[Gllug] VACANCY: Junior Systems Support

[Hari Sekhon]

Vidar Hokstad wrote:
> Stephen Nelson-Smith wrote:
>   
>> I'm not entirely sure why 'Victrorian' is being used as a pejorative
>> term.  I don't think I share the economic or social view of
>> Christopher or Hari but I think a person who lives sustainably should
>> be admired, not pilloried. 
>>     
> I don't think "living sustainably" is what people have a problem with, 
> but his attitudes in other messages and the assumption that what they 
> have is somehow attainable for most people if only they worked harder, 
> and the implicit assumption that people who run into problems in their 
> life just have themselves to blame.  That is at least what was hard to 
> swallow for me.
>
> It _is_ an attitude that most people left behind in Victorian times, and 
> that shows a massive lack of respect for the people providing a vast 
> proportion of the services society needs to function, yet who make 
> little enough that they'd easily find themselves in trouble if society 
> did not provide a security net. The comparison to Victorian times is apt 
> since it saw the UK at the centre of the rise of social conscience, both 
> through writers like Dickens, and socialist thinkers (Christopher 
> probably would prefer not to think about the fact that Marx lived, and 
> is buried, in London...).
>
> Sure, if you make as much as Christopher or me, you could probably live 
> better by moving somewhere where nobody cares about ordinary people and 
> taxes are accordingly lower. Personally I wouldn't want to. I'm happy to 
> know that people around me will be taken reasonable care of if they need 
> help, and I don't feel the least bit sorry for people at our salary 
> level who complain about the levels of tax in the UK.
>   
Vidar, you seen to only be considering the rich vs the poor... is there 
nothing in between? Ok, so you're rich and don't have to care, good for you.

What about people in between, working professionals who earn a decent 
wage but can't do much with it because priority is given to the poorer 
people who didn't work their way up (whether they aren't able to or just 
don't care to work hard enough is besides the point).

It's my experience that there are a lot of very nice and decent people 
living without much security or financial benefit for their work in this 
middle gap while people further down the pole actually enjoy much better 
stability with provided social accommodation (nice to be a priority, 
eh?) while said professionals are relinquishing a large proportion of 
their earnings to renting in shared accommodations. That seems a bit 
immoral to me.

It's this polarized view which leaves the middle gap and why the middle 
class which is considered the backbone of the country is currently being 
obliterated.

-h

-- 
Hari Sekhon
http://www.linkedin.com/in/harisekhon

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug