It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

City workers taunt G20 protesters

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
I work in central London. A good 70% of the "anti-capitalist" protesters see this thing in the same way they see a flash mob organised on Facebook.
It's shocking how many people "Fighting for freedom" know exactly nothing about how this economic downturn came about and could not care less.
If you ask them to explain what they think would be a better alternative to globalisation and capitalism their eyes glaze over.

Maybe take away their benefits and really give them something to get pissed off about!
Joke! That was a joke!

Maybe I'm getting old, but I fail to see what smacking a copper in the face with a stick or trying to set fire to a building is going to achieve.

I completely respect peoples right to protest, but I think it's important that you know what you're protesting about.


The rest of the week should be interesting.




posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by A55A551N

Originally posted by Aeons
Then they can go back to school and retrain.
That's what living in a country that isn't run stupidly gives you.
Choices.
Even if you don't want to have to make them.


This country isn't run 'stupidly'?

Give me a break....


ETA: It's also not about not having the skills to get other jobs, each person I know personally... Has a multitude of talents and had this situation not be happening would have been able to find another job EASILY - Probably wouldn't be out of their current job to begin with.

When did people losing their jobs and not having one turn into anything about skill rather than the issues of our current climate?

[edit on 1-4-2009 by A55A551N]


If you can't find a new job, when your rate of unemployment is well under 10% then your "skills" aren't currently wanted or needed and it is time to develop some new ones.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marek
I work in central London. A good 70% of the "anti-capitalist" protesters see this thing in the same way they see a flash mob organised on Facebook.
It's shocking how many people "Fighting for freedom" know exactly nothing about how this economic downturn came about and could not care less.
If you ask them to explain what they think would be a better alternative to globalisation and capitalism their eyes glaze over.

Maybe take away their benefits and really give them something to get pissed off about!
Joke! That was a joke!

Maybe I'm getting old, but I fail to see what smacking a copper in the face with a stick or trying to set fire to a building is going to achieve.

I completely respect peoples right to protest, but I think it's important that you know what you're protesting about.


The rest of the week should be interesting.



Totally agree w/ you there.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by A55A551N

Originally posted by Aeons
Then they can go back to school and retrain.
That's what living in a country that isn't run stupidly gives you.
Choices.
Even if you don't want to have to make them.


This country isn't run 'stupidly'?

Give me a break....


ETA: It's also not about not having the skills to get other jobs, each person I know personally... Has a multitude of talents and had this situation not be happening would have been able to find another job EASILY - Probably wouldn't be out of their current job to begin with.

When did people losing their jobs and not having one turn into anything about skill rather than the issues of our current climate?

[edit on 1-4-2009 by A55A551N]


If you can't find a new job, when your rate of unemployment is well under 10% then your "skills" aren't currently wanted or needed and it is time to develop some new ones.


You might want to go recheck your numbers buddy... Well under 10%? Go check the amount of people who've had to go in the past 3-4 months to the Job Centre to "Sign on" and look for more work.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Perhaps you all need to move to Somalia, where your ideals might be embraced. The intelligence of those systems all obviously speak for themselves.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Without Capitalism none of you would be able to post your misguided and sadly limited thoughts here.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by A55A551N
[might want to go recheck your numbers buddy... Well under 10%? Go check the amount of people who've had to go in the past 3-4 months to the Job Centre to "Sign on" and look for more work.



UK unemployment rate will probably rise to 7% by the end of 2009.

It is currently 6.5%.

[edit on 2009/4/1 by Aeons]



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Marek
 


Starred,I couldn't agree more with 100% of what you said.

Ignorance is no excuse for violence on either side of the coin.

Sticking it to a cop who's only crime is to be on duty at that particular time and place isn't going to help matters.


Now if they got a hold of all the crooked politicians and fat cats?? I really dunno then



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by A55A551N
[might want to go recheck your numbers buddy... Well under 10%? Go check the amount of people who've had to go in the past 3-4 months to the Job Centre to "Sign on" and look for more work.



UK unemployment rate will probably rise to 7% by the end of 2009.

It is currently 6.5%.


[edit on 2009/4/1 by Aeons]


Fair enough, I hold my hands up and stand corrected on the percentage. I will admit when I am proven wrong, thanks for the proof - Is there a link to source?

However... Percentage is a different 'value' to when you look at the actual number of how many jobs have actually been removed from businesses and the number of jobs available compared to the number of people actively seeking work.

It's a lot more difficult than "6.5%" seems to indicate to you, good sir.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Marmota monax
 


Capitalism isn't the problem.
Capitalism is actually the solution here.

Capitalism requires competitiveness in the markets. What is happening here is the Governments are caving in to a select few MONOPOLISTS.

By the very nature of operating a bank, you are a monopolist. You try to horde wealth. This is what banks do. When you have Governments caving in to the will of a central bank, you have VOIDED the capitalistic nature of our economies.
You have removed competition outright. Look at Washington Mutual for an example.
The banks are consolidating power through these foolhearted legislative actions and the Government is taking them over by proxi. Wealth is being horded exclusively by the Government and the Bankers.

Here is the outrage. My thoughts on this matter aren't limited at all.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
Yes, I think that you people who believe in the Agrarian Utopia and other such nonsense don't really give a carp about anyone but yourself. IPhone or not.


Odd, I dont recall ever saying there was an agrarian utopia.



Originally posted by Aeons
No, I don't believe that everyone who makes more than 50,000 more than I is out to get me. No, I don't think that every world leader is an evil person out to destroy humankind.


Nor do I.

But I am aware that some of the people at these meeting are conscious of the fact that some of the worlds peoples are being deliberately sacrificed to their own desire for wealth.

www.iie.com...


A second part of the response has to be an honest recognition and admission that there are costs and losers. For too long, those of us on the pro-globalization side tried to ignore and deny this fact-but it clearly must be accepted and admitted. It follows from standard economic theory, and it follows from looking out the window and seeing the impact within many of our countries. This, in turn, means that something needs to be done to help deal with the costs and those who are losers. In broad terms, it requires better social safety nets in many of our countries and programs that will help the adjustment to dislocation, whether caused by globalization or other interrelated forces.


These same people never saw the economic collapse coming. They have been calling the people opposed to their plans "irrational," (from the same speech)


It seems to me that all these things make the backlash all that more worrisome. If we have the manifestations I've indicated in a period of economic progress and success, what could be the outcome when the U.S. economy inevitably slows down, unemployment begins to rise and a $400 billion trade deficit becomes a huge target of attack and criticism? What if a similar downturn and more difficult economic times occur in the rest of the world?

It would be easier to dismiss all these concerns except for one troublesome fact: We've seen it happen before. As Joe Nye pointed out earlier, we had a similar period of globalization a hundred years ago. The standard understanding, of course, is that this earlier world of globalization-which by many measures was more extensive than today-came crashing down with the advent of World War I followed by the Great Depression. But careful students of that history have informed us that the contemporary backlash a century ago was already significantly rolling back globalization well before the onset of war and depression.


Both times these groups have attempted to globalize, they have caused a collapse. And while they blamed the first one on the people protesting, I would argue that is their own delusion. This time, there was no "backlash" that limited their globalizing and it still came crashing down. The common denominator both times was too rapid a shift of wealth from the bottom to the top via globalization.

So you think what you want, I am sure you have some reasoning to support it, such as "because I said so," or "because TV told me so," but I simply do not agree with you.

There is a problem with what some of these people are doing, and no I dont think you should burn the independent butcher shop down the street because he makes more than you do, but the people do need to make themselves heard. These policies being pursued by the super wealthy are not good for us. We the people sense it even when we dont have reasoned analysis to say why it is bad for us. But that doesnt mean reasoned analysis does not exist and cannot be articulated. It can. But in general, people susceptible to propaganda dont give a rats butt about reasoned analysis anyway. If they did, they would be doing more than shouting the company line.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by A55A551N

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by A55A551N
[might want to go recheck your numbers buddy... Well under 10%? Go check the amount of people who've had to go in the past 3-4 months to the Job Centre to "Sign on" and look for more work.



UK unemployment rate will probably rise to 7% by the end of 2009.

It is currently 6.5%.


[edit on 2009/4/1 by Aeons]


Fair enough, I hold my hands up and stand corrected on the percentage. I will admit when I am proven wrong, thanks for the proof - Is there a link to source?

However... Percentage is a different 'value' to when you look at the actual number of how many jobs have actually been removed from businesses and the number of jobs available compared to the number of people actively seeking work.

It's a lot more difficult than "6.5%" seems to indicate to you, good sir.


www.lse.co.uk... nomics

www.hrmguide.co.uk...

People may be actively seeking work and still be employeed. Perhaps they are searching in case of problem. Or they have decided that a downturn is a good time to jump ships. You cannot extrapolate that looking for a job is the same as not having one. You also cannot extrapolate that someone losing their job means that they will not find another soon. Perhaps in a different position, maybe not rolling in the same cash, but a job nonetheless.

These figures are for time periods of one or two quarters. The average job search takes how long?



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT_T
reply to post by Marek
 


Starred,I couldn't agree more with 100% of what you said.

Ignorance is no excuse for violence on either side of the coin.

Sticking it to a cop who's only crime is to be on duty at that particular time and place isn't going to help matters.


Now if they got a hold of all the crooked politicians and fat cats?? I really dunno then



I don't know about Brits, being a Yank myself. I've spilt blood and have had my own blood spilled. I think the protesters are OK.

Without qualification, I'm behind the protesters.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 



People may be actively seeking work and still be employeed. Perhaps they are searching in case of problem. Or they have decided that a downturn is a good time to jump ships. You cannot extrapolate that looking for a job is the same as not having one.


Those I'm referring to (Specifically the 20+ I mentioned in the post which started this debate between the two of us) all have lost jobs due to the current downturn. Those who're looking for jobs right now, are doing so because they've lost jobs or have been told they may have to be let go; same premise.


You also cannot extrapolate that someone losing their job means that they will not find another soon. Perhaps in a different position, maybe not rolling in the same cash, but a job nonetheless.

These figures are for time periods of one or two quarters. The average job search takes how long?


The job turn-around in this country has always been a load of crap. I am skilled to enter into a lot of different careers and right now (luckily for me) I'm studying; but when I was actively seeking work, it took me more than 5-6 months to find a job and that was without this whole landslide we're going through atm.

Now you can say it was probably a personal experience and I shouldn't attribute it or connect it with other people, but I am not the only person who has found it extremely difficult to find jobs; especially when more jobs are disappearing than are being created.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I am not against Globalization because it is an easy word to say and sounds real scary.

I expect my country and the like to be sure that our collective preference for Human Rights, stability, etc. remain on the top of the agenda instead of just letting the "super rich" make all the rules.

Therefore, I am certainly not against the G20 or any other such group of elected world leaders from regulating and organizing based on our shared values. The alternative is to do nothing and let the "super rich" do it all unchallenged.

Logic. It is your friend.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


I suppose you just don't get it.
The super rich are ALREADY making all these decisions themselves.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by A55A551N
reply to post by Aeons
 



People may be actively seeking work and still be employeed. Perhaps they are searching in case of problem. Or they have decided that a downturn is a good time to jump ships. You cannot extrapolate that looking for a job is the same as not having one.


Those I'm referring to (Specifically the 20+ I mentioned in the post which started this debate between the two of us) all have lost jobs due to the current downturn. Those who're looking for jobs right now, are doing so because they've lost jobs or have been told they may have to be let go; same premise.


You also cannot extrapolate that someone losing their job means that they will not find another soon. Perhaps in a different position, maybe not rolling in the same cash, but a job nonetheless.

These figures are for time periods of one or two quarters. The average job search takes how long?


The job turn-around in this country has always been a load of crap. I am skilled to enter into a lot of different careers and right now (luckily for me) I'm studying; but when I was actively seeking work, it took me more than 5-6 months to find a job and that was without this whole landslide we're going through atm.

Now you can say it was probably a personal experience and I shouldn't attribute it or connect it with other people, but I am not the only person who has found it extremely difficult to find jobs; especially when more jobs are disappearing than are being created.

Then take a job doing something else in the mean time while you look. Take the pay cut to your ego.
That's the difference between you and the immigrant. They'll come with a PhD and 40 years experience and drive your cab and clean the bathroom.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by Aeons
 


I suppose you just don't get it.
The super rich are ALREADY making all these decisions themselves.





And you are supporting them continuing to do so totally unopposed by your governments and your elected officials, or any other group with power working on your behalf. Good stuff.

[edit on 2009/4/1 by Aeons]



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


No, actually I'm not.
You see, people telling the big business interests no has not worked.

Burning down their institutions?
We'll see.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


... You say this like you presume to know me, please don't do that.

I have never ONCE taken a job or even gone after a job, based on how much money I will earn per annum. It's never interested me.

I have never needed the security of the pound, not because I'm "rich or spoiled" just because I'm still yet to enter into a position, to do such a thing. PERHAPS when I need to depend on how much I make, I will think about it.

I've been a "janitor" I've worked at Burger King, I've been a gopher for film sets. I've been an executive administrative assistant and since I was 11, I've been a professional actor. - My jobs fluxuate.

Now when you said "Then take a job" or w/e it was you said, you may have meant generally and if so my point still stands.

That none of this takes away from the fact - Job cuts/losses are GREATER than those available.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join