FYI, there are many, many communities in Australia that are far worse served for infrastructure than Macquarie Fields, but that do not have the same "issues".

Employment: Macquarie Fields even has own special programme - how is that "neglect"?

http://mediacentre.dewr.gov.au/mediacentre/AllReleases/2007/April/Tailoredemploymentprogrammesfordisadvantagedyouth.htm

Education: Are these somehow different from schools in other suburbs? In what way are they disadvantaged?

http://www.macfields-h.schools.nsw.edu.au/ and http://www.macfields-p.schools.nsw.edu.au/

Transport: The railway station is served regularly by East Hills-City and Campbelltown-City lines. How does that constitute neglect?

There have been other attempts to help, such as Bob Carr's effort:

http://www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/download/macfield.pdf

Whatever the problems at Macquarie Fields, and I accept that there are many, you cannot simply blame everybody else. And to pretend that it is all the fault of the "morally bankrupt conservatives" is just about as naive as you can get. It is probably worth pointing out that a genuinely "conservative" approach to the problem would be to double the strength of the police force and build a couple more prisons.

There is no longterm value in cargo-cult suburbs that just expect handouts rather than working to solve their problems. If there is "neglect", then it is necessary to show the form that this neglect actually takes, rather than just whingeing.

And bunging it on doesn't work either.

>>how could a single mother of 3 that has a child with cancer and earns approximately 400 dollars a week be able to afford a 340,000 dollar house. Continue waffling, my friend!<<

She wouldn't. But is her condition a result of being "disadvantaged" by living in Macquarie Fields? In any event, she is better off than if she lived in, say, Parramatta.

If you are going to get your jollies from being self-righteous, RJA, prepare better arguments.

Pericles provides admirable comment in response to each of the crosses which RJA claims the poor McQuariefield roiters suffer.

However, I will add my contribution

“1. decent access to education and training”

What is the attendance rate at school and how much effort has the rioters made to find apprenticeships or attend further education, compared to the average “conservative”? have the rioters attempted to acquire tertiary qualifications like this conservative?

“2. sufficient transport services.”

I have a dislike for public transport so I choose to drive.
Are there no bus services to and from McQuariefields?
Should we provide everyone with cars to enable them to get from place to place and what sort of cars, not Bentleys I trust. How about those who have lost their licences? – chauffeurs?

“3. accessibility to employment opportunities “

I, presently, drive 50+k each way, each work day to different clients during the week .
“Accessibility” is a attribute which is subjective and dependent entirely upon individual attitude.
Like myself, I bet every other conservative’s “attitude” is more accommodating and flexible, toward “accessibility to employment opportunities”.

“4. access to medical services and the ability to pay for sufficient health care”

Are you claiming McQuariefields is a remote station in the Northern Territory?
I recall we all still pay medicare levies introduced by Hawke (the philanderer).
Or are you claiming there are no doctors or medical clinics within bus or walking distance of McQuariefields?

“living experiences of any individual or community, it would be difficult to ‘work harder’.”

Fortifude, self-respect, determination are some of the qualities which make “working hard” and “working harder “something which individuals and communities achieve daily, without the need for public acclaim.

I guess it comes down to, those who can “walk the walk”, do just that, walk.

Those who can only manage to “talk the talk”, complain about how tough and “unfair” life is for them and others.

I guess you are not up to “walking” on your own legs and seek to adjoin yourself to the pitiful who have given up and can only beg for alms and handouts

Once again the author has popped his head in with regards to this ‘twaddle’, and perhaps now that makes it a funnier ‘old world’. Interestingly enough, Pericles calls this article ‘twaddle’ yet seems enthusiastic and bothered to continue waffling within this forum. However, I thank both Pericles and Col Rouge for their comments. I must say these comments were a lot more intelligent than the previous ‘2 cent’ rants offered by both, as they have articulated central issues of disadvantage. They have taught me how desperate conservative arguments can stoop.

I would like to share a few observations regarding the desperation of such comments. (1) There’s an obsession drawing uninformed conclusions. For instance, by pointing out issues of social disadvantage, arguments in this forum have accused me of justifying crime. (2) The contextual aspects of the riots are ignored or used against lower class communities. (3) There is massive simplicity involved in analysing social tensions.

A common desperate conservative argument examines other disadvantaged suburbs and concludes that since other lower class communities have not rioted, the residents of Macquarie Fields must be inherently ‘criminal’. The laziness involved in this approach contradicts and embarrasses itself. Criminologist Don Weatherburn documents how other suburbs in NSW have higher rates of reported crime (although I don’t agree entirely with other arguments by Weatherburn). Using ‘criminality’ to understand the riots would also suggest that other suburbs with higher reported crime rates are likely to ‘riot’. Along this tangent, I can observe how I am told to ‘prepare better arguments’ by comments that are lazy, weak, and simplistic.

Let us now examine these factors of disadvantage

(1) education

Pericles had posted evidence that schools exist in Macquarie Fields, something that I had never initially doubted. Col Rouge has resurrected issues of truancy and the inability of ‘rioters’ to pursue apprenticeships. In the research conducted by Dr Lee prior the riots, staff turnover for these schools was extremely high, and educational resources were under-funded.

(to be continued)

Please note I do not doubt that other suburbs have these problems. Since the events of public disorder, attention has been drawn to these schools where community workers have attempted to deconstruct the stereotypes offered by conservative comments. I notice Col Rouge does not include university aspirations in the education options for the local community, showing the normalisation of maintaining lower class positions.

(2) sufficient transport services

Col Rouge dislikes public transport services and chooses to drive… and from what I can see also has an inability to understand that lower socio-economic communities do not enjoy this privilege.

‘Are there no bus services to and from McQuariefields [sic]’. There are Bus services in Macquarie Fields, according to the research by Dr Lee, many residents are unable to spend 20 dollars a day on public transport where bus services from the estate are rare.

‘Should we provide everyone with cars to enable them to get from place to place and what sort of cars, not Bentleys I trust. How about those who have lost their licences? – chauffeurs?’

I don’t think anyone would endorse your pathetic suggestion; it would help if you were more realistic in your proposed solutions. Pericles, there is a train line which is located far from the MF housing estate.

(3) accessibility to employment opportunities

Col Rouge’s understanding of ‘accessibility’ is based on the privileges of owning your own car and being able to afford current petrol prices. The link posted by Pericles concerns a media release dated 2007 – just a reminder the riots occurred in 2005. Since the riots, many community members have productively helped youth in the area, from the ‘Fair Go’ Project or the work by Father Riley. Before the riots, the research in the area suggested that employment opportunities in the area had moved away, making it difficult for disenfranchised youth to gain opportunities. I acknowledge that other communities also experience these disadvantages and it should be mentioned that criminalising youth does not enhance their employment opportunities

(Limited to 2 posts in this forum for the next 24 hours... to be continued)

(4) access to medical services and the ability to pay for sufficient health care

‘Are you claiming McQuariefields [sic] is a remote station in the Northern Territory?’

No.
Please read the article ‘The riots occurred at the Glennquarie housing estate located in Sydney’s far southwest suburb of Macquarie Fields’. There is a saying: 'If you ask a stupid question you get a stupid answer'. In this case, I was unable to provide a stupid answer to match your question.

I had included this aspect in my understanding of the ‘haves’ to raise issues regarding the relationships between lower class communities and health care. Disadvantaged communities that live in public housing consist of people living with serious illnesses and disabilities. To expect that families facing these issues have ‘choices’, constantly complain, and need to ‘walk the walk’ lacks any compassion and serious understanding of poverty. In your comments, please be more respectful to these communities and relocate such verbal trash to another chat area.

Another link posted by Perciles again strengthens my argument. This fact sheet documents how reported crime in the area has dropped – contradicting Pericles suggestion of the need for more prisons and ‘stronger police forces’. The fact sheet acknowledges disadvantages as FACTS, yet Carr had dismissed the understandings of social disadvantage. To dismiss inequalities and acknowledge the existence of inequalities is a contradiction, something common in the comments responding to my post.

Thank you both for your comments.

RJA

RJA “Disadvantaged communities that live in public housing consist of people living with serious illnesses and disabilities”

That statement is wrong.

Many communities, consist with some minority of serious illnesses and disabilities but do not riot and would not consider themselves as particularly “disadvantaged”.

“Disadvantaged communities” might exist, in a minority context, not because they include some folk with illnesses or disabilities but because they house the shiftless and indolent, the lazy and parasitic. Those among us who prefer to spend their dole cheques on booze, fags and the occasional hit of crack, smack or dope, rather than working to improve their circumstances and move out of their “disadvantaged” circumstances.

“and from what I can see also has an inability to understand that lower socio-economic communities do not enjoy this privilege”

I choose how I spend my discretionary income. It is more cost effective for me to drive and forego the joke of subsidised public transport and since my client companies value my services and remunerate me extremely well, I make no apology for doing so.

As for “I don’t think anyone would endorse your pathetic suggestion;”

I guess I overestimated how “sharp” you are and your ability to recognise sarcasm.

“I had included this aspect in my understanding of the ‘haves’ to raise issues regarding the relationships between lower class communities”

I am the son of a UK railway worker.

The only “advantage” I received was the insistence by my parents that I do something with my life, rather than waste it.

Who I am today might not comply with your sense of levelled indifference. That I decided not to remain in the place which life placed me is entirely my choice.

Importantly, self-knowledge includes recognising that I am not so “special” as to believe that most other people could apply themselves and achieve similar to myself.

That many do not achieve much and end up as “disadvantaged charity cases” is the result, generally, of the choices they avoid making and the pointless excuses of wallies, like you, who defend their indolence.

This forum has transformed from a discussion regarding the Macquarie Fields riots to Col Rouge’s personal achievements. Apart from firing out sarcasm which easily backfires, Col Rouge has bravely taken the road to stupidity, particularly through: ‘Disadvantaged communities” might exist, in a minority context, not because they include some folk with illnesses or disabilities but because they house the shiftless and indolent, the lazy and parasitic’

With the resurrection of oppressive stereotypes, the rationality of Col Rouge’s comment is based on ignorance. The strict criteria for public housing in NSW cater predominately for disadvantaged families who have been affected by serious illnesses or circumstances.

This forum has become an opportunity for you to boast about your own achievements in an attempt to verbally beat up lower class communities. At the end of the day not everyone has the opportunity to gain such achievements due to their circumstances – whether it concerns factors such as medical conditions, geographical location, or accessibility to services. To deny these factors in assessing individual capability and lower class positions would only demonstrate an incapability to acknowledge that other people have different life experiences.

Further I would appreciate it if you examined the argument and replied to it properly, rather than searched for pathetic, desperate measures of calling me a ‘wally’ – which is a poor reflection on your own abilities to discuss social problems respectfully. Then again, considering the verbal filth you have posted on previous comments, perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised.

Nonetheless - Thank you for your comment

RJA your all encompassing excuse

“At the end of the day not everyone has the opportunity to gain such achievements due to their circumstances – whether it concerns factors such as medical conditions, geographical location, or accessibility to services.”

We can all choose, to stay where we are or move.

Without wishing to “boast”, I deliberately chose to “move” to where I thought I could find a better quality of life.

Making such a move is painful (socially and in terms of family ties), comes at a price of severe disruption to ones life and of course tangible “risk” but millions of people choose to do it every year.

As For “boast about your own achievements”

If that is your response to my comment “self-knowledge includes recognising that I am not so “special” as to believe that most other people could apply themselves and achieve similar to myself.”

You are doomed to the ignominy of self defeat through apathy.

You have failed to challenge my opinion, so you have moved from the objective to a subjective flanking maneuver, by claiming I am "boasting" about who and what I have done.

I have said nothing of what I have "done".

I have attempted to suggest what values I have deployed though out my life and what I have passed on to my children – being “self-knowledge”

I would note I commented in the same sentence “I am not so “special” as to believe that most other people could apply themselves”

It is a shame you have neither the wit nor attitude to find “self knowledge”, you would find greater “satisfaction” from what must be a miserable sub-existence.

Col Rouge, as you continue your road to stupidity it seems that instead of returning to the topic area and examining the factors of poverty one by one which I successfully articulated, you have decided to continue boasting about your own successes as the basis of your argument – instead of perhaps consulting sources which concern other peoples experiences. I am not here to challenge your own experiences and I will have to break it to you that it has nothing to do with the topic area of this forum – which you forgetfully seem to stay on track.

Though it is nice of you to consider examining my post rather than throwing names at me, also, you have decided to contradict yourself.

‘I have said nothing of what I have "done"’

Yet other posts have revealed the following

‘I am the son of a UK railway worker.

The only “advantage” I received was the insistence by my parents that I do something with my life, rather than waste it.

Who I am today might not comply with your sense of levelled indifference. That I decided not to remain in the place which life placed me is entirely my choice’

‘I, presently, drive 50+k each way, each work day to different clients during the week’

Whilst your sarcasm continues to backfire it might help if you re-read your posts so you don’t find yourself contradicting yourself

Oh your driveling piffle, let us dissect your claims to my supposed “boasting”

“I am the son of a UK railway worker.”

That is not something I have “done”, it is something which describes who my father was and my parentage, in UK in a household of very modest means.

“The only “advantage” I received was the insistence by my parents that I do something with my life, rather than waste it.”

Not something which I have “done” but what was done by my parents.

I admit I did “migrate”, along with which millions of other Australians or their parents or grandparents which formed this nation.

I waited in line, like many others have before and since.

“‘I, presently, drive 50+k each way, each work day to different clients during the week”

That simply illustrates an attitude of flexibility, instead of an expectation for things to be handed to me on a plate or by the state.

However, people do not employ me to drive. What they employ me to “do”, I have made no mention of here.

So I suggest you run away and hand out soup to the dole cheats and scumbuckets who you are so ardently defending, despite their own indifference to what is in their own best interests. Maybe they will fill your need for “validation” in some way which you will never get from trying to argue with me.

And if you think I have been “sarcastic” in the past, well, bring it all on, I have barely warmed up.

Even in dissecting claims you have contradicted yourself and have still maintained to stay away from the main topic area. If your main desires are to be sarcastic and talk about your own experiences as evidence that lower class communities are somehow criminal, and you have ‘barely warmed up’, then continue on – I’m sure it will all back fire as it usually does.

To be honest I am not interested in your own achievements or what you have done in the past, or what you have been taught. This is a forum to discuss the Macquarie Fields ‘Riots’. Please get back to discussing the topic area as I enjoy destroying the pityful, pathetic and rather humourous arguments you put forward

‘So I suggest you run away’

Unfortunately for you, that won’t be happening.

I look forward to your next entertainingly pathetic post