After reading and thinking about your comments.

So i am with Arnie on this one!

Christine, Arnie probably spent too much time thinking “I’ll be back”
Jerry, I think volunteering is an excellent way of maintaining parks. They do a lot of it in America and it is spreading in Britain. I am thinking about it too – and there is a danger that this is as far as I will get with the idea.

Arnie felt it necessary to reassure guests at the wedding not to worry?
[ http://www.rom101.com/storyview.jsp?storyid=465 ]

The conditions imposed on Mary Elizabeth Donaldson suggest to me that the Danish Royal Family might have been wishing for a different princess and I imagine the Kennedys were equally sceptical about Arnie joining the clan.
Country houses and great estates are a paradox. They ‘obviously’ should not exist but (1) they often manage the land better than smaller and more ephemeral owners (2) tourists love visiting them and countries would be poorer without them.

What are the consequences of downward mobility?
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_country_houses_in_20th-century_Britain ] Perhap the comment of the Shah of Persia contributed to his downward mobility?

The feudal system was certainly class based but it derived from the Anglo-Saxon and Roman systems, which were also class-based. So is current American society. Rich people do not want their kids to play with poor kids, to go to school with poor kids, to live near poor kids or to marry poor kids. So are most social systems in most countries at most points in history. Hence the current interest in facilitating social mobility instead of income equality. This appeals to the people who move up but not to the people who move down!
Part of the reason for the Beeching cuts was that the rail unions steadfastly refused to improve productivity. The example which sticks in mind is their insistance on the employment of ‘footplatemen’ – whose distant predecessors had, I think, used the footplates of trains to clean the engines and help the fireman shovel in coal.

The social system in the United States in based on the idea of the self-made man. Hence the American dream. Inherited wealth rather than intelligence demarcates the class system. (Approximately one half of the wealthy in the US).

There is a difference between peaceful protest [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution ] and civil unrest which is criminal, including riots and sabotage. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disorder ]. The distinction also has to account for action which amounts to civil war. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war ]

Yes. Beeching is a false economy. Productivity gains are always to be preferred to cost cutting unless there are true efficiencies to be gained.

As long as there are sociologists they will place people into groups, which can be called classes. There is an interesting differentiation between income and class: for example, what class are English vicars in? – they have a good education and very low incomes. And what class are US tele-evangelists in? – they are super-rich but many of them show few, if any, signs of intelligence.
Re Beeching, my biggest grudge is against the policy of ripping up the tracks, knocking down the bridges and scrapping the trains. They could have left the lot and allowed volunteers or private companies to take them over. I did not support the policy of empty trains running about the country in the 1960s – and I do not support the policy of empty busses driving around town and country now.
An interesting point re the future is that if we switch from fossil fuels to electricity from renewable sources then the un-economics of batteries will mean that trams and trains will gain a comparative advantage over private cars.

Compared to many European cities, London has a more intimate mix of rich and poor within neighbourhoods, as well as having a greater disparity between rich and poor. But this has been the case for a long time and I do not think it can be used to explain the 2011 riots.
Since my voice is not strong, I have little experience of shouting and will leave Lawrence to respond on the relativities of shouting/apologising. But yes, I would do my best to shout at, or grab, anyone who was about to fall over a cliff or be hit by a car. Political correctness would not enter my mind!
I think the gender-roles of males and females are diminishing rapidly but that they derive from the norms of hunter-gatherer socieities and still have some way to run.
A China Daily commentator makes the following observation on the London riots: ‘British Prime Minister David Cameron said on Thursday that he would not be restrained by phony human rights concerns, and he was prepared to use rubber bullets and water guns against the rioters. He also referred to the youngsters who were rioting as thugs, criminals and so on. The people of the world should examine the British prime minister’s words very carefully. When a Third World country was faced with a riot or insurrection, the British government and other Western governments always supported the rioters and rebels, and always referred to the rioters as defenders of democracy and human rights. Thus far, the British government and Western governments’ attitude toward such riots and rebellions in Third World countries has been one that only added oil to the fire by supporting the rioters and rebels.’ Fair point, but there is a difference: the Arab rioters want to change the constitutions of their countries and the British rioters ‘just want stuff’.

I wonder whether the housing estates (poverty and deprivation) account for the 17% unemployed plus those considered children? [ http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/london-riots/story-fn6ck45n-1226114270922 ]

One comment is that the contrast of poverty next to wealth was fueling resentment. Perhaps mixed socioeconomic areas are not the panacea they were held out to be?

Yes. Giving growing boys opportunities for ‘danger, risk-taking, adventure, single-mindedness’ is important. Equally, it is important for girls. [ http://www.girlsrugby.org/ ] The physicality and interests of the individual might determine the boundaries for these attributes. It is important to let both genders self-select. [ http://www.abc.net.au/btn/story/s3172607.htm ]

Tom if a man has to apologise for shouting (at women) is he merely apologising because ‘it is not good to shout at women?’ Would it be OK to shout at a women if a) she was just about to take a step over a cliff b) there was a car coming very quickly towards her or c) she had done something that really annoyed you?

Should women shout at men? If so when?

Grant, my view is respect is only evidenced by pay when there is an inherent unfairness in what is being paid. Many corporate positions offer higher remuneration than political positions but the social respect is not directly related to the financial reward.