In a recent article for Elmbridge Lifestyle magazine Samantha Laurie highlights the current state of child poverty in Surrey - Is the situation of social inequality blown out of proportion or is this something that needs to be seriously looked at?

Hmm, I know what Im gonna say might be a bit mean but....
Yeh there is difference, even in my 'village' of West Horsley. But people close to me have said that its generational lack of learning (meaning that its pointless educating the children as the parents will drag them down again) and also of aspirations. Poorer people NEED to show off what little they have (jewellery, designer labels, customised cares etc) and that leads to jelousy, theft and a connection to the fashion/bling and current fads of the day.

Im not saying that well off peopel dont show off - in my village you can see it - but its alot more understated and subtle. My parents are ok I guess and we have a nice house but they dont have to compete with anyone else. Traditionally poorer people feel they do have to compete.

Putting people in an area without changing their makeup wont work - they will just mess that place up. I guess restricting what they have acces to might work as educating them in being nice hasnt worked either.

OMG this sounds horrible but I really dont mean it to be! I dont know what the best way is!

And will get far worse under the nasty party. They are now reducing police numbers so that will mean more crime. In Oct bus pases for older people will will taken away as will the heating grant. Because of the rise in VAT heating bills will be much higher.

In the meantime Mr Cameron will still be living his millionnaire lifestyle and enjoying his extra one hundres and fifty thousand a year PM salary paid for by us.

no it isnt everyone gets along without any problems with social inequality www.wokingsearcher.co.uk

"I don't know what the best way is."

While the word 'best' is in that sentence the world shall revolve around conflict rather than cooperation.
What if we try: I don't know what the way 'forward' is.
This at least admits to a going forward, for time's arrow points ever on, and change happens with every tick of the clock.
I happen to tether myself to the truism that, "It takes all sorts to make a world." The same is true on the small scale of Surrey as it is Globally.
Is it then a matter of degree, this "inequality", or merely a matter of stand-point?
If a matter of degree, then surely as long as somebody has enough (of whatever) to sustain themselves AND the opportunity to do better, and at some stage can accept the risk of doing less well, then both they and we are in much the same boat.
If, however, our world runs along the lines, so eloquently portrayed by John Cleese, Ronnie Barker and Ronnie Corbett all those years ago, as if we each know our place and where we stand in relation to one another, is there not then also a balance to be struck?

Is our present trouble one of an ever widening gap between the haves and the have-nots, not simply in terms of wealth but also of opportunity? Have we reached a point where we require they to suffer in order to augment a status under threat?

Well terms like poverty and competition for equality or superiority are state of mind..Don't want to sound preachy but a man with strong self respect can never be disregarded as he or she always demands respect in their own ways..