Anarchists Protest Lack Of Government Spending

reply to post by mnemeth1




I don't see them "Marching for free stuff" as you put it.
I'm sure they'd be happy to just leave the fee structure as it is now... as opposed to tripling it.

Oh well.

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

I don't see them "Marching for free stuff" as you put it.
I'm sure they'd be happy to just leave the fee structure as it is now... as opposed to tripling it.

Oh well.

We'd all be happier if prices fell instead of increased.

Of course, this is only possible in a system of sound money and limited government.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by FermiFlux
Mate, I don't think you understand what's going on here. This is happening in the UK, where, for a degree, you'll end up paying roughly £3000 pounds per year. The Liberal Democrats leader Nick Clegg promised the students and the people that he would fight to keep the cap on tuition fee prices. But now the coalition government is removing the cap and proposing costs of upto £9000 per year, he has agreed and the people are absolutely livid that he has out right lied.

This is a protest/riot against the TRIPLE-FOLD INCREASE of tuition fee prices in the UK that would seriously jeopardize the chances of our younger siblings and upcoming children getting a degree.

No one is asking for free stuff, everyone pays back their tuition fees, it's a matter of paying back £12,000 - £20,000 or paying back £36,000 - £41,000

edit on 10-11-2010 by FermiFlux because: (no reason given)

No - I understand perfectly what is going on here.

If tuition is 1,000 per semester, yet the college's operating costs are 3,000 per student per semester, where does the extra 2,000 come from?

Who is paying that extra 2,000?

If the State raises tuition rates to 3,000, is this wrong?

edit on 10-11-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

Ok, and how is the government going to reduce that difference if the budget cuts are throwing hundreds of thousands of people into unemployment and at the same time reducing the amount of youngsters coming through the education system that can make the difference?
Cuts are needed but they need to look elsewhere, the education system is expensive but needed at the same time.

What happens to middle class families who do not receive any money from the government to help take their kids into university? They are facing paying a lot of money which just might not be possible for them. Even if the worst comes to worst, a decision like this should take at least a decade to implement. In America, families save from the moment their kids are born, people need a chance here too.

Originally posted by FermiFlux

Ok, and how is the government going to reduce that difference if the budget cuts are throwing hundreds of thousands of people into unemployment and at the same time reducing the amount of youngsters coming through the education system that can make the difference?
Cuts are needed but they need to look elsewhere, the education system is expensive but needed at the same time.

edit on 10-11-2010 by FermiFlux because: (no reason given)

When government "throws thousands of people into unemployment," they are necessarily ONLY throwing out people whose paychecks were dependent upon the theft of people who actually produced goods and services.

Government employees produce NOTHING - they make nothing.

Since public sector employees produce nothing of value, the labor that is freed up by firing them allows private sector employers to cheaply hire more labor and expand operations.

Labor is like any other commodity, when there is more available, prices fall and productivity can be increased.

I think college is over-rated anyways. 90% of jobs out there that require a college degree don't REALLY need one as it relates to job skills. Most companies can train their employees on the job, even for highly technical skills.

State funded colleges were pushed by the major industry cartels who wanted to push the cost of this training off on to the public sector rather than pay for it themselves.

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Hey, I want free stuff, can we get together and riot? We can go around and destroy other people's stuff and maybe get what we want.

You know, I think I moved past that stage of the terrible twos when I was two, is it just me or do I find people that are attempting to argue the point disingenuous?

At least we in Europe seem to be prepared to demonstrate against our government, While you in America have your tea parties and vote in right wingers who want to give more power to big business and corporations. A fine example of false class conscience.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
We'd all be happier if prices fell instead of increased.

Of course, this is only possible in a system of sound money and limited government.

I didn't say fall... I said stay the same.

Anyway there is a better thread on this exact topic happening right now.

Originally posted by blupblup

Originally posted by mnemeth1
We'd all be happier if prices fell instead of increased.

Of course, this is only possible in a system of sound money and limited government.

I didn't say fall... I said stay the same.

Anyway there is a better thread on this exact topic happening right now.

If prices are staying flat, then that necessarily means society's productivity is not increasing or someone is printing money at the same rate society's productivity is increasing.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
At least we in Europe seem to be prepared to demonstrate against our government, While you in America have your tea parties and vote in right wingers who want to give more power to big business and corporations. A fine example of false class conscience.

Look at what you wrote, then think about it for a few minutes and get back to me.

Then explain why what you wrote is an oxymoron.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

I think college is over-rated anyways. 90% of jobs out there that require a college degree don't REALLY need one as it relates to job skills. Most companies can train their employees on the job, even for highly technical skills.

Even though some specific degrees the case is different, I very much agree. I have an older sister with two degrees and one masters, and is still competing for jobs with people without degrees, because they're the only ones with half a chance landing.

I guess whilst jobs are so scarce, there's no point giving ourselves more over-qualified people eh.

Anarchists riot with Socialists for two reasons, IMO.

1. Just to have the opportunity to riot, they really love breaking the law.
2. Anarchists agree with Socialists on principle but not on policy, they diverge from the Socialist movement when it comes to government actually enforcing rules and regulations but they riot with them because they agree with the sentiment.

Just my opinion though.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
At least we in Europe seem to be prepared to demonstrate against our government, While you in America have your tea parties and vote in right wingers who want to give more power to big business and corporations. A fine example of false class conscience.

Look at what you wrote, then think about it for a few minutes and get back to me.

Then explain why what you wrote is an oxymoron.

Yep, Im happy with what I wrote, you will never understand where I am coming from. I've read enough of your posts to realise you and I will never see eye to eye on politics. We are at complete opposites of the spectrum

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Yep, Im happy with what I wrote, you will never understand where I am coming from. I've read enough of your posts to realise you and I will never see eye to eye on politics. We are at complete opposites of the spectrum

You're right I'll never understand where you are coming from, since where you are coming from is logically irrational.

Yeah, I also found it very funny that they were protesting a lack of Government support by spray painting Anarchy signs everywhere?

Apparently the education system in England isn't what it used to be. When I lived in England we learned that Anarchy was the total absence of Government

Originally posted by Misoir
Anarchists riot with Socialists for two reasons, IMO.

1. Just to have the opportunity to riot, they really love breaking the law.
2. Anarchists agree with Socialists on principle but not on policy, they diverge from the Socialist movement when it comes to government actually enforcing rules and regulations but they riot with them because they agree with the sentiment.

Just my opinion though.

It was students, just normal British students, some got a bit carried away and got a bit violent and others came along who were not students to get involved in the naughtiness some of whom may have been anarchists.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

I don't see them "Marching for free stuff" as you put it.
I'm sure they'd be happy to just leave the fee structure as it is now... as opposed to tripling it.

Oh well.

We'd all be happier if prices fell instead of increased.

Of course, this is only possible in a system of sound money and limited government.

What also makes prices fall is if it doesn't cost as much to put the products out. IE, if the wages of the people making those products falls as well.

Prices fall, wages fall. Everyone ends up in the same situation.

However, in reality, wages fall, prices stay the same or increase, and corporate interests increase their profits.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr

Originally posted by Misoir
Anarchists riot with Socialists for two reasons, IMO.

1. Just to have the opportunity to riot, they really love breaking the law.
2. Anarchists agree with Socialists on principle but not on policy, they diverge from the Socialist movement when it comes to government actually enforcing rules and regulations but they riot with them because they agree with the sentiment.

Just my opinion though.

It was students, just normal British students, some got a bit carried away and got a bit violent and others came along who were not students to get involved in the naughtiness some of whom may have been anarchists.

Students or anarchists, they were all socialists with a poor concept of what makes economies function and why prices are set the way they are.

When the State sets prices, it necessarily leads to chaos.

reply to post by mnemeth1


There were students from all social backgrounds, just because everyone isnt a die hard capitalist wanting to live in a dog eat dog society, makes them socialist only in your warped mind

Originally posted by babybunnies
What also makes prices fall is if it doesn't cost as much to put the products out. IE, if the wages of the people making those products falls as well.

Prices fall, wages fall. Everyone ends up in the same situation.

However, in reality, wages fall, prices stay the same or increase, and corporate interests increase their profits.

Yeah, but the important part is understanding why wages fall yet prices increase. It has nothing to do with corporate interests and everything to do with monetary policy.

When the supply of money is increased, prices go up.

Those who get the new money first get the most benefit.

Those who get the new money first are always mega-corporations funded by government contracts/subsidies, banks, and bureaucrats.

Further, prices can increase due to subsidies. The government creates bubbles by subsidizing things, such as education. When government subsidizes education, the educational bureaucracy expands dramatically. This necessitates more subsidies to keep the price of education at the same level, and so on. Eventually when the subsidies are stopped, the true cost of the bureaucracy is revealed and prices must necessarily skyrocket or people must be fired.

Since bureaucrats are never fired, prices must necessarily increase.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

There were students from all social backgrounds, just because everyone isnt a die hard capitalist wanting to live in a dog eat dog society, makes them socialist only in your warped mind

Protesting government cuts in spending necessarily makes you a socialist.

reply to post by mnemeth1


It's not about 'getting everything for free' it's about protesting cuts in education leading to the rise of already high tuition fees at universities here in the UK. I had an Anarchy sign on my guitar when I was a teenager, because I liked the Sex Pistols, didn't mean I was an Anarchist. The media always focuses on something out of context so we don't see the big picture, the majority of protesters were peaceful.

If the government raises the cost of tuition fess in the UK it will mean less people will be able to study in the forseeable future because they haven't been able to save enough to go, which could cause a 'brain drain', and higher unemployment as those who did not go to University will be hunting for non-existent jobs, So while The ConDem Government thinks it is making cuts to kill the the national debt, it may end up increasing it, who knows. Valuable public services such as Health, Education & Emergency services should not be touched.

They also want the right to challenge and possibly remove the Liberal Democrat MPs who joined with the Tories in the Coalition for going back on their promise that they would not raise tuition fees. I wanted the Coalition to work, even though I have never voted Tory and never will, I have voted Labour and Liberal Democrat once in protest over the Iraq War, the idea of two opposing political parties working together is a positive move for Westminster, both Parties in theory, should keep each other in check, unfortunately the honeymoon period is over and the cracks are starting to show, and I now have no idea who I will be voting for at the next general election, could be Paid Cymru at this rate. There is more to this story than just angry students spraying graffiti. :-) Peace