Sharesmagazine
 Home   Log In   Register   Our Services   My Account   Contact   Help 
 Stockwatch   Level 2   Portfolio   Charts   Share Price   Awards   Market Scan   Videos   Broker Notes   Director Deals   Traders' Room 
 Funds   Trades   Terminal   Alerts   Heatmaps   News   Indices   Forward Diary   Forex Prices   Shares Magazine   Investors' Room 
 CFDs   Shares   SIPPs   ISAs   Forex   ETFs   Comparison Tables   Spread Betting 
You are NOT currently logged in
Register now or login to post to this thread.

THE TALK TO YOURSELF THREAD. (NOWT)     

goldfinger - 09 Jun 2005 12:25

Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

mnamreh - 17 Mar 2010 13:11 - 8521 of 81564

.

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 13:32 - 8522 of 81564

Kayak - I agree with your logic re parents being punished for crimes there little darlings commit. Unfortunately the parents today get away with the crimes they commit and unless there is radical change they will probably get away also with the crimes there children commit! This country has been going to the dogs since the sixties, 'Spare the rod spoil the child' Who said that?

Kayak - 17 Mar 2010 13:35 - 8523 of 81564

tabasco - I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with those statistics - they say nothing about why they are so high for the UK. Perhaps because the age of criminal responsibility is so low?

If they are true, I doubt very much that they are anything but comparing apples and pears. Source, please?

mnamreh, you are a wise chap. FFS = For F***'s Sake.

Much of the polarisation in UK society is down to the tabloid press, for which polarised attitudes are the name of the game.

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 13:46 - 8524 of 81564

Kayak.

Also, a lot of children's morals come from their peers. If they hang out with peers who have similar discipline issues, it's not a surprise they try to fit in.

==========

Much of what the peers are doing is that shown to them in the media. The gangs or group then tries to emulate what has been demonstrated to them.

The media being driven by "profit", not morality.

=============

Tabby,

Ten years olds have not got the ability to take stock of themselves and decide on a set of morals for themselves..so you are saying they have no responsibility for any of their actions?therefore violence is going to be inevitableif in their make-up


Violence is within all our natures, as demonstrated by legalised killing ie. War.


The drive remains instinctual, but hopefully not often used.

Containment, or constraint of the violent impulses, needs to be integrated into children at a young age and continually be re-enforced.

Preferably this is not done by punishment by reward for more gainful behaviour.

The impulse sublimated and diversified into more productive methods of obtaining more valuable goals, rather than remaining purely destructive.

======

I feel lucky that I had parents who didnt physically punish me.

I knew, when, or what I was doing, was being frowned on and generally stopped doing so. At least , while I was within their view.

My father would also explain to me why he thought my behaviour was less than expected and the consequences of it to myself and others of continuing it.

It taught me awareness of others and to have respect of their feelings.

Although, not necessarily to be restricted by that understanding.

-========-

We attempted to bring up our children in a similar manner. Although the question why was sometimes a B. Nuisance.

Thankfully our grand children are being brought up in a similar manner and will avoid to much trouble.
-----------

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 13:46 - 8525 of 81564

.

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 14:09 - 8526 of 81564

cc.

Bring back the stocks and hanging for driving offences. That will stop the Bs, first time. No re-offending allowed.

Sort them out once and for all.

Catch them young before they have a chance to offend. We all know the families which shouldn't be allowed to breed!

mnamreh - 17 Mar 2010 14:19 - 8527 of 81564

.

mnamreh - 17 Mar 2010 14:21 - 8528 of 81564

.

Kayak - 17 Mar 2010 14:37 - 8529 of 81564

To be fair, I think Fred was being sarcastic. Mind you I know of one family who shouldn't have been allowed to breed :-)

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:44 - 8530 of 81564

Only one Kayak? You should get out more :o)

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:44 - 8531 of 81564

Only one Kayak? You should get out more :o)

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:45 - 8532 of 81564

Only one Kayak? You should get out more :o)

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:48 - 8533 of 81564

There's a parrot in ere!

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:49 - 8534 of 81564

There's a parrot in ere!

Chris Carson - 17 Mar 2010 14:50 - 8535 of 81564

There's a parrot in ere!

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 15:05 - 8536 of 81564

CC, Flap your wings and leave then!

mnamreh - 17 Mar 2010 15:09 - 8537 of 81564

.

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 15:10 - 8538 of 81564

I think I would go back to the system of guilty by association or as up north by naming.

Preferably after a mention in the Sun.

Kayak, ????????

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 15:15 - 8539 of 81564

I would bring back guilt by association or named and hang all who disagree with me.

Or if you are up north, those mentioned in the Sun.

Weren't Kayak and Cameron mentioned in the Sun??????????????

Fred1new - 17 Mar 2010 15:16 - 8540 of 81564

I would bring back guilt by association or named and hang all who disagree with me.

Or if you are up north, those mentioned in the Sun.

Weren't Kayak and Cameron mentioned in the Sun??????????????
Register now or login to post to this thread.