The evolution of the scubag?

Deliverance

Ok I hope this is appropriate, I use the term 'scumbag' to refer to the urban social terrorists operating in every major town in Ireland. I am talking about the subculture that plagues every communal area.
The question is: Where have they come from, what is their purpose and what is the solution to this problem or indeed their problem?

I suspect that over the next 10 yrs it will get worse as nothing 'real' is being done to deal with them or their situation by the government or local authorities.

Are they the dissilusioned people of Ireland, victims who have no future , Or are they a pest control issue which will take more radical measures.

At the moment from what I have seen on threads and indeed experienced personally it is definately a situation which is rife and it will get worse, and no one seems to be able to do anything about 'them' in a civil sense at least.

The 'scumbag' culture is going to get a lot worse (evolve) through neglect of the issue in my opinion. I am curious to hear any other opinions on this from other peoples real views and experiences.

Zillah

Actually, from an evolutionary point of view, those of us who successfully function in terms of a huge impersonal society are the the freaks. Human nature is designed to function in a small tribal context. These scumbags have simply not been sucessfully indoctrinated to function in our weird super tribe; they're operating as if they own family and friends are their tribe, while everyone else is from other rival tribes.

WindSock

Define a Scumbag?

InFront

I like his description of "urban social terrorist/ subculture that plagues every communal area..." actually. It removes the 'class divide' to the question as well.

In my opinion, these are just guys who need to get a job, or get some direction, or whose parents really need to start acting like parents.

In answer to the question 'where have they come from', haven't they always been there/ here? Why do you say they're on the increase op?

*WKD*

So is the title of the thread a modern varient on the word scumbag?

eviecarwash

They're on the increase because they're banging out a lot more kids than the rest of us, who in turn become scumbags!! Seriously..

Karoma

InFront wrote:

I like his description of "urban social terrorist/ subculture that plagues every communal area..." actually. It removes the 'class divide' to the question as well.

But, this seems to contradict his previous definitions:

Maybe we should take money out of the social welfare sector which these people live off and put into law enforcement and health and proper issues, proper areas of worth. Maybe then the 'scumbags' who obviously have to much time on their hands, would have to get a job and consequently get a life which doesn't include robbing, stealing and intimidating good folks.

As an idealist it makes me sad to realise that maybe a social welfare system which is very good in this country allows the degenrates a law unto themselves, and to me the only way they can be held into check is by taking away the very rights which I believe in on principle.

I do not feel that the solution is local, it is national, to me I think that we should cut the money they are given and make them work for a living, radical I know but it would force them into employment and therefore a realisation of other people.

Not all recipients of the social welfare system are scumbags, not all scumbags are recipients of social welfare. Such over-simplified, and grossly ignorantly biased views only serve to make the issue worse.

eviecarwash wrote:

They're on the increase because they're banging out a lot more kids than the rest of us, who in turn become scumbags!! Seriously..

Because over-population by the lower classes is a new phenomenon? Who exactly is "they"?

I am working in the media and plan to highlight this situation over time as it strikes me more and more as a problem.

Are we part of your research? (Not a problem for me...just nice to know if one is going to be cited further down the line.)

Mahatma coat

well, forced labour, denial of government services and welfare, sterilisation and Deathcamps didnt solve the problem last time it was tried, but hey I'm all on for givin it another go

alternatley we could conscript them and send them off to Iraq badly trained in vehicles armoured with canvas equipping them with a malfunctioning weapon and not nearly enough ammo.

seems to be workin for the yanks

Mahatma coat

Overpopulation by the working classes is not a new problem, its been with us since the industrial revolution, back then ya didnt live long down the mines so a steady supply of uneducated labour was required, then we had factories that required manual labour to keep them occupied, now with automation theres no call for their services anymore, suddenly (well over a period of a few generations) theres a huge uneducated workforce with nothing to do all day and a chip on its shoulder regarding those who 'have made it'. tis a vicious cycle and its only gonna get worse over time.

maybe we could do the aul Leif ericsson trick, convince them that theres this wonderful lush green country (to make it easier for them we'll call it - oh I dunno how bout Greenland) where theres abundant drugs, childrens allowance is 2 grand a week and everyone gerts a free Civic.

then we leave them there over the winter and go back in spring to clean up a bit and refuel the civics for the next wave

Enright

Should there be a link to child benefit and socially acceptable idioms such as school attendance and acceptable behavioural patterns?

I would be in favour of child benefit being docked in the event of non attendance at school, again parents who regularly remove their children from school to avail of cut price off peak rates should be penalised as well.

If the child benefit allowance is to assist parents with the cost of bringing up children, and if the state or their advocates such as school, legal system etc feel that parents are not fulfilling their part of the contract, then there should be monetary implications.

I’m a believer that only through education and employment will certain attitudes change, therefore I am putting the link between child benefit and attendance as a possible solution.

Gurgle

Mahatma coat wrote:

Overpopulation by the working classes is not a new problem, its been with us since the industrial revolution

Back then of course, they were actually working class - they had to work for 10 to 12 hours a day 6 days a week. Not much time for joyriding in carriages and burning them out afterwards.

The working classes these days are living as well as the middle classes.

Its the new class of non workers that causes the problems. Historically they would have been given a swift hanging, which had a 0% re-offence risk and tended to keep the breeding rate down.

Mahatma coat

Enright wrote:

Should there be a link to child benefit and socially acceptable idioms such as school attendance and acceptable behavioural patterns?

I would be in favour of child benefit being docked in the event of non attendance at school, again parents who regularly remove their children from school to avail of cut price off peak rates should be penalised as well.

If the child benefit allowance is to assist parents with the cost of bringing up children, and if the state or their advocates such as school, legal system etc feel that parents are not fulfilling their part of the contract, then there should be monetary implications.

I’m a believer that only through education and employment will certain attitudes change, therefore I am putting the link between child benefit and attendance as a possible solution.

Ah yeah, thats been tried before too, over here in Australia

it led to whats commonly known as the stolen generation, people who thought they were doing the right thing at the time, being good christians and all that ****e.


Seriously folks I think the Greenland plans a winner

Mahatma coat

OK when I say working class I mean it as a sort of mentality rather than a set social position (tho they're not mutualy exclusive).

tho I like the word C.H.A.V.

spurious

A good old-fashioned war would sort it all out.

DublinWriter

Gurgle wrote:

The working classes these days are living as well as the middle classes.

Its the new class of non workers that causes the problems. Historically they would have been given a swift hanging, which had a 0% re-offence risk and tended to keep the breeding rate down.

I think you are reffering to what people now call 'The Underclass'.

eviecarwash

Just bring back capital punishment and hold people accountable for their actions. I guarantee crime will drop dramatically. Those who lead law abiding lives have nothing to worry about.

Mahatma coat

eviecarwash wrote:

Just bring back capital punishment and hold people accountable for their actions. I guarantee crime will drop dramatically. Those who lead law abiding lives have nothing to worry about.

lets just get some of these boys to sort out the undesireables and the underclasses


now dont get me wrong I agree with what you're saying, anyone who knows me knows that I am a big fan of dealing with the situation in this manner.

however everyone needs to be fully aware of the ramifications of this course of action, its messy and once its started its almost impossible to stop, then of course theres the issue of who gets to live and who gets to die, scummers obviously, purge the prisons, then maybe the unmarried mothers (although the troops will need entertainment), then the handicapped and the infirmed, then after that well the bloodlust would have only gotten going so we'd move on lookin for new targets, maybe the immigrunts, then probably the hippies and the gays, then we start movin onto the rest of 'normal society' anyone who gets caught drink driving ( a henious crime by all accounts) tax evaders (we need that revenue to keep our bloodthirsty stormtroopers from mutiny)


course I would also have anyone who speaks with a D4 occent roysh taken out and shot.

then after that it would be time to spread our ideology across the globe, naturaly we start with the isle of man and move on from there, I've never really liked the french, or the italians, or the spaniards, or, or, well I dont like foreignists so the troops could have free reign on the continent (keeps em away from us, and lets face it anyone who would be a stormtrooper is an undesireable of the highest order)

eventualy once we've cleared up europe and the middle east we should be ready to tackle the chinese.

see where I'm going with this

Zillah

eviecarwash wrote:

Just bring back capital punishment and hold people accountable for their actions. I guarantee crime will drop dramatically. Those who lead law abiding lives have nothing to worry about.

Yes, excellent plan...

We will live in some nightmarish fear-State where life is not worth living!

jetsonx

some excellent sociological and historical intepretations given there by Zillah and Mahatma.

Karl Hungus

Quite frankly, the first step to solving this particular problem is to completely tear apart the judicial system.

It's the judges who are turning these people back on the streets multiple times with slaps on the wrists, and pathetic fines that don't get payed anyway. What we need are judges who'll go and throw the book at them.

As it is, it's more trouble than it's worth for the guards to even catch the little hooligans when they're thrown back on the streets ready sooner than they've put through the paper work. If we had a system that will actually discipline and punish them for breaking the law, that makes the guards' jobs worthwhile.

That, in my opinion, is the best place to start.

Stupidity like cut welfare is only going to make things insanely worse, and it's foolish to think otherwise. They're not going to get a job and straighten up, and it's sheer wooly-headed idealism to think it would actually happen in reality. First of all, who's going to hire them? Nobody in their right mind is going to hire someone who's strung out on drugs half the time. Second of all, these are the kind of people who'd threaten to syringe you for your mobile phone... And that's for ****s and giggles!

Put people who already have a serious disposition towards crime in a position where they've no income and thusly, no way to survive legally, and how soon do you think they'll be looting shops and mugging people en masse?

Welfare ain't the problem, it's the judicial system.

Mahatma coat

Zillah wrote:

Yes, excellent plan...

We will live in some nightmarish fear-State where life is not worth living!

AH Yeah,

but its all good as long as you're the one wearin the Jackboots and stompin the heads

WindSock

Mahatma coat wrote:

Ah yeah, thats been tried before too, over here in Australia

it led to whats commonly known as the stolen generation, people who thought they were doing the right thing at the time, being good christians and all that ****e.

The Stolen Generation was a different thing altogether. Snatching children from their parents and sending them across the continent for re-education is not the same as punishing the parents pockets for their childs lack of school attendance.

biko

Shouldn't this be in the Dublin forum?
There I said it

Zillah

Mahatma coat wrote:

AH Yeah,

but its all good as long as you're the one wearin the Jackboots and stompin the heads

Yeah but then you're either a psychopath or some pathetic obedient drone.

Mahatma coat

boreds wrote:

The Stolen Generation was a different thing altogether. Snatching children from their parents and sending them across the continent for re-education is not the same as punishing the parents pockets for their childs lack of school attendance.

OK yeah I see yer point on that one there, but I thought you meant something more along that lines, as in takin away the children as a source of income to the parents, as opposed to takin away whatever slim hope of survival these kids had by changing their status from revenue to expense in the eyes of their (shouldnt generalise but what the hey) uselessfatfilthyunwashedshellsuitwearinjunkie parents

WindSock

Mahatma coat wrote:

by changing their status from revenue to expense in the eyes of their (shouldnt generalise but what the hey) uselessfatfilthyunwashedshellsuitwearinjunkie parents

That might act as the most effective form of contraception for them

2Scoops

eviecarwash wrote:

Just bring back capital punishment and hold people accountable for their actions. I guarantee crime will drop dramatically. Those who lead law abiding lives have nothing to worry about.

Our government has already adopted a 'zero tolerance' approach to crime - can't see it getting any less tolerant tbh:rolleyes:

Macker

biko wrote:

Shouldn't this be in the Dublin forum?
There I said it

If it's only a Dublin problem I'm moving to Galway ....no wait

nesf

Macker wrote:

If it's only a Dublin problem I'm moving to Galway ....no wait

To be fair, the problem is far worse in Dublin but that's due to population density and other factors rather than anything inherent to "Dubliners".

Mahatma coat

boreds wrote:

That might act as the most effective form of contraception for them

ROYSH absofcknloutley fknTrue!

but.......................................................and its a big BUT..............................................

<aside to racist anecdotal joke -(may well be off form MODS please )- but shur anywat)

>

NeoNazi in a bar spoutinhis sh1te to the barman.etc..........
in walks this organgrinder and a monkey routine, ondly da organgrinder appens ta be
Blick

aaaaaaaaaaaanyway rOYSY te guy sees this monkey goin round with tis hat, and e's collectin coind, so the lads givin ye munky coinz

an de barman goes,

eh lad didnt think ou liked dem sorta folk


and de lad goes















ah yeah but ya kanty take it out on de Kids.




,<aaaaaaanyway delete as ye wish>

but, ya know whaI mean like,

Mahatma coat

appologies for previous soon to be deleted jokeinpoortaste

Degsy

Are there no prisons..are there no workhouses?

Mahatma coat

see therin lies te issue if ys prvide em wit facilities yas ondly encurgs em ta liv

stop bein SOooooooooo pinkolibrleleftie dat de obvius problm in fronta ya is as blind as the forest fer vitex cofassus in a large gathering within mangrove regions

Dyr

Mahatma coat wrote:

lets just get some of these boys to sort out the undesireables and the underclasses


now dont get me wrong I agree with what you're saying, anyone who knows me knows that I am a big fan of dealing with the situation in this manner.

however everyone needs to be fully aware of the ramifications of this course of action, its messy and once its started its almost impossible to stop, then of course theres the issue of who gets to live and who gets to die, scummers obviously, purge the prisons, then maybe the unmarried mothers (although the troops will need entertainment), then the handicapped and the infirmed, then after that well the bloodlust would have only gotten going so we'd move on lookin for new targets....
eventualy once we've cleared up europe and the middle east we should be ready to tackle the chinese.

see where I'm going with this

I do indeed and i like the sound of it. Dem bleedin handicaps have had it coming. Big time :mad:

Sofaspud

Mahatma coat wrote:

but, ya know whaI mean like,

Not really, no.

Mahatma coat

OOOHHHHHHHHHH A following

the power, THE Poewr

<realises tis jst da interweb>












<secretlypreparesNurenbergRallytypespeefch>

Mahatma coat

Sofaspud wrote:

Not really, no.

OK Right,

so

right, some of us went to school acquired educations gor requized qty pts fr CAO/CAS and got grantsetc... went ta colledgee gor edukashuns hyflyn jbs and sh1rtrsloadsa ca$h ]

UDDERS

spent there time mitchin dossin shiftin wimmin gettins stoned and generalllllly actin the mick, however

when teh ,..., aait I saw this clip a few weeks ago Idiocracy

Does that help clarify wot I'd be sayin?

Wibbs

Mahatma coat wrote:

right, some of us went to school acquired educations gor requized qty pts fr CAO/CAS and got grantsetc... went ta colledgee gor edukashuns hyflyn jbs and sh1rtrsloadsa ca$h ]

Eh what? Learning to spell and construct sentences might be a start and do not wheel out the old dyslexia crap either. Please it's old at this stage.

Does that help clarify wot I'd be sayin?

Frankly no. You're not netwhizkids twitchier younger brother are you?

Degsy

Mahatma coat wrote:

OK Right,

so

right, some of us went to school acquired educations gor requized qty pts fr CAO/CAS and got grantsetc... went ta colledgee gor edukashuns hyflyn jbs and sh1rtrsloadsa ca$h ]

UDDERS

spent there time mitchin dossin shiftin wimmin gettins stoned and generalllllly actin the mick, however

when teh ,..., aait I saw this clip a few weeks ago Idiocracy

Does that help clarify wot I'd be sayin?

Will you stop posting in that idiotic style?Its incredibly irritating.

Jocksy

They're on the increase because they're banging out a lot more kids than the rest of us, who in turn become scumbags!! Seriously..

This is a really serious and fascinating issue.
Evolution is based on teh fact of survival of the fittest, winner takes all etc. regarding mating. The smartest, strongest, best looking etc.. people were the ones that supplied the offspring. But there has been a reversal of that trend now in western societies with large familys becoming unpopular with the more succesful classes. What would happen if this trend was to continue over thousands of years. Would be see evolution in reverse?

Mrs_Doyle

We, as a State, breed scumbags. We finance their existence and reward their scumbag behaviour through housing, and other benefits.

I, like most functioning members of society, have funded my own third level education, will purchase my own home(eventually), will purchase my own furniture, will (eventually) have children, whose expenses I will also cover.

My friends sister, aged 20, recently had a child, with her boyfriend of 1 year. She registered the Father as unknown. She claimed her family residence was overcrowded..... it wasn't, she just neglected to mention her older siblings had moved out already. She was housed just 5 minutes from her family home. She received cheques, with which she was instructed to buy prams, cots, and other necessary baby things.

She lives in her little duplex now, with her boyfriend, and her baby. He claims unemployment, despite working 30 hours a week (cash in hand), she claims unmarried mothers benefits, despite the babies father still being on the scene,
They have a nice little set up, with more cash coming in then the average young family.


There is no shame or stigma attached to what she is doing, in fact, in the eyes of some, she would have been completely stupid had she have done things differently.

Define Society:
A society is a group of human beings distinguishable from other groups by mutual interests, characteristic relationships, shared institutions and a common culture.

She was encouraged, by society, to chose her current path.

She was supported, by society, to claim as many social benefits as possible.

She was educated, by society, as to her 'entitlements'.


You can rest assured, in time, her child will be encouraged, educated and supported, by society, to follow a similar path.

beans

Jocksy,

You're assuming that evolution has a planned direction, that it tries to usher humans toward an ideal of some sort. It's the same as people saying 'are we actually de-volving'?, neither actually exist. Evolution cannot 'work in reverse'. If in 1000 years the country was overrun with the 'scumbag' types who are the subject of this thread, then that would be just evolution working as normal.

Good thing I'm not immortal so.

Jocksy

Thats an interesting point. I'm looking at things from a subjective viewpoint about what is a better standard of human being but you're right, evolution should be the judge of that.

nesf

Mrs. Doyle, it's the free-rider problem. There will always, in any society, be those who will, if given the chance, take as much as they can and contribute as little as possible and then claim that they are entitled to it. In any welfare state it is impossible to avoid them (well, in a practical sense at least) but the other option (a complete removal of the welfare system) is generally considered to be worse for society in general. It's not a reason to condone their behaviour but if you are being realistic you have to expect some percentage of people to behave in that manner unfortunately.

Mrs_Doyle

nesf wrote:

Mrs. Doyle, it's the free-rider problem. There will always, in any society, be those who will, if given the chance, take as much as they can and contribute as little as possible and then claim that they are entitled to it. In any welfare state it is impossible to avoid them (well, in a practical sense at least) but the other option (a complete removal of the welfare system) is generally considered to be worse for society in general. It's not a reason to condone their behaviour but if you are being realistic you have to expect some percentage of people to behave in that manner unfortunately.

I understand what your saying, and I reluctantly accept that 'free riders' will always be a problem.

However, my problem is not just with the one, or two, who manage to ride the system. There are generations of families who have been entirely supported by the state.
Housed, clothed, fed and educated.

Why is it that we should be responsible for the survival of parasites?

Why does the system allow for people to continue to drain its resources, while contributing nothing?

Should you pay for my baby, as well as your own, merely because I refuse to provide for myself and my child?

Sure, even when dealing with a small child, a baby, you are told not to reward bad behaviour with attention. Yet we reward the anti-social behaviour of a substantial percentage of our population, with an unlimited supply of attention (in the form of one benefit after another).

Where someone refuses, for whatever reason, to provide for them self, or their family, our state steps in and provides for them.

This is wrong.

If you constantly spoon feed a child it will never learn how to feed itself.
Not because it can't, but because it does not have to.

nesf

Mrs_Doyle wrote:

I understand what your saying, and I reluctantly accept that 'free riders' will always be a problem.

However, my problem is not just with the one, or two, who manage to ride the system. There are generations of families who have been entirely supported by the state.
Housed, clothed, fed and educated.

Why is it that we should be responsible for the survival of parasites?

Why does the system allow for people to continue to drain its resources, while contributing nothing?

Should you pay for my baby, as well as your own, merely because I refuse to provide for myself and my child?

Sure, even when dealing with a small child, a baby, you are told not to reward bad behaviour with attention. Yet we reward the anti-social behaviour of a substantial percentage of our population, with an unlimited supply of attention (in the form of one benefit after another).

Where someone refuses, for whatever reason, to provide for them self, or their family, our state steps in and provides for them.

This is wrong.

If you constantly spoon feed a child it will never learn how to feed itself.
Not because it can't, but because it does not have to.

I agree and (apparently) the state agrees:

€375m saved in welfare fraud crackdown

These people should be punished by the state and the state should try and unearth fraud in the system but the amount of money needed to completely eradicate fraud in the system would make the amount lost to fraud look very very small. A balance has to be found between the amount of resources spent finding these people and the amount lost to the ones who aren't caught. Once the state invests enough that they make it relatively "risky" to be committing welfare fraud (as in you've a fair chance of being caught and prosecuted) then the state is doing enough, but you have to accept that some degree of fraud must occur in the system for "practical" reasons. It'd be a greater loss of taxpayer money to eradicate it completely!

Mrs_Doyle

I have the feeling that this thread, and others like it, will only succeed in infuriating those of use who 'do things by the book'.

It saddens me that so many of us are aware of the flaws, and injustice, of the system, and yet have no real option but to accept that 'that's just the way it is'.

It makes my blood boil when very obvious cases of fraud (e.g. child and baby housed by state while babies daddy very blatantly resides with them) are not investigated.

NutJob

Mrs_Doyle wrote:

I have the feeling that this thread, and others like it, will only succeed in infuriating those of use who 'do things by the book'.

Yep because no politician has the guts to propose two good suggestions that appeared in this thread already.

Before someone says mass murder no
-docking social welfare for parents of truant children
-justice system reform

bonkey

nesf wrote:

Once the state invests enough that they make it relatively "risky" to be committing welfare fraud (as in you've a fair chance of being caught and prosecuted) then the state is doing enough,

You mean, I assume, once you've a fair chance of being caught, prosecuted, and suitably held accountable for your actions.

nesf

bonkey wrote:

You mean, I assume, once you've a fair chance of being caught, prosecuted, and suitably held accountable for your actions.

Yes, though exactly what that entails and how far to take that is an interesting issue.

WindSock

I think the problem herein lies with us Women. We are not choosing correctly whom we wish to mate and procreate with, so stupid useless uglies keep getting into the cycle. Womens faults, I tells ya. Skanks, keep your legs closed, you're holding us back.