to not understand how someone brought up...

[NickNemo]

... in an unbelievably privileged environment and who is currently living a lifestyle that is far beyond the means of the everyday man-on-street, can even begin to understand what people who can barely make ends meet go through in real life?

I am talking about you, David Cameron!

AIBU? I probably am!

that's true riven - they haven't got time for those on benefits. if the conservatives had their way, no one would be getting any benefits at all.

If he was black would you say he couldn't understand white people,or vice versa?
Gordon is Scottish so doesn't understand the English,therefore shouldn't be Prime Minister?
Winston Churchill obviously shouldn't have been our PM in wartime,how could he empathise with the people,he went to Harrow??
Prejudiced and insulting,imo.
YABU

I cannot vote in the UK, so I am arguing for argument's sake. Since when does being raised in poverty make you a better PM than someone who was not?

Leadership, honesty, intelligence, analytical skills, empathy/ability to relate to people, ability to negotiate, good listening skills, ability to surround themselves with good advisors, charisma, experience in implementing policies etc etc are far more important qualities to look for in a PM. If you think that DC has better qualities than the alternative vote for him - otherwise do not.

Discounting him just because he is rich is against the very principles of meritocracy - and I rather live in a generally meritocratic society than in one that chooses politicians because their parents were rich/poor/white/socialist/fascist/whatever.

I don't think anyone should be written offfor where they are born (higher or lower on the social scale) but I do think the times of real financial poverty and hardship and the estate I lived on as a child have helped me better understand social issues now that I live in a cosy village far away and can afford to heat and eat, if not spend much else.

I do thgink a range of experiences makes aperson rounder.

So whilst Iwouldn't write anyone off entirely on this basis,itwould make me want to look deeper IYKWIM?

Like that charity I worked for that helped parents and refused to emlpy non aprents: an acknowldegment that true understanding is experiential at least in part.

It's only a part of the equation, but I don't think YAB totally U to at least question it.

YABU I think.

People don't need to have 'walked a mile' if they can learn about other's lives in other ways.

You might as well say how can a poor person ever understand the needs of the middle class/ rich, or how can a woman ever understand the needs of men.

Anyway, these people are just front men - they have a raft of policy wonks and advisers, many of whom will come from ordinary backgrounds.

I won't be voting Tory in this or any other lifetime but I can't be doing with toff hating, it's as closed minded and offensive as chav hating in my view.

Been thinking more about this...!

The role of a politician is surely about having the best teams of people to advise or report back on certain areas of society and make judgement calls about what is best for the interests of the groups and also for society at large.
You don't have to have been a farmer to be in a position to make sensible policies towards the countryside and you don't have to have grown up as the child of a drug addict to make decisions on policy areas for vunerable children.

Surely it is MUCH more important to recognise that a bit of life experience doesn't make you an expert, and therefore call on suitable experts to help you out. I'd be more concerned if entire national policies were based on the experience of one family when he was growing up, rather than on the expertise from a wide range of groups who have looked at evidence, published it, peer reviewed it, had it scrutinised by groups with opposing political ideologies.

I know there will always be debate about which 'experts' each party will chose to listen to, but at least there is accountability there. Basing something on childhood memories/experiences can't be held to account or questioned in the same manner.

Sort of agree

I agree that C's backjground is of little relevance,

what I do think though is that you have to have fair representation across the whole of the Cabinet- he is, after all, only wanting to be Prime Minister- there are a few others involved.

If they are all Bullingdon Boys etc then there's an issue

If nto then not a problem imo

the majority are though aren't they?

what a lovely game this must be

Think they are Custy

But I think that overall balance is more of an issue than just DC IYSWIM

You're right, Peachy. I guess that was the point I was trying to debate, I am rubbish at putting my points across. But I completely get what you mean.

agreed peachy.

So if you don't have AID's there is no point trying to understand what's it's like for those who do?

If you are not disabled you can't possibly comment on what you would like to do for those who are?

It is so bigoted to suggest that because he has had a life that has had advantages not everyone has had he can't understand what it might be like for others. His background is not his fault. If he was poor would you suggest he couldn't be Chancellor as he has no experience of dealing with a lot of money?

Does the Secretary for Families need to have 120 children to work for what is best for families?

A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.

He should be judged on his merit, not on our presumptions.

The nappy thing did it for me.

Of course he wouldn't know.

I wonder how many hours he's spent on a phone to SS or SN health visitors.....

Custardo who gets to decide who is the clever man and who is the stupid man?

Sometimes I win Trivial Persuit and sometimes my DH does, it all depends on the questions that come up. He can't answer on literature and geography and I'm not so good on sport.

Noone is exactly the same as someone else at anything so while DC does not have the background that means he can remember what it was like to struggle to find food for his family doesn't mean that he doesn't understand struggle. Look at how much he did for his son, Ivan, he understands life is not always fair. So to say he isn't aware of 'real life' is hugely unfair IMO.

OK , so it's only tangentially relevant but this is a lovely bit from an article in The Times:-
"New York ? Sting is sitting in the lotus position on a plush white couch in his bright Central West apartment, talking about how a soccer ball might change a poor child?s life. ?Instant, instant joy! These kids have got nothing,? Sting notes, as a uniformed servant hovers in his doorway with a silver tray."

i decide. silly! which proves my point i think

There are some hilarious bono and geldoff cartoons too

Personally I think if you judge someone on their background which is not their choice you might as well judge them on skin, colour, IQ, religion, gender, sexual persuasion.

Limiting people though factors they cannot control is ridiculous. Why try and help anyone not axactly the same as you if you couldn't begin to understand their situation.

Is that what OP wants, people to only have opinions or help people of exactly the same gender, age, race and socio econmoic background....?

Get real Cameron lovers. He's a TORY, of course he's evil. I'm not even trying to be amusing, I actually believe that.

OP, you are NBU.

Exactly. The OP seems to have a very strange view of the world where you cannot possibly have anything decent to say on anything that you have not 100% experienced yourself.

Could Thatcher only represent women then? Or should we save Brown just for the Scots?

Frankly I've rarely heard such drivel.

HE'S A TORY. of course he doesn't get real people's lives. Their whole belief system is based on this.