[Closed] Are Poor People Cr@p at Crossing Roads?

Woah there Adam, I think the toner cartridge needs changing...

There is another answer - in poor areas there are less car owners so people walk more - that makes them more likely to get hit by cars. Also commonly the middleclass areas have lower speed limits and traffic calmed roads to appease the daily wail complainers.

Im with the OP.

Lessen the burden on society!

Poorer areas tend to have more "rude boys" tearing up and down the street, aswell as the obvious increase in the amount of cars driving down the roads as a result of more highly condensed housing.

or, is it the car drivers fault in these areas, not driving so well?

It cos they're all staggering about on Buckfast and crack.

Or possibly just that poorer areas have less money set aside for road safety as they generally have more pressing needs?

There is another answer - in poor areas there are less

car owners so people walk more

Not IME, I went to buy a welder from a poor area of glasgow, I could barely move for the number of cars jamming the streets.

Or possibly just that poorer areas have less money set aside for road safety

they are less likely to be driving would be my guess

Speaking of natural selection in action. A new footbridge in Manchester had to be closed soon after opening, because 'if someone really reached, they could touch the overhead tram power lines (under the bridge) with an umbrella'.
Why modify the bridge? If you're the sort of person who wants to try this sort of thing out, please be my guest...

poorer kids are more likely to "play out" unsupervised than middle class kids

poorer areas have more cars parked on the road - less visability for drivers/ people crossing the road

more boy racers in poorer estates

well to do village where my kids go to school - 20 mph limit and speed bums

less well to do village where we actually live - 30 mph limit everywhere, no speed bumps

it's free range kids innit.

I knew someone who hit a kid who ran out in the road near a 'caravan site'.

The kid had bounced off the car and seemed ok but whilst he was finding this out he heard what he described as a 'roar' from the caravans and about 40 blokes all started runnign towards him carrying whatever weapons they could lay their hands on.

About 10 yards behind this wall of blokes was an equal number of women all shouting at the blokes not to beat the crap out of the car driver.

He got away without a kicking but was more shaken up by the reaction from the adults than hitting the kid int he first place.

[i]well to do village where my kids go to school........speed bums[/i]

is it a private school? I believe that sort of thing is rife.

well to do village where my kids go to school - 20 mph limit and speed bums

less well to do village where we actually live - 30 mph limit everywhere, no speed bumps

Not IME, I went to buy a welder from a poor area of glasgow, I could barely move for the number of cars jamming the streets.

ah but ..... were they driving them or living in them?

🙂

Why modify the bridge? If you're the sort of person who wants to try this sort of thing out, please be my guest...

Recently a bridge was going to be put in near a not-so-nice estate near my old house, over a dual carriageway. It was going to cost a fortune to be put in a specific location because a survey found that locals wouldn't use it if it was 100 yards up the road. In the end they scrapped the bridge and dropped the speed limit on the road to 50 instead. All of this is despite the fact that there is an underpass 100 yards in the other direction.

Also the scummiest places around liverpool/mersey/manchester seem to be littered with speed bumps - its a pain, it stops me fleeing when kids surround my car for no reason!

Actually, take a drive through Possil (Glasgow). It's one of the poorest areas in the UK.

I remember as a kid my mum always used to call it "lemming country" as folk just seem to wander in the road round there.

Not really sure why exactly - though as a ex-weegie myself I'm aware that there is definitely a cultural norm of just walking through heavy traffic in Glasgow, so maybe it is just more pronounced in poorer areas?

I was driving the work van the other night, in a bad area and a couple of lads came flying out a side road on their bmx's. Had to slam on my brakes, then got a load of aggro off the two loads "open your ****ing eyes" etc - couldn't help thinking I should have accelerate and let natural selection do it's thing.

Bilsland Drive is where I recently was (ineffectively) fly-kicked by a young girl while I was cycling home. Maybe she was just walking out?! 😀

let natural selection do it's thing.

Wouldn't be natural then, it'd be Eugenics wouldn't it?

Hmmm I've noticed the pelican crossings in poorer areas near us have a really, really long "green man" cycle and afterwards the lights never go to flashing amber but do a proper red+amber green. I wondered why, maybe this is due to the stats mentioned in the OP.

Mind you no matter how long the bloody green man cycle some nob will still step onto the road just as the lights go to green - GRRRR.

I've noticed the pelican crossings in poorer areas near us have a really, really long "green man" cycle and afterwards the lights never go to flashing amber but do a proper red+amber green.

Pedantic point of order: they'd be Puffin (or possibly Toucan or Pegasus) crossings, not Pelican 🙂

Forking Our Souls - Member

This got me thinking.

How are you finding the challenge ?

Are you lot serious? No surprise to see you know who pushing the master race line again but the contempt for people who live in certain areas or don't match your income bracket is astonishing...suppose some of you think you are being clever and ironic.

No contempt here, just academic contemplation of what social factors may contribute to a statistically observable phenomenon.

As with GrahamS. Though views mildly tainted by actually having spent a fair amount of time around and working with people from such areas.

How are you finding the challenge ?

Are you lot serious? No surprise to see you know who pushing the master race line again but the contempt for people who live in certain areas or don't match your income bracket is astonishing...suppose some of you think you are being clever and ironic.

What did you expect? This is largely a middle class forum.

That's right, go and usurp my "troll of the day" you utter git.

How are you finding the challenge ?

One tends to find it comes quite naturally to those of an educated bent. Tell me Ernest, how many times have you been run over?

(Sorry Blingbling 😉 )

what grevious tim said, combined with the fact that more and more people have NO common sense at all.

sadly, this gene trait isnt being wiped from the gene pool thanks to "health and safety" (spit spit)

and though i hate to say it, im going to anyway, cause im thinking it, even if it makes me a middle class ****:

do "poorer families", you know, the jeremy kyle, microwave dinners and 40 a day, ones, spend as much time educating thier kids about things in "life" that require common sense?

dont dick about near trains
look when your crossing the road
respect your elders (step to one side for the old lady hobbling along the pavement kind of thing)

do they spend ANY time?
i get the feeling that as soon as the little ****ers are old enough to walk, they are just always "out", and not considered to be the parents problem anymore?

I thought it was to do with kids being run over not poor people, as that is what the news just reported.

Besides one of the things they are trying to push through is to stop 'daylight saving' which is all good by me more evening daylight 😀

Spot on Olly, but this situation has been allowed to go completely unchecked by the Laws of Natural Selection.

I say leave them to it. And set up a chain of low status florists to cash in on all those ghastly floral tributes that the Jeremy Kyle sector seem so fond of...

16-year old scrote killed on a moped? Let's create a wall of flowers at the road side, 'cause he loved carnations when he was alive... 🙄

"he was a beautiful boy, loved by all"

inbetween the lines: "what a gobshite, too bad he mashed himself razzing his moped along a footpath, but cant say i"ll miss him"

I'm always surprised by the numbers of people in Chiswick who don't look when crossing the road. I know that its a relatively poor area after all with Chelsea and Knightsbridge just up the way.
Some of you guys (I know some are trolling) really do disappoint me.

This story relates to a fascinating piece of research!

Serious accidents are traditionally mapped according to where the crash occurs. Traffic engineers then look at possible improvements to make "accident hot spots" safer (speed limits, remodelling the junction, etc)

However, a few years ago, someone analysed serious accidents in a different way, and mapped the postcodes of the victims. And yet again, the map showed hot spots - but centred on deprived areas

So making physical improvements to deprived areas won't work. These accidents happened all over the place - towns, countryside, motorways. The common factor is that, statistically, the victims tended to live in poor areas

Looks like some people are getting a little bit overexcited at the prospect of the Fuhrer being on TV soon...I bet he's got plans eradicate all the undesirable traits from the gene pool.

I'm always surprised by the numbers of people in Chiswick who don't look when crossing the road

Most people use their hearing to cross the road - only if they hear something that registers as dangerous do they look.

Wait till every other car is electric

"he was a beautiful boy, loved by all"

It's the Poignant Message Contest that really makes me laugh - top prize: a close-up zoom on Regional News Tonight. 2nd Prize: Photo on cover of Local Evening Post.

Favourites include "Why???" and "Heaven has another angle" (sic).

I like to sneak there under the cover of darkness and add my own: "Aaaaarghhh" and "We won't be there when you cross the road..."

Why do people dislike want to be middle class snotty gits? Oh that's why, comments like above! I know lots of people who bought houses, cars and bikes they could ill afford and are struggling to get by on their incomes and now have negative equity on their houses. If they lose there jobs and houses then they cant even claw back some money and will still be in debt. I earn more than most of them and stay in a moderate ex council house and more importantly I live a very nice lifestyle and don't have any debt. Do I fall into the scum bag category? Some people are unbelievable in there opinions of less fortunate others and unless your a Banker W@nker I wouldn't be laughing.

Looks like some people are getting a little bit overexcited at the prospect of the Fuhrer being on TV soon...I bet he's got plans eradicate all the undesirable traits from the gene pool.

i thought he was canvassing in these specific areas surely?

Cause all the pols are "taking our jobs" (doing your jobs for less money and less complaining)

cause apparently EVERYONE has to go to uni now, and get an office job.

One tends to find it comes quite naturally to those of an educated bent.

Glad to hear it mate. And whilst I am loathed to contribute to your trollistic thread Porked Soles, it is interesting to note that someone of "[i]an educated bent[/i]" didn't stop to consider that the disproportionate amount of traffic calming measures such as speed humps in nice leafy middle-class suburban areas, when compared to the lack of them in poor inner-city areas, might have an effect.

😕

the disproportionate amount of traffic calming measures such as speed humps in nice leafy middle-class suburban areas, when compared to the lack of them in poor inner-city areas

Is there any evidence for this assertion?

it is interesting to note that someone of "an educated bent" didn't stop to consider that the disproportionate amount of traffic calming measures such as speed humps in nice leafy middle-class suburban areas, when compared to the lack if them in poor inner-city areas...

Can you point me in the direction of statistics that support this Ernest? The reason I ask is that I live in the leafy 'burbs and there's not a single traffic calming measure in sight. To travel to my nearest town, I have to drive through a very deprived area where the youth are wont to take cars from my own neighbourhood without permission, and drive them back to their estate for a bit of joyriding.

The local authority - in their wisdom - have infected the area with a plague of speed humps, the result being that when our cars are returned, they invariably have more suspension damage; and it takes much longer for the emergency services to navigate through the area to help the tax payers in my neighbourhood.

Edit: Sorry, forgot to add a patronising " 😕 "

I was gonna get annoyed at this thread but hey, if laughing at the poor people makes you guys feel better then good for you.

All of this is despite the fact that there is an underpass 100 yards in the other direction

I'm actually loaded but I'd skip across the road through the traffic too instead of diverting 200m from my intended route, especially if it involved a scummy underpass

And why are poor people a drain on society ? Surely it's the richer people who consume far more of everything ?

I've got 20 copies of a double sided 12 page report to photocopy.
I'm thinking of using the auto staple function but I haven't tried it before so would this be a wise move Adam?

And why are poor people a drain on society ? Surely it's the richer people who consume far more of everything ?

There's nothing like a cleverly crafted counter-argument to act as devil's advocate in cases like this. And believe me Simon, that is absolutely nothing like a cleverly crafted counter-argument. 🙄

it is interesting to note that someone of "an educated bent" didn't stop to consider that the disproportionate amount of traffic calming measures such as speed humps in nice leafy middle-class suburban areas, when compared to the lack of them in poor inner-city areas, might have an effect.

Any reason for leaving the last bit of my quote out, ie " might have an effect" ?

I just thought that someone of [i]"an educated bent"[/i] might have considered that "traffic calming measures" possibly work.

Around my manor traffic calming measures are mostly around the posh bits. No doubt because posh people tend to be far more demanding.

Forking Our Souls, You really do sound like a complete selfish moron. I really hope your trying to take the p1ss!

"Heard on the news today that paupers are 4 times more likely to be mown down whilst crossing the road, and that politicians are calling for increased road safety measures in less desirable areas.

This got me thinking. Are poor people just generally bad at crossing roads, or could it be that the sort of people that can't get their heads around the Green Cross Code are far less likely to be able to earn a decent wage?"

Do you seriously believe that a higher income bracket makes a person more intelligent? Tell me you're just trying to be ironic, or trolling, because I dont want to accept the fact that you believe 'paupers' should be wiped out by 'natural selection'.

Are you lot serious? No surprise to see you know who pushing the master race line again but the contempt for people who live in certain areas or don't match your income bracket is astonishing...

Are you so blinded by your own dogma that you are unable to consider the fact that alot of deprivation is actually created by those living there through their own poor attitudes and behaviour.

As with most things it's not simple and the reality is that the stats will be a mixture of traffic calming postcode lotteries (although traffic calming when done badly can make roads more dangerous), poor attitudes and life skills of people living in the area, maybe more pedestrian journies etc.

However they will not all be innocent undeserving victims of the middle classes, it's not all down to upbringing or place of birth, loads of people have managed to do really well in life despite coming from more humble backgrounds just as many who had a more privileged upbrining have totally cocked up their lives. So we live in a time when social mobility is lower than it has been for a while. Doesn't that just possibly suggest that our society is now fairer than it has been for a long time. All those people who in the fifties and before were completely blocked from doing better through class structures have now had the opportunity to move up and many of those who were total numb wits protected by class have now sunk.

It drives me nuts everytime someone on the left attacks people of a different opinion by being derogatory about their view point rather than engaging in a proper rounded debate and actually accepting some unpleasent truths about society. It's alright comrade, tractor output is up for the 34th year so people must have more food than they can eat, even if the shelves are still empty.

Any reason for leaving the last bit of my quote out, ie " might have an effect" ?

Err... No? Because if they were prevalent in affluent areas, they "might" have an effect. That's not the issue I wanted you to clarify - I wanted you to point me in the direction of statistics or evidence that supported your very unequivocal assertion that there are indeed disproportionately more of these measures in "middle class suburban areas".

...because I dont want to accept the fact that you believe 'paupers' should be wiped out by 'natural selection'.

It's just a flight of fancy Mitch, I'd never try to put it into practice. 😉

that is absolutely nothing like a cleverly crafted counter-argument

perhaps because I wasn't devil's advocating ? I believe in compassion and tolerance and disfavour the mariginalisation of the poor. Whatever our level of income we're still people

Do you seriously believe that a higher income bracket makes a person more intelligent? Tell me you're just trying to be ironic, or trolling, because I dont want to accept the fact that you believe 'paupers' should be wiped out by 'natural selection'.

no, probably more likely (likely, not fact) that a higher intellegence leads to a higher income?

stumpy jon has said all i wanted to say, but never manage to get out.

stumpy jon for fuhrer!

+1 for Stumpyjon. It's always the first and last resort of the left-of-centre to claim victory based on their view point being the "enlightened path" and anyone who disagrees is an unsophisticated, uneducated moron.

Olly is quite right, more intelligent people are statistically wealthier than their ignorant counterparts. This is a cause of unending frustration for people who feel their lot in life is not representative of their intellect. They become angry and a bit militant.

Alright back there Ernest?

I wanted you to point me in the direction of statistics or evidence that supported your very unequivocal assertion that there are indeed disproportionately more of these measures in "middle class suburban areas".

So you're blind are you ?

But tell me, does someone of [i]"an educated bent"[/i] always need statistics before coming to a
decision/conclusion ? Must make getting through the week quite challenging for you 😕

Still, I guess it means at least you don't have to rely on "common sense" 8)

and a bit militant.

[img] [/img]
forkingoursouls goes hunting for benefit cheats

disproportionate amount of traffic calming measures such as speed humps in nice leafy middle-class suburban areas, when compared to the lack of them in poor inner-city areas, might have an effect.

Incidentally, I did stop to think that. And from experience concluded that there are more of them in the rougher areas where I have lived, and fewer in the "middle class" areas. In fact they were removed from one of the better off areas because they were put in a bus route and it was too damn noisy.

In fact I know the person who worked on the first major council traffic calming scheme in my old area and that was in a place where he was bombarded with bricks because he pulled up in a white van with a high vis jacket on. I am also unaware of any factors other than "how many deaths/injuries/complaints have been had on this road" when they decide where to put the humps.

But tell me, does someone of "an educated bent" always need statistics before coming to a
decision/conclusion ? Must make getting through the week quite challenging for you

Indeed thinking *properly* and accurately about a many subjects does require a lot more detail than just what you can see with your eyes.

Still, I guess it means at least that you don't have to rely on "common sense"

I think have the wrong word. Common sense has nothing to do with this, perception does. You perceive a disproportionate amount of traffic calming in middle class areas. That involves your perception of classes, areas and visiting them all. Actual counted statistics are far more reliable than most people's "common sense".

Olly is quite right, more intelligent people are statistically wealthier than their ignorant counterparts

I don't see intelligent/ignorant as opposites, and one might consider that, since intelligence is genetic is doesn't deserve reward or to be considered as a merit. I've never had to try hard at anything the whole of my life (apart from trying to ride a bike properly) - anything I want to do comes easily, yet I get paid loads. This hardly seems fair.

I don't see intelligent/ignorant as opposites, and one might consider that, since intelligence is genetic is doesn't deserve reward or to be considered as a merit. I've never had to try hard at anything the whole of my life (apart from trying to ride a bike properly) - anything I want to do comes easily, yet I get paid loads. This hardly seems fair.

ignorance and intellegence often go hand in hand.
Bankers?
pinstripe, pink shirt wearing Audi Q7 drivers? (often about 4ft nothing)

totally off topic, but things like this normally get me riled up and putting on my "righty facist" hat on.

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Fire-crew-hit-by-sickening.2374739.jp

dont discriminate, im sure its really hard for these people to find other things to do with thier time!

So you're blind are you ?

Er... No? A shade myopic, but nothing to worry about. As I pointed out, and as Coffeeking has also just mentioned, my own experience of traffic calming measures are quite at odds with your bold statement, which is why I asked you to back it up.

You obviously can't, so I think we can overlook your last post. Next!

Incidentally, before someone suggests it, I'm not suggesting poor people are thick, or passing judgement. Just analysing it in a calm and sensible manner, rather than taking an extreme stance such as "dont be daft, it has nothing to do with it, you meany - let me get my head back in my bucket of sand" or "of course, thick people should die, where's my bucket of sand?".

I don't see intelligent/ignorant as opposites,

No. That's probably because you, like many other ignorant people, erroneously assume the word "ignorant" to mean lacking in manners rather than it's true dictionary definition which is "uninformed or uneducated".

"I earn more than most of them and stay in a moderate ex council house "
drug dealer? sorry IGMC

Doesn't that just possibly suggest that our society is now fairer than it has been for a long time.

Where's the fairness in those who can afford to move to where the jobs are and those who can't and get left behind? And how can those sort of families possibly hope to afford property in the catchment area of a good school? Of course thirty or so years ago these families may have had jobs in the manufacturing industry. Not anymore.

These people have been priced out of the market, so talking about a fairer society is boll*cks.

mmm

about 1.28 in

talking about a fairer society is boll*cks.

since when has the world been fair?

i realise its easier for me to say, my parents worked thier nuts off to get me out of an education system where i was sat in solitary during lessons cause i was too disruptive, and not taught, and put me through a school where they actually gave a flying flunge.

but the world isnt fair.
some people are needed to fill management jobs, science jobs, where as some people are needed to haul bins of rubbish, washup in restraunts and clean hotels.
i hate to say it, but i even suspect that society NEEDs bankers to some extent.

fact of the matter is, some jobs are better paid than others, if they wernt, it would be communism. which is great in theorey, but people are greedy and unfair by thier very nature, so it doesnt work.

if your bacon could argue "its not fair" would you set it free rather than eat it?

lifes not fair

my own experience of traffic calming measures are quite at odds with your bold statement

Well you need to get onto the council then. After all, traffic calming measures are will increase road safety** in you area, so why should just poor people have it all ?

**Although I have to admit that I'm using common sense rather than statistics again.

Just as an aside, some friends of mine - a magistrate and an aerospace systems designer - adopted 3 children from a very deprived area. Parents were heroin addicts, long-term unemployed, not very bright.

They were counseled to lower their expectations for these childrens' academic potential. Obviously, a couple of highly successful, wealthy middle class parents would hope to offer these poor kids the best education money could buy, but they were advised by social workers that they would probably be lacking in that department due to their parentage.

So it's a well-documented phenomenon, no matter where you put these people, statistically, they're never going to achieve as much as the offspring of wealthy parents who are - again, statistically - more intelligent.

FOS - that makes no sense

how old were these kids? your friends were told to lower their expectations because the kids had got off to a bad start in life - not because they had "Bad genes"

"So it's a well-documented phenomenon, no matter where you put these people, statistically, they're never going to achieve as much as the offspring of wealthy parents who are - again, statistically - more intelligent."

My wife and I were told something similar when we adopted our boys - It boiled my p**s at the time, and hearing you trot out the same misguided crap is having a similar effect now. If we continue to tell kids they wont achieve or make anything of themselves, then it eventually sticks - the negative stuff is always easier to believe, that's human nature, but that doesnt mean we have to reinforce this by continuously churning out the same tired old argument.

After all, traffic calming measures will increase road safety** in your area, so why should just poor people have it all ?

I've corrected your typos, but I'm afraid you're very, very wrong Ernest. As I mentioned in my Original Post, socio-economic status seems to have a far greater bearing than traffic calming measures.

So remember Ernest, Stop, Look, Listen, and Think.

(You can apply that mantra to this forum as well.)

how old were these kids?

3 months, 18 months and 2.5 years old.

It might not be very palatable, and of course, there are many exceptions, but it's proven that intellectual ability is inherited.

And in addition to my last post, both boys are meeting, and in some cases exceeding, their targets in school, so what does that say about 'statistics'?.

FOS you really do talk some patronising twaddle.

wealthy middle class parents would hope to offer these poor kids the best education money could buy, but they were advised by social workers that they would probably be lacking in that department due to their parentage.

All the more reason for "the best education money could buy" I would have thought............or doesn't paying for eduction make any difference then ?

BTW, your friends need to be careful.......I hope they realise that their kids will end up stealing off them, vandalising their house, and generally going around drinking and fornicating.

It's in their genes you know.

FOS you really do talk some patronising twaddle.

So, just because you disagree, it immediately becomes "twaddle"? Everything I've just posted has sound scientific evidence to back it up, to the point that those oh-so-liberal-lefties, the Social Services feel compelled to advise adoptive parents on the subject.

So, ooOOoo, feel free to point to evidence to the contrary, but if the best you can do is to accuse me of spouting 'twaddle', I think this debate is probably a bit beyond you. Mind the road on the way out.

So, just because you disagree, it immediately becomes "twaddle"?

No. It's because it is twaddle.

Something which you are rather good at.

[img] [/img]

"So, just because you disagree, it immediately becomes "twaddle"?"
... not to mention hateful, patronising and insensitive.