Every time something goes wrong or is introduced in France that they don't like, they seem to riot, blockade and strike.
In Britain we canvass, employ spin doctors and the public generally accept as there are no alternative options.
Who is right and who is wrong?
|
|
Who has the better lifestyle? Decide that and you have your answer.
|
|
I don't think that running half the country out of fuel and getting loads of flights cancelled is going to win much support from the general public. On balance we here are too compliant and the French are too agressive, to when it comes to wars of course!
|
|
I'm not sure that like for like the general population of France has a better lifestyle, notwithstanding the retirement age, itself the reason they have the current demonstrations. Having said that, I agree that we are too accepting at times and could learn a lesson or two from our neighbours. I think our biggest mistake was joining the EU. History will show it to have been a mistake, the fruits of which we can already see.
|
>>I think our biggest mistake was joining the EU. History will show it to have been a mistake, the fruits of which we can already see.
EU = Empty Union.
|
>> >>I think our biggest mistake was joining the EU. History will show it to have
>> been a mistake, the fruits of which we can already see.
>>
>> EU = Empty Union.
>>
Agreed.
|
|
I think the occasional riot to remind the politicians not to push their luck is a good thing. What happened to the poll tax? The Torys won't be significant in Scotland in my lifetime after their poll tax experiment. Why you lot down south put up with the Scots running your lives is beyond me.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 11:19
|
i think its wrong that they have rioted over this
Their government wants to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62, big deal!!!! 2 years they need to get a grip.
I enjoy going out to work for a living and will personally hold off as long as i can - working gives me a feeling of well being, and some structure and purpose to my day.
Last edited by: Redviper on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 11:36
|
As a punk fanatic I always love the idea of rioting. I think I may start one depending on the results tomorrow :p
In all seriousness I don't like the violence riots bring but sometimes bringing a country to its knees the only way citizens can have any power.
Thankfully the internet gives us more peaceful ways to protest.
Now excuse me I have a riot to organise on facebook.
|
Why you lot down south put up with the Scots running your lives is beyond me.
Why the Labour Party was so dumb as to appoint (not elect) a Scot as Leader is beyond me unless they are all dumb.
Well I suppose that's the answer..
The French have always been revolting and if it were not for EC subsidies would be a LOT worse off.. Still with a military record of failure for over a century, what can one expect... ? Rather like the Italians...And the Dutch...
Last edited by: madf on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 13:49
|
|
But what difference does military failure mean? They are not spending billions in other countries wars? Whether you agree or disagree with their burka ruling, they have done it and are not running scared of consequences? Whether GB wanted to or didn't want to do it, they wouldn't do it for fear of upsetting certain sections of community.
|
It's somewhat odd that, in my albeit limited experience, every French person I speak to says the strikers and protesters are wasting their time and causing unnecessary problems but opinion polls show that around 70 per cent of the population backs taking industrial action against increasing the retirement age.
It's no wonder the standard Gallic response is a shrug...
Of course, attitudes may harden now that fuel is running out (none at all available in my part of the world at the moment).
I expect things to come to a head within a few days now as the school holidays are looming, meaning students and pupils - and, of course, teachers - won't be able to skive off to join the protests, not to mention the November 1 public holiday, when families traditionally travel long distances to their ancestral homes to decorate the graves of their forefathers.
From your bemused man on the spot...
|
>> The French have always been revolting and if it were not for EC subsidies would
>> be a LOT worse off..
Well, this is the point - they know exactly which side their bread's buttered. Cutting up rusty like this when the status quo is threatened is their way of ensuring that all these things get put on the "too difficult" pile.
You have to admit it's worked pretty well for them up to now.
|
French students are notoriously "noisy" when it comes to protesting - there is an element who enjoy the violence and destruction.
There's a picture of a very forlorn looking Renault van on its side not sure of the make (possibly an Urinal :-) ) on one of the press sites - sums the whole thing up as being very French.
|
They've still got some spirit and their strike leaders don't seem to be buyable.
We could learn something from them but we won't, and i agree with Woodster, EU was a con from the beginning and we've got the cons back in.;)
|
>> Why you lot down south put
>> up with the Scots running your lives is beyond me.
We don't have a damn choice. Didn't putting the clock back or forward originate from Scotland? What a ridiculous human concept, manipulating time to conform to our activities.
|
Your ancestors shouldn't have invaded our ancestors then should they eh ? Rearrange this well known phrase or saying " Chickens roost coming home to"
:-))
|
I have just looked out of the window and cannot see any
rioting peasants in the Vineyards. (34)
Probably not surprising because down here the temperature is about 9C and falling.
7 days ago it was still T shirts and shorts weather
Mike H - what is it like further north?
|
>> Your ancestors shouldn't have invaded our ancestors then should they eh ? Rearrange this well
>> known phrase or saying " Chickens roost coming home to"
>>
>> :-))
I think you're going back a bit too far now Humph, I don't think they changed their clocks then did they? Anyway, I'm not part of this inbred lot :-)
|
|
Might have rotated their sundials a bit. Never know.
|
12C here today and the sun's come out long enough to tempt me to do some gardening.
There was petrol in Limoges and in our local town this morning but for how long, who knows? Carrefour had jacked up its fuel prices up by 8-10c a litre, but not Leclerc.
TV news says Sarkozy has ordered fuel depots to be reopened by the Gendarmes and La Rochelle is apparently working. But what's the use of reopening supply depots when the refineries are on strike?
Motorway accesses to Limoges blocked by burning barricades this morning. Also the airport, I'm told. Maybe we need MOL over here to bang a few heads together...
Hope that's a fairly comprehensive update pmh? :-)
Oh, and we were driving out of Limoges, feeling quite elated over SWMBO's successful eye operation when I was flashed by a speed camera. Darn!
|
>> Your ancestors shouldn't have invaded our ancestors then should they eh ?
I thought the reason for the Treaty of Union in 1707 was Scotland's bankruptcy.
More here than I ever knew about it:
www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/civil_war_revolution/scotland_darien_01.shtml
|
|
But who caused the Bankruptcy ?
|
>> But who caused the Bankruptcy ?
The Scots would probably blame the English.
But William Paterson (a Scot) had more than a bit to do with it, and the usual bandwagon style greed for a get rich quick scheme.
|
Wrong!
Wrong there and wrong here, these guys campaigning outside parlament yesterday while George O was speaking need to live in the real world, to say "stop these cuts now" is simply unrealistic.
|
|
I think orderely marches and vocal protest are in order. It is when the fringe element, expecially in France it seems, turn up and start burning cars and looting shops that I wonder what they are trying to prove. Burning my car isn't going to make the cuts any better or more tolerable!
|
>> Wrong there and wrong here, these guys campaigning outside parlament yesterday while George O was speaking need to live in the real world, to say "stop these cuts now" is simply unrealistic.
That's a different argument though i think, that's more about what they're disagreeing with, rather than the act of disagreeing in a visible & loud way.
We could definitely benefit from adopting some of their willingness to say "non!"
It's the old story with this bit of land though, we pay lip service to encouraging multi cultural society. Cliquish doesn't get a look in.
|
>>
>> The Scots would probably blame the English.
>>
>> But William Paterson (a Scot) had more than a bit to do with it,>>
And this time Gordon Brown (a Scot) had more than a bit to do with it.
|
France can be a strange place, to outside eyes.
Burning cars is regarded as part of the fun on New Year's Eve - every year the government publishes the number of cars torched. It seems the Gendarmes, as in many other instances, stay on the sidelines. And can you imagine protesters in the UK being allowed to occupy a motorway and filter the traffic?
|
To be fair to Gordon Brown, even though he's a dolt for some of his (& his advisors) decisions, he was handed an economy which had only one possible direction.
The root of the problem was created by the passive aggressive poodle before him. Gordy was just useless at keeping the plates spinning where i reckon Tony would have started juggling to distract your attention while managing to keep most of the plates spinning.
|
|
Gordon was his "prudent" Chancellor though - he had some input including the disastrous de-regulation of the Banks.
|
|
And the selling of gold at the wrong price, and lots of it ISTR! $40 0r £40 an ounce comes to mind - nice profit now it is 1500 whatevers/ounce, except it has long gone!
Last edited by: Perky Penguin on Sat 23 Oct 10 at 10:41
|
The banks... don't get me started :-P This electronic market making shennanigans *has* to be stopped ASAP, why the hell isn't it all over the headlines, the public would be raging if they knew what was going on, but the average punter doesn't.
All the players know the legislation's coming to prevent this, they all accept what they're doing is absolutely wrong, but meanwhile they're just syphoning off free money from the markets to the detriment of every other human being.
All the banks are moving into it if they're not already playing (they are already playing).
Background:
EMM is the idea that all stocks are correlated (and they are), so when one stock changes price you use micro-second (it's genuinely is in the order of micro-seconds, the players co-locate FPGA's in the exchanges) level trades to take advantage.
It adds absolutely no value to the markets - despite the moniker "Market Making" which in a very loose definition it kind of is.
These guys are siphoning *billions* out of the markets.
|
|
I don't think it going out of the markets; it is being moved around to make a profit, and pay bonuses to be fair. I don't care where it is going so long as it isn't coming out of my pockets and my income. The Stock Exchange is Ladbrookes with suits
|
>> I don't think it going out of the markets
Nope, it's definitely going out of the markets. The profit bit, is the bit that disappears out of the market unfairly & unethically. The amount moving about is pretty much impossible to imagine it's that large. The amount disappearing into their pockets is only frighteningly large.
It is coming out of your pockets & your income. Just because there's no entry on your payslip under deductions that reads "5 guys in a cheap basement with 1,000 computers" doesn't mean they're not helping themselves to money which would otherwise have benefitted you.
|
|
My income, or the pension element of it, is fixed and does not depend on the antics of City Spivs and/or people who work in the Treasury. Even if the money is going into bonuses etc it is still being spent or gambled; surely it is not totally lost to the eceonmy? It is taxed for a start.
|
Gordon Brown was in total charge of the economy from day 1 of Labour coming power. He single handedly got us in the mess we're in now.
Rather than now drawing his MPs salary while failing to turn up at Parliament, he should be in the dock for criminal incompetence. He should never be forgiven for what he has done.
'No more boom and bust'....that should be tatooed on his forehead.
Last edited by: midlifecrisis on Sat 23 Oct 10 at 10:56
|
|
To be fair MLC Blair would have been pulling some strings - classic Labour thing - inherit a good economy and wreck it. One huge elephant in the room is the off the book PFI scam - pound to a penny that anyone who works in public service has a PFI scheme somewhere in their organization and that organization is paying huge amounts to fund it. Money that could have been spent on services/jobs..
Last edited by: Pugugly on Sat 23 Oct 10 at 11:03
|
>> To be fair MLC Blair would have been pulling some strings - classic Labour thing
>> - inherit a good economy and wreck it.
Have we really all forgotten who started to sell (give away?) the family Silver?
The one who closed down a lot of UK production?
The one who made it easy to borrow money that many couldn't really afford?
The one who sold run-down houses that the landlords were happy to see the back of, to people who had little or no chance of affording?
I could go on.... but can't be bothered..... save to mention school milk.
|
Yes that's as maybe but Labour had 13 years to change it, did they ?? no they didn't they made it worse. The economy was a basket case (IMF etc) when the tories came into power in 1979 as well, the only difference now is that there is not even a basket left !
|
Easy to have rosy memories of the Thatcher reign, too easy to forget that it was the Tories who took us (well those who were already brainwashed into belief) into the common market...doesn't that title have a nice cosy village farmer's market ring about it.
Apart from frittered North Sea oil income, Thatcher sold most of the family silver to subsidise the destruction of quality manufacturing and our own coal production as we moved ever deeper into financial chicanery and the best laugh of all 'service industries'.
Each and every one of the politicians of all the main parties shares in the guilt of the present debacle, i don't recall many objections/resignations from the House for any of Tone's wars being a single example.
Only glad i haven't voted for either of the main three for many years, they do nothing in my name and i struggle to find any difference between the lot of them.
|
Never ceases to amaze me that when discussing the state the country is in today, people still roll out 'Thatcher'. She's not been in power for 20 years.
In 1997 this country had a healthy economy.
After 13 years of Labour economics, we're a basket case (again)
The discussion on defence cuts shows I have no great admiration for our Dave and his crew, but I shudder at the thought of Labour still being in power. A figure head Prime Minister, with the 'dark lord' Mandleson pulling the strings on behalf of his cronies.
|
>> In 1997 this country had a healthy economy.
>>
So they told us, though i doubt anyone here would believe anything a politician tells them.
The reason Thatchers name is mentioned despite disapproval is that there's too many about with some rosy view of life under the Tories the last time, recalling the last housing bust don't suppose the thousands booted out of their homes thought the economy was so wonderful, remember interest rates at the time? i do and the hours i had to work to keep the wolf from the door.
When the hard working backbone of Britain have had another 12 years of kicking from the present lot they'll no doubt re elect the labour set of the time who will undo whatever gains are alleged, and on it goes.
This will always be the problem here in the one party but with three names state.
Those in the right jobs did well under the last lot of Tories, those in the right jobs did well under Nulab, depending on whether you're 'in' or not coloures your view of the particular govt of the day.
|
>> Those in the right jobs did well under the last lot of Tories, those in
>> the right jobs did well under Nulab, depending on whether you're 'in' or not coloures
>> your view of the particular govt of the day.
As a single parent living in a mining district during the middle of the Thatcher years, you'd expect me to be one of her sharpest critics. I didn't hold with all that her government did, but I can remember the mess they inherited; history does indeed repeat itself and regrettably our leaders have never learned that lesson. I find it strange that many people even older than me seem to regard the years before 1979 as a golden age. In reality it was an even worse mess than we have now.
|
I didn't hold with
>> all that her government did, but I can remember the mess they inherited; history does
>> indeed repeat itself and regrettably our leaders have never learned that lesson.
Agree wholeheartedly, i had the utmost respect for her and her leadership, she had a full set unlike anything to be found in the House now, and the guts to admit responsibility...something we may never see again from that place.
|
>> Yes that's as maybe but Labour had 13 years to change it, did they ??
>> no they didn't they made it worse. The economy was a basket case (IMF etc)
>> when the tories came into power in 1979 as well, the only difference now is
>> that there is not even a basket left !
>>
And that last sentence is my point exactly.
The basket, and all its contents were sold off to the French, Germans, Spanish etc.
There are reasons that we as a country were fairly well off at the end of the 90's, and many of those reason were we were living off the profit of the sales of the family silver.
Once the silver had gone, there was/is nothing left to sell.
IMO there is only one way to get out the mire we are now in.
We need to totally change the ways things are done.
Firstly, plug the leaks - stop money pouring out this country, into the pockets of other countries. give the jobs to UK residents not people who are only working here temporarily to fill their own pockets, and claiming child allowance for kids that have never even seen the UK!
Also robbing the poor will not, and can not work, what happened this week, is, over the next few years, the number of poor (unemployed) will increase. tax bills for those remaining in employment will increase, the homeless numbers will increase, the amount of suicides will increase.
The only way I can see, is to attempt to get the unemployed working, reducing the costs to the employed.
this could be by giving the unemployed 'jobs' that are both required, but currently unaffordable, ie sorting the potholes etc, working within councils in offices - basically give those who need to work, work that needs to be done.
If that sounds stupid, stop and think.
we the taxpayers are paying for people to sit around doing nothing, whilst the infrastructure of the country falls apart, due to lack of funds.
Also, REDUCE the retirement age.
if we can get the unemployed into work, then the cost's there will reduce.
the money saved there could be used in the pension fund.
By raising the retirement age, there are less jobs for the younger people - not helping the unemployed figures is it?
All I am saying, is think out of the box.
|
Who are these 'poor' people. Are these the feckless, workshy who think benefits are a right. The same people who are now worried that they might have to cancel their Sky+. The same people I see day after day. Drinking Stella at 10am, watching their 50" plasma and nipping down the bookies in their motability car, 'got a bad back, see'.
Osbourne said he would change the system so nobody can get more than the average working family on benefits. Let's turn that around. Sit on your backside and you can claim the SAME in benefits as somebody working their backside off. What an incentive. A significant proportion of this country seem to think they have an automatic right to benefits. 'It's their right, innit'. Their is no work ethic, no incentive. The woman who took her kids to Raul Moats funeral earned more in benefits than the PC who got shot. Figure that out.
When I hear about 'fairness' from some right on Lib Dem or the oedius Harriet Harmann, I know that means I'll be paying yet more tax, so some jobless chav can buy a new X Box. My wife is losing her job because of the cuts. We won't qualify for anything. I am seeing a significant reduction in my salary. We don't expect nation to provide. She is pursuing every oppportunity for new work. We just get on with it and the kids go without. No holiday for us next year, for the second year running. Plenty of people on benefits seem to manage a trip to Spain.
Life can be a bitch. We are not here to provide luxury for those that can't be bothered to provide for themselves.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 26 Oct 10 at 01:05
|
"Who are these 'poor' people. Are these the feckless, workshy who think benefits are a right. The same people who are now worried that they might have to cancel their Sky+. The same people I see day after day. Drinking Stella at 10am, watching their 50" plasma and nipping down the bookies in their motability car, 'got a bad back, see'."
Considering (or maybe because of) your profession, you really have a very jaundiced view of people.
I have recently been running a project around the country where I am paying quite competent IT people £90 a day. There have been 20 or so on the team on average. It's been running for 5 or 6 months and so has been a nice earner for them. It's coming to an end, and none of them (not one) has managed to find more work, despite having lots of experience at their level (and some beyond the level at which they've been working) and looking hard for work. They don't fall into your description except maybe before too long they will effectively be poor.
|
They're striking because they might have to work until 62, rather than 60...is that right?
Why are the strikers mainly young people, who have 40 years or so to arrange their retirement, rather than people in their late 50s who had been planning on retiring at a certain age?
Because it is just an excuse to riot over something...as if anybody who is 20, really cares that they might have to retire in 42 years time, rather than 40 years time.
|
Recent changes to our proposed dates of retirement and delays to darwing pensions seem to have gone down with nothing mre than restrained comment here. However, the elephant in the romm is the vast and ever increasing burden of Government employees pensions. This burden has just been added to a court ruling this week, which could lead to other claims. I t would only happen if BT went broke but who can say the won't?
The High Court ruling on BT's crown guarantee means the taxpayer must ensure the pensions of almost all the 344,000 members of BT's pension scheme. A payout in the event that BT goes bust could be as much as £22.8bn.
|
ST, those are some big assumptions propping up that view.
Taking your "tax the higher earners more" point.
I happily pay for free public healthcare, free education, even constructive benefits (yeah right). With the current situation, there comes a point where enough is enough.
(fortunate enough to be a) higher rate tax payer since my early 20s, why shouldn't i take my hard earned elsewhere and to hell with those that wont learn from history, that wont (can't!) consider anything else than their own position.
|
>>The economy was a basket case (IMF etc) when the tories came into power in 1979 as well, the only difference now is that there is not even a basket left !<<
I really, really don't want to get into a who did what argument over the way the UK has gone round in ever-decreasing circles in the past 51 years (since the 1959 general election) but I'd have to take issue with that one.
The IMF intervened, by invitation under pressure from outside sources, in the UK economy in 1976, when Denis Healey was Chancellor. Within two years the economy had been completely turned around, to the surprise of the IMF - which was quickly paid off - but not to Denis Healey. By 1979, still under the same Chancellor, the economy was in good shape but the government of the time was derailed by - mainly - public sector unions demanding something back after accepting years of imposed austerity measures. (This will get to sound familiar again soon...). The so-called 'Winter of Discontent' allowed MT into power and, within 18 months, the economy certainly was a basket case, following the slavish adherence to a money supply theory that had never been properly tested, let alone proved. It took nearly 15 years and four more Tory Chancellors before the mess was sorted out in time to hand power to MT Mk 2 - Tony Blair.
If anyone is looking for interesting fireside reading this coming winter, I'd recommend:
'The Time of My Life', by Denis Healey
Volumes 2 and 3 of the Alan Clark Diaries
The Prudence of Mr Gordon Brown, by William Keagan.
Lecture over.
|
>> ST, those are some big assumptions propping up that view.
>>
>> Taking your "tax the higher earners more" point.
>>
Skoda, Have you actually read 'wot I Wrote'?
Nowhere in there did I even MENTION high earners!
MLC, the 'poor' I'm on about, are those who are, for many reasons, often through no fault of their own, unemployed, or on low wages.
The scroungers need to be sorted out.
the baby factories need to be stopped! (both female and male!)
there is a huge divide between the rich and poor, and there always will be.
that is life.
Believe me, there are people out there who would love to pay their own way - but can't.
Please re-read my essay, then think about what I have said, what I have suggested, is to give the unemployed jobs to do, thus earning their keep, as will as hopefully getting them back on the road to proper full time employment.
nowhere in there, or in my mind, do I agree with people getting paid for sitting on their bottoms doing knowt other than opening giros.
IF you care to read it PROPERLY what I am suggesting is the complete opposite!!!!!!
|
>> (fortunate enough to be a) higher rate tax payer since my early 20s, why shouldn't
>> i take my hard earned elsewhere and to hell with those that wont learn from
>> history, that wont (can't!) consider anything else than their own position.
>>
The way I read that last comment, its you who can't see things from other peoples positions.
To be sat, wondering where the next meal is going to come from, is something some people can't even imagine.
to others, its the fact of their everyday life.
May God treat you well, that you or anyone you know, are never in such a position.......
|
I don't condone rioting, but I have a fair degree of admiration for the French people. They seem to grasp the concept that the government is there to serve them rather than vice versa, which we Brits would sometimes be better off for realising.
No other race on Earth seems to defend its way of life and stick to its principles so passionately. The British stiff upper lip has a lot to answer for sometimes, and has played no small part in allowing us to fall into the deep merde we are in now. Take the fuel protests - a masterstroke of catching a complacent government with its pants down, which was largely supported by the British public. That is until personal inconvenience resulted, when the support evaporated. In France, the public would have backed the protesters to the hilt, come hell or high water.
As for living standards, France recently topped a European Quality of Life index run by uSwitch, for the second year in a row. Britain came a lowly ninth.
|
|
For some reason, the French are more excitable than the British. Why this should be, I don't know.
|
>> the French are more excitable than the British.
Not sure that's really true. They get passionate, break things and even fall to killing one another on a largish scale every now and then. But they can't begin to compete with modern Britain for pathetic, pointless, inhibited, faffing hysteria over very little or practically nothing. They aren't as hip as us but they're a damn sight cooler despite widespread opinion to the contrary.
|
|
Im rather glad I dont live somewhere where the residents destroy the place they live to make a point.
|
French riots - right or wrong? - Zero
