Falinge estate in Rochdale most deprived in England.

[Mike D]

The Daily Fail the paper of little England in its full glory. They used to write lots of article on imigrants claiming thousands in benefits and lapping it up up in mansions. Now its the estates full of scroungers lapping and reprobates what ever will be next on the agenda for them.

The only good thing about the paper is Martin Samuel and even his halo is began to fall after all its all the bum licking from upstairs.

 

[Rascal]

If he's on the sick then he's getting the major outgoings paid for by everyone else .

OK i will give you the benefit of the doubt here

Explain further though

 

[peoffrey]

If he's on the sick then he's getting the major outgoings paid for by everyone else .

OK i will give you the benefit of the doubt here

Explain further though

Housing paid for, Council Tax paid for and a nice cash sum every week for incapacity benefit. I know numerous people who fleeced it for ages and led comfortable lives that didn't involve going anywhere or doing anything when they were fully capable of working.

 

[dazdon]

I live 5 mins away from this place and I really don't think it's that bad.

Langley Middleton is far worse in my opinion it's got an aura of doom in and around it.

 

[peoffrey]

I live 5 mins away from this place and I really don't think it's that bad.

Langley Middleton is far worse in my opinion it's got an aura of doom in and around it.

I lived on Wood Street and my Grandad is still in the area. Langley wasn't as bad as some might have you believe. I've largely got good memories of the place.

 

[Paladin]

I'd like to point out that each year they announce this, they always miss out the fact that they are not talking about "just" the actual estate of flats (called "lower falinge" actually), but the area that includes a section of the town centre - the section that the hostels are in, where many of the local homeless/ reformed (ish) drinkers etc etc are temporarily living. All those are on benefit, and it's those figures that push the "falinge" area into being listed as the "scum of the earth"!! The actual flats have decent people there - maybe not all of them, but many are in full time work and good decent people (and no, i don't live there before you accuse! but i did know people who lived on there, and they were in full time work paying full rent and taking no benefits, and they don't smoke drink or have sky!).
A friend also works for the council and had access to the maps they use for these surverys, and that showed that it's not the "Falinge" area just used, it uses the same size area again further into the town with the hostels etc. So don't just tar anyone who lives there, there's good people! But it's easy for the press to take moody rainy pictures of the flats and blame everyone there instead.

The information is from the government's Indices of Multiple Deprivation, and the most recent published figures are from 2010 (IMD2010) freely available here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010. I don't know where the Mail has got its 2013 figures from, but I suspect they are referring to the 2010 data. This area of Rochdale is indeed the most deprived area in England.

The data is collected at Lower Super Output Area level, which is a geographic area consisting of a small number of post codes, and averaging around 1,000 households. There are some 32,000 LSOAs in England and around 4,400 in the North West.

The indices contain a number domains, or measurements including income deprivation, employment deprivation, health deprivation, crime, barriers to housing, children and youth, and there is an overall index, which gives a weighted average of all the other domains. This LSOA in Rochdale is indeed the most deprived area in England in terms of income. I do a lot of work in this area, and if I remember rightly, around 60 of the top 100 most income deprived areas are in the North West of England.

This reinforces arguments that the region should receive additional funding to help tackle the severe deprivation up here, and Simon Danczuk is right that major investment is needed.

 

[jma]

A typical anti-poor Daily Mail story.

Reporting that 80% live on Benefit is designed to make people think of scroungers.

Ask yourself this if the Mail did a story on say Eastbourne retirement village would it report that 1000% of people live on benefits.

Spot on.

The Mail is a crazy right wing rag for people who are daft enough to believe it is more high brow than the red tops. It subtly serves Conservative ends by turning people against people to achieve their 'every man for themselves' and 'trust nobody- especially not foreigners or poor people' agendas.

The picture of the satellite dishes was an especially clever trick to build resentment among those most susceptible. They then do the rest by filling in the gaps and imagining people drinking 'premium lager' and watching Jeremy Kyle on their flat screen tvs, whilst their kids suffer eating cheap value brands.

This government and their press have continued to try to turn people against people, first private sector against public sector with the gold plated pension nonsense, now we're all being encouraged to resent those in need of state help- ironically the vast majority of the population when considering tax credits etc. By generating in-group and out-group mentalities people can be manipulated into overestimating in-group similarities and out-group differences.

Using this strategy, they can play to the darkest side of human nature, where one person starts to resent another, and despite things getting progressively worse for everyone, very few people notice and question this strategy.

Not enough appreciation for this post.

Of course, it has always gone on, with rags like the Mail just doing what they have always done.

What I really don't like is the ramping up of this trait into a concerted and overwhelming effort on behalf of the government.

Far from the guff that is spouted about an honest and frank debate about the hard decisions that the country has to make, we have every single aspect of policy laden thick with allusions to it being on the side of hard workers ("Yeah, yeah, that's me, that is, they mean me so it must be good") and against lazy twats ("Yeah, yeah, the cunts, they are ripping me off the lazy twats).

However, it just doesn't add up and is far too often nonsensical guff designed to hide ideological fervour. There is a list as long as your arm over the last 3 years but the most cynical recently is the message that removing the rights of workers and making it far simpler to sack people is actually something designed to benefit hard workers. (Well, let's be fair, it will benefit 'some' hard workers - and that is exactly the issue).

It shouldn't amaze me, because throughout history populations have shown the same traits to be easily manipulated, but I am always staggered as to how easily pandering to people's egos (Yes, you, you, you are the hard workers) and making them feel persecuted (some twats are persecuting you, we are against them) can get them to support, or at least severely dampen opposition to, just about anything. This government has that premise written atop of their whole agenda.

 

[dazdon]

I lived on Wood Street and my Grandad is still in the area. Langley wasn't as bad as some might have you believe. I've largely got good memories of the place.

I lived there for 18 years although I wasn't born there.

Wood street was always the "Posh" end in my humble opinion.

Now it's all scruffy corner shops selling cheap booze to hoodies.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Having worked all over the UK, i've seen some very affluent suburbs and some real rough places. One thing that i have noticed, is that someone on their arse with hardly a pot to piss in, will gladly give you a cup of tea, unlike pretentious snobby twats, who'd rather look down their toffee noses than offer you a brew! Twats.

I always like a post that doesn't generalise.

 

[blueday]

Having worked all over the UK, i've seen some very affluent suburbs and some real rough places. One thing that i have noticed, is that someone on their arse with hardly a pot to piss in, will gladly give you a cup of tea, unlike pretentious snobby twats, who'd rather look down their toffee noses than offer you a brew! Twats.

[/quote]

Which catagory would you prefer to be in?