cannabis

[mogadishu]

well.... black people until the 1960's had to ride on the backs of buses, be segregated for their education, had less rights... in the eyes of the governemnt, their skin color meant they were of lower caste.

hindus in low ranking castes are currently converting to buddhism en masse to escape the persecution the face from being "low class".

Generally, the higher the person ranks themselves in a "class system", the more in favor of it they will be.

Class in britain is about money. you can term it with manners, knowing the right wines, speaking with the accent.... money is the collateral for everything. the upper class know about wine because they had the resources to learn about wine like connaisseurs (sp?). they speak well because they had the money to pay for an education where such accents are common, and to socialise with others who behaved in the same way.

Does anyone think Prince Charles would be upper class if he grew up in a poor district in Brixton.

so basically my answer is, i think class structures are artificial constructs which lead to less meritocracy.

[Curvey_Brunette]

well.... black people until the 1960's had to ride on the backs of buses, be segregated for their education, had less rights... in the eyes of the governemnt, their skin color meant they were of lower caste.

hindus in low ranking castes are currently converting to buddhism en masse to escape the persecution the face from being "low class".

Generally, the higher the person ranks themselves in a "class system", the more in favor of it they will be.

I'm unsure what race segregation has to do with a class system that's based on how high up the ladder you are?

Religion and belief is a poor example to make because religion and race has nothing at all to do with 'upper, middle or lower' class.

Throughout our history people have dragged themselves out of poverty to become someone of some standing, Marks & Spencers started life as a street barrow on a market, Dr. Barnado started life as an orphan.

As they prove, anyone can better themselves but very few actually do it.

Class in britain is about money. you can term it with manners, knowing the right wines, speaking with the accent.... money is the collateral for everything. the upper class know about wine because they had the resources to learn about wine like connaisseurs (sp?). they speak well because they had the money to pay for an education where such accents are common, and to socialise with others who behaved in the same way.

Class has nothing to do with money!

The Beckhams have money but no class, 99% of lottery winners have no class.

Manners are a basic not limited to a single class.

Knowing the right wine is not class, it's pretentious. There's a prime example, because most of the wines now have a screw top I now consider them vulgar, I'd sooner pay £2 for a bottle of red with a proper cork than £9.99 for a bottle with a screw top.

I find it odd how you define education financially, I started off at a normal everyday junior school until my parents decided that home educating me was what was best for me.

When I was a student, I was given a grant to live on and had to work my way through both college and university.

So my education hasn't really cost me any more money than someone going to Cambridge because the books for the courses at Cambridge or Oxford cost exactly the same as they do if you're going to a 'normal' university. In fact, I’d hazard a guess that £1 for £1 I’ve spent LESS money on my education than someone going to Oxford or Cambridge.

Does anyone think Prince Charles would be upper class if he grew up in a poor district in Brixton.

I don't think he's 'upper class' anyway, after all, look at Camilla

so basically my answer is, i think class structures are artificial constructs which lead to less meritocracy.

Which it would if you applied it in your way.

To me the 'class system' is simply a reflection of what level you're capable of operating at.

If you can't read or write there's no point in going for a job in a management position.

If you can't do maths there's no value in applying to be an accountant.

If you have a PhD it's a wasted resource for you to sweep the streets.

A 'class system' based on human nature and human limits would work far better because it would give people a starting point. No mater who you are, no matter where you live, no matter how much money you have, if you need to work for a living then you should do what you're capable of doing and the only way to find that out is to start at the bottom and work your way up.

[mogadishu]

I'm unsure what race segregation has to do with a class system that's based on how high up the ladder you are?

for the fairly obvious reason that these people's class was decided by their skin color. they were seen as automatically bottom of the ladder class. many of the basic freedoms enjoyed by middle class people were denied them en masse until the sixties.

Religion and belief is a poor example to make because religion and race has nothing at all to do with 'upper, middle or lower' class.

not necessarily.... the caste system is a class system, whether its divided into "upper lower and middle" or "priests, farmers and polluted laborers".

Throughout our history people have dragged themselves out of poverty to become someone of some standing, Marks & Spencers started life as a street barrow on a market, Dr. Barnado started life as an orphan.

As they prove, anyone can better themselves but very few actually do it.

and well done to them, but they were lucky too. a lot of people work like dogs just to make ends meet. it doesn't mean they're lazy or lacking intelligence.

Class has nothing to do with money!

The Beckhams have money but no class, 99% of lottery winners have no class.

well, that's debatable... but the beckhams are an extreme example of the money you'';d expect to be owned by an aritocrat coupled with a working class background.many people deny the money/class link, but every which way they define class, the issue of money is in the background. As for lottery winners, it's difficult to know, becasue the ones who advertise their win are, due to jealousy, already putting themselves ina position where some people will want to knock them. I'd be a classy winner... *loses self in day dream*

When I was a student, I was given a grant to live on and had to work my way through both college and university.

today's students are not nearly so lucky. they have to both take out loans and pay a lot of tuition fees. that's an aside, but it's an indication of how this sector of the population face more financial struggle than they did when you were studying.... many start working life with already a heap of debt. free education with a maintenance grant somebody gave you? it must have been heaven!!!

Does anyone think Prince Charles would be upper class if he grew up in a poor district in Brixton.

I don't think he's 'upper class' anyway, after all, look at Camilla

oh right.... i'm starting to see what you mean... you don't think aristocrats are necessarily upper class.... what's wrong with camilla?

so basically my answer is, i think class structures are artificial constructs which lead to less meritocracy.

Which it would if you applied it in your way.

To me the 'class system' is simply a reflection of what level you're capable of operating at.

If you can't read or write there's no point in going for a job in a management position.

If you can't do maths there's no value in applying to be an accountant.

If you have a PhD it's a wasted resource for you to sweep the streets.

A 'class system' based on human nature and human limits would work far better because it would give people a starting point. No mater who you are, no matter where you live, no matter how much money you have, if you need to work for a living then you should do what you're capable of doing and the only way to find that out is to start at the bottom and work your way up.

[Curvey_Brunette]

for the fairly obvious reason that these people's class was decided by their skin color. they were seen as automatically bottom of the ladder class. many of the basic freedoms enjoyed by middle class people were denied them en masse until the sixties.

Until WWII most people in the UK had never seen a black person and all they had to go on was the tales of the slavery of the black because he/she was deemed as uneducated and only fit for being a slave.

They were considered as beneath lower class because they could not be educated.

As the world has opened up more and more, attitudes have changed.

Seeing blacks as ignorant and uneducated was perceived by all the classes and so this had nothing to do with the class system itself.

not necessarily.... the caste system is a class system, whether its divided into "upper lower and middle" or "priests, farmers and polluted laborers".

The caste system is not a class system, the caste system was 'their way' of sorting their own positions in life, this hasn't stopped some black people from obtaining some very powerful and influential positions as time has gone on.

I don't think you get how the class system works, regardless of race, creed, religion and colour, the class system was divided into 3 sections.

Upper for those who were educated and had the money to be an employer. They often would have titles and vast amounts of land which would be worked by the lower classes.

For example, a land owner would offer accommodation to those he/she employed without any pay or for a tiny amount of money each week. They were to work the land or they worked in the house or they maintained the house and did all the odd jobs.

Middle for those who were educated and had no money but were able to make money for their employer.

For example they would be the housekeepers and butlers, people who worked in banks, as police officers, in government office and such like.

The lower classes would work the land, work in factories performing easy and repetitive tasks and do all the menial tasks such as sweeping the roads, sweeping chimneys.

and well done to them, but they were lucky too. a lot of people work like dogs just to make ends meet. it doesn't mean they're lazy or lacking intelligence.

Lucky? In what way?

As Thatcher said "Hard work might not get you to the top, but it'll get you pretty close"

You can have the best idea in the world, something that would change our way of life, but if you don't have any money and you don't the skills to market it to perspective investors then that idea will go nowhere.

The likes of Dr. Barnado were able to put across their ideas in order to get it off the ground. They were able to relate and illicit trust from those investing in him as well as communicate what he was trying to do.

Dr. Barnado was able to successfully articulate himself not only to those he was considered to be beneath but also those who were considered beneath him.

well, that's debatable... but the beckhams are an extreme example of the money you'';d expect to be owned by an aritocrat coupled with a working class background.many people deny the money/class link, but every which way they define class, the issue of money is in the background. As for lottery winners, it's difficult to know, becasue the ones who advertise their win are, due to jealousy, already putting themselves ina position where some people will want to knock them. I'd be a classy winner... *loses self in day dream*

The beckhams are a prime and conclusive example that money does not bring and will never bring class.

Michael Carrol is another example, Lee Ryan, a lottery winning car thief won £6 million, but did it bring him any class?

Instant wealth does not bring class and I have no reason to be jealous of anyone who wins money. I have the satisfaction of knowing everything we own we earned and it wasn't given to us on a plate.

today's students are not nearly so lucky. they have to both take out loans and pay a lot of tuition fees. that's an aside, but it's an indication of how this sector of the population face more financial struggle than they did when you were studying.... many start working life with already a heap of debt. free education with a maintenance grant somebody gave you? it must have been heaven!!!

You keep on mentioning luck but there's no such thing as luck.

It's not "lucky" to win the lottery, you pay your money to get a chance of winning.

Noel Edmonds says he asked the cosmos for the house he lives in and was lucky to find it. Of course being able to afford such a house had nothing at all to do with it was it?

Famous people aren't "lucky" They have an ability to do what they do and make themselves famous be it an actor in a Hollywood blockbuster or someone who can actually sing or dance or make people laugh.

I personally don't believe in luck, I consider luck to be for complete losers who sit and wait for things to happen to them. What most people call "luck" isn't actually luck, it's persistance.

Arnie was Mr. Universe because of all the hours of pumping iron in the gym.

Sly Stallone wasn't lucky to find someone to make the first Rocky movie, he carried the screen play under his arm for over 10 years before someone decided to take a chance it may make money.

"Luck" Is just another word for persistence.

oh right.... i'm starting to see what you mean... you don't think aristocrats are necessarily upper class.... what's wrong with camilla?

Well, Camilla has no class at all, she is simply a scrubber who Charlie fancies.

The aristocrats didn't necessarily have class, many of them behaved like spoilt children when they didn't get their own way which is why France decided it was a dammed fine idea to cut off their heads.

Having a big house, having a title, having money does not bring you any class as all.

You can be an asshole if you have £5 in the bank or £500 million in the bank. Look at Chris Evens, worth almost £100 million and yet he's got no class at all.

[mogadishu]

Until WWII most people in the UK had never seen a black person and all they had to go on was the tales of the slavery of the black because he/she was deemed as uneducated and only fit for being a slave.

They were considered as beneath lower class because they could not be educated.

for sure, but i believe london had a sizeable black population in c19.... at any rate, unable to be educated because of the color of your skin? if people assumed that, they should have known better.

Seeing blacks as ignorant and uneducated was perceived by all the classes and so this had nothing to do with the class system itself.

of course it did. they were allocated the place at the bottom of the ladder, rather than given the freedom to be educated that you yourself have enjoyed. people's ignorance why they weren't.... objectively it was nonetless wrong they had any less freedom of opportunity than you.

The caste system is not a class system, the caste system was 'their way' of sorting their own positions in life, this hasn't stopped some black people from obtaining some very powerful and influential positions as time has gone on.

how are you defining class system here? the caste system walks talks and acts like aclassm system to me. black people obtaining powerful positions? yes, but statistically only a tiny number.

I don't think you get how the class system works, regardless of race, creed, religion and colour, the class system was divided into 3 sections.

why must it be?that seems horribly simplistic.... gvien that class is fundamentally an artificial construction, it can surely be divided into any number of sections. i forget who it was who satted that the english class system is like an onion, in that peeling it would reveal ever more layers.

As Thatcher said "Hard work might not get you to the top, but it'll get you pretty close"

well thatcher was blatantly offering an opinion, not an objective fact. a minority of those who work hard might get to or near the top, the majority of hard workers, by definition, won't. There are far fewer places at or near the top than can accommodate the millions who slog just to make ends meet.

The beckhams are a prime and conclusive example that money does not bring and will never bring class.

Michael Carrol is another example, Lee Ryan, a lottery winning car thief won £6 million, but did it bring him any class?

so by "class" you mean "refinement"? is that right?

Instant wealth does not bring class and I have no reason to be jealous of anyone who wins money. I have the satisfaction of knowing everything we own we earned and it wasn't given to us on a plate.

good for you, but you and i seem to disagree anout the existence of the hundreds of thousands of people who work intelliogently and very hard, and still can't keep up.

It's not "lucky" to win the lottery, you pay your money to get a chance of winning.

ok this seems to be getting pedantic now. if i won the lottery, i'd feel incredibly lucky, as i think would others. if you would not, fine.

I personally don't believe in luck, I consider luck to be for complete losers who sit and wait for things to happen to them. What most people call "luck" isn't actually luck, it's persistance.

It can be both, and it's ideal to have both.

if someone works hard in a career in law, for example its persistence. if they get a job through who they know, it's luck. the idea that luck plays no role in getting breaks in an example like this is unrealistic, i think. that's not to deny you need to work as hard as you can and hope. don't get me wrong, i don't like the dynamic of people relying on luck. but it happens. for a lucky few, it works.

[mogadishu]

p.s. don't forget that to today's students you would seem incrediblky lucky to have a free university educatiuon. yoiu didn't have to persist to get it fre, that was something you could take for granted. not the hard work, but getting ti free.

[Curvey_Brunette]

for sure, but i believe london had a sizeable black population in c19.... at any rate, unable to be educated because of the color of your skin? if people assumed that, they should have known better.

Why should they have know better?

You can't automatically know something, experiance is the key and it's unfair to assume that people would just know something.

of course it did. they were allocated the place at the bottom of the ladder, rather than given the freedom to be educated that you yourself have enjoyed. people's ignorance why they weren't.... objectively it was nonetless wrong they had any less freedom of opportunity than you.

If that were true then people who were born into poverty would never have been able to 'pull themselves up' out of poverty and aquire positions of high standing within their communities.

how are you defining class system here? the caste system walks talks and acts like aclassm system to me. black people obtaining powerful positions? yes, but statistically only a tiny number.

But if there was a "class system" based on race then no black person would ever have attatained any position of authority.

Jessie Jackson, Matrin Luther King, Nelson Mandella, James Armistead, Tom Bradley, Carol Mosely, Edward Brooke, all were black, all were born in "poverty" and all became people in positions of power and influence.

It strikes me if you're black and poor the chances of getting somewhere are slimmer but not impossible. Carol Mosely went on to become a confirmed ambassador to New Zeland after she lost her re-election bid in 1998.

why must it be?that seems horribly simplistic.... gvien that class is fundamentally an artificial construction, it can surely be divided into any number of sections. i forget who it was who satted that the english class system is like an onion, in that peeling it would reveal ever more layers.

It's not an artificial construct at all, the class system was 'naturally devloped' in order to give people a starting point, a place to begin.

well thatcher was blatantly offering an opinion, not an objective fact. a minority of those who work hard might get to or near the top, the majority of hard workers, by definition, won't. There are far fewer places at or near the top than can accommodate the millions who slog just to make ends meet.

The Thatcher years created the 'New rich' type of person.

People had more access to the means to get them somewhere but the condition of accessing those heights was lots of hard work, lots of effort and lots of determination.

so by "class" you mean "refinement"? is that right?

In a way yes.

Oscar Wild has class, Quentin Crisp also had class, neither of them had much money.

good for you, but you and i seem to disagree anout the existence of the hundreds of thousands of people who work intelliogently and very hard, and still can't keep up.

They can't keep up because they're not geared to keep up, they're not able to keep up because they don't know how.

It doesn't make them a lesser person, but if they sit and bitch about their situation instead of being proactive and changing things to be the way they want it to be then they have no class.

The moaners and complainers often get nowhere because of the way they are. It's kind of like the way some people on some forums react when they 'discover' I'm 'loaded'

According to them I should spend my money not in charity shops, not on second hand cars or bike, not on a 'low cost Internet connection' because I can afford new.

The thing is, if we spent our money like a lot of people think we should spend it we'd be filing for bankruptcy within 5 years.

ok this seems to be getting pedantic now. if i won the lottery, i'd feel incredibly lucky, as i think would others. if you would not, fine.

But why would you feel lucky? The whole point of paying your £1 and entering the draw is to give you a chance of winning!

Why so many people as so surprised when they do win escapes me.

It can be both, and it's ideal to have both.

But "luck" isn't actually luck!

If you always get the same numbers on the lottery and eventually win it's because you've persisted.

if someone works hard in a career in law, for example its persistence. if they get a job through who they know, it's luck.

How is that luck?

Working your way up the ladder isn't luck, a mate telling you a job is going and putting in a good word for you isn't luck, it's successful networking.

the idea that luck plays no role in getting breaks in an example like this is unrealistic, i think. that's not to deny you need to work as hard as you can and hope. don't get me wrong, i don't like the dynamic of people relying on luck. but it happens. for a lucky few, it works.

In a work environment it's not "luck" that helps you climb the corporate and social ladders, it's down to articulation and networking, getting to know the 'right people' and being able to influence them in the direction you'd like to go.

[Curvey_Brunette]

p.s. don't forget that to today's students you would seem incrediblky lucky to have a free university educatiuon. yoiu didn't have to persist to get it fre, that was something you could take for granted. not the hard work, but getting ti free.

Persoanlly, I won't employ anyone with a degree or a GCSE, (Got Certificate - Says (I’m) Educated) or an NVQ (Not Very Qualified) because the educational system is such a shambles.

A 60% mark is a fail in my opinion, not a degree pass.

[Mrs_Ephgrave]

My husband used to smoke cannabis for quite a few years and now he has really bad short term memory and forgets things all the time. I don't think it should be legalised at all.

[Curvey_Brunette]

My husband used to smoke cannabis for quite a few years and now he has really bad short term memory and forgets things all the time. I don't think it should be legalised at all.

Short term memory problems are common among weed smokers.

But as a rule those "problems" clear up more and more after about 3 weeks of not smoking.

Perhaps a visit to your GP and an alzheimers check should be done?

Long term effects of weed are very rare, a bit like smoking tobacco really, the longer you go without the more alert you are and the better you feel.

Problems that still present after smoking weed has stopped are usually indigenous problems and require further investigation.

[candy_floss]

I smoke weed sometimes with my friends and it hasnt caused me any harm at all, just made me feel relaxed and chilled out!
But when i drink Alcohol, im a bit of a light weight and it makes me sick
If I had a choice i would rather smoke a spliff than have a drink.

[Mrs_Ephgrave]

Perhaps a visit to your GP and an alzheimers check should be done?

He's only 39 so i don't think this is a problem. I think its just a good excuse when he doesn't listen to me properly. lol

[mogadishu]

But if there was a "class system" based on race then no black person would ever have attatained any position of authority.

Well it couldn't be based exclusively on race. But for a long time black people were classed as sub-human. Now atypical examples of advancement doesn't nullify the fact that many people today make racist assumptions about the class of blacks.

Why should they have know better?

You can't automatically know something, experiance is the key and it's unfair to assume that people would just know something.

exactly. they knew nothing, so they chould have deferred so socratic wisdom and assumed nothing. as it was they knew nothing and made a massive racist assumption nonetheless.

[mogadishu]

I can't wait till Curvey wins the lottery and goes around telling off everyone who tries to suggest she was lucky.

[Curvey_Brunette]

I can't wait till Curvey wins the lottery and goes around telling off everyone who tries to suggest she was lucky.

If I won the lottery I'd be more than lucky, it would be a miracle!!!!

I don't play

Happy Samhain everyone and don’t be a pain in the arse tonight please, have fun, enjoy the spirit of the evening and watch out for me ……


I’ll be on my broom stick zooming around the UK strafing people from 8pm to midnight