Jamesfrom818
Banned
Looks like Bieber cancelled French tour dates or something.
fortified_concept said:Failed revolutions rarely make things worse. Even when they fail, revolutions intimidate the ruling class and force them to rethink their plans.
Funky Papa said:The best demonstrations are always the "happy ones". Less chances for rioting, which is a very real concern with certain groups.
It is not like you have to look like a car burning anarchist to make your point...
ToxicAdam said:It's hard to take your words seriously when you shroud them in conspiracy-theory language.
But, despite that, you may be right. What happened to Greece is a seperate issue and is really being used as political shorthand for what can happen when a government doesn't exert fiscal responsibility for it's people. It's highly doubtful that a situation that happened in Greece would happen in France, but maybe a lesser version of that.
fortified_concept said:These are the facts. As for the informed assumptions it's no secret that governments all over Europe the last few months are using Greece as the ultimate tool of fearmongering to sell state property to corporations, reduce salaries, lay ruin on social services and increase pension age limits which makes me assume this too is a plan. It's the march of corporatism and it's happening so fast that even I'm losing track of it, and it's exactly how Klein was describing it for Chile, Bolivia, Argentina and other countries that went through it. This is an attack against all Europeans and we better wake up before it's too late.
MagniHarvald said:The fools have no idea what they're doing in the streets, they're just glad to skip class. I was for increasing it up to 65, so complaining about it going up to only 62 is pure bullshit to me.
<- 19y-o, currently in France.
empty vessel said:This is like walking into your boss's office and demanding a pay cut for yourself.
nyong said:Irony
empty vessel said:This is like walking into your boss's office and demanding a pay cut for yourself.
CharlieDigital said:I can see why some people would do it, though. In your analogy, one might do it if it would save the job of coworker.
MagniHarvald said:Explain please? I don't plan on living and working in France anyways, but since I'm, normally, going to live a longer life, and hence have a longer retirement, than the previous generations, I'm going to cost more money. Seems perfectly logic to me to work longer. Unless you prefer the other alternative, losing a bigger cut of my salary over the same period as previously?
CharlieDigital said:I can see why some people would do it, though. In your analogy, one might do it if it would save the job of coworker.
MagniHarvald said:Explain please?
Can you provide any sources for your facts?fortified_concept said:It would be irony if I was talking out of my ass basing my argument on lies. Go ask any european if his country is taking the measures I just described or not. I didn't say Europe will become Chile but the tactics being used are extremely similar to the Shock Doctrine.
Suzaku said:I agree. I say let the French women strike if they must, it almost seems like a rite of passage for young girls.
empty vessel said:You will always have the option to work as long as you like. The question is when you can expect to see benefits. The position you are taking is adverse to your own interests. You are saying that you do not want retirement benefits to be available to you until a later age.
Raising the retirement age will make it harder for young people to get jobs, who will then cost the state money. And as others have pointed out in the thread, retired people can contribute to society as well and in that way make up for the cost they create by retiring. It's not a simple choice of raised taxes or a reformed retirement system.MagniHarvald said:Explain please? I don't plan on living and working in France anyways, but since I'm, normally, going to live a longer life, and hence have a longer retirement, than the previous generations, I'm going to cost more money. Seems perfectly logic to me to work longer. Unless you prefer the other alternative, losing a bigger cut of my salary over the same period as previously?
SmokyDave said:Can you provide any sources for your facts?
At the moment it just sounds like you spent a weekend watching 'The Money Masters' on a loop or something.
fortified_concept said:Go ask any european if his country is taking the measures I just described or not. I didn't say Europe will become Chile but the tactics being used are extremely similar to the Shock Doctrine.
fortified_concept said:Go ask any european if his country is taking the measures I just described or not. I didn't say Europe will become Chile but the tactics being used are extremely similar to the Shock Doctrine.
How is it arrogant? They are uniformed. They are essentially destroying their own country. Going on like this simply isn't sustainable. The amount of working people compared to the non working is vastly decreasing(less child birth and babyboom generation going into retirement and longer living people). Are they fucking expecting the French government to create money out of thin air?Neo C. said:Look, I don't agree with the French high schooler, but to think that all of them are uninformed or don't know what they are protesting against is quite arrogant.
From what I've read so far, they argue that in a shitty economy, they can't find a job after graduating from university. When you are in your mid twenties, struggling to get a job and you are probably the first person to get laid off (because you are young), the 41.5 year employment is quite hard to reach before 67.
I'd rather not have a job for 2 or 3 years then paying so much tax that I won't even have money left do anything. Or make government keep lending money to make up for the deficit, but the lending will go on forever and the debt also till government can't even pay the debts anymore. So they need go bankrupt(when this happens to a country it's not a pretty sight). USA gets away with the defecit since they are an economic superpower and the world pretty much trades in dollars.CharlieDigital said:If you look at it from this perspective, then, it is hurting them as it decreases their job opportunities by keeping older folks employed, longer.
2San said:I'd rather not have a job for 2 or 3 years then paying so much tax that I won't even have money left do anything.
I did mean Goldman Sachs & Greece predominantly but I'm googling it as we speak. I'll read around. You're certainly correct about the fearmongering but I can't help but feel you're doing a little of your own.fortified_concept said:On the top of my head: UK, Sweden, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Portugal are countries taking these measures where the governments are using Greece to scare their citizens. Or did you mean the facts about Greece? I'll dig up the links if you want me to even though all you got to do to find out the basics is google Goldman Sachs + Greece.
CharlieDigital said:Page 1: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=23913661&postcount=84
Summary: a healthy dose of skepticism and due diligence is what any responsible voting public should respond with to calls for cuts in benefits.
nyong said:Go ask any European? Why exactly does Europe need a "wake-up call" if everyone is already in agreement with you? Then you draw an explicit parallel between what happened in Chile and what Europe is currently going through?
I'm not saying that you're completely wrong on every point, but the few slim pieces of evidence you provide are so far buried under hyperbole and arrogant self-assuredness that it's impossible for meaningful discussion to take place. Which is the point, I assume, when you couch the opposition's arguments in terms that suggest corporate brainwashing.
Hari Seldon said:It is in his interest to want a higher retirement age if he plans on saving and investing on his own rather than rely on government programs. A lower retirement age brings on higher taxes, it isn't "free".
GaimeGuy said:And fyi people, it's not simply "retiring at 62" that's being protested
Under current rules, both men and women in France can retire at 60, provided they have paid social security contributions for 40.5 years - although they are not entitled to a full pension until they are 65.
Sarkozy is trying to raise the retirement age to 62, the qualificaiton to 41.5 years, and the pension age to 67. The biggest issue people have is the qualification being raised to 41.5 years: That hurts people who have been on unemployment, as well as part time workers and women (maternity leave). It becomes harder to quality for retirement, it's not just about how long you have to wait to retire.
Protesters argue that anyone who has ever spent time unemployed will struggle to fulfil the time requirement. THAT is the major point of conflict.
oh, okay, proceed.Ether_Snake said:No we are going to ignore your comments because it is much more reassuring for us to imagine that the kids in France are too dumb to know what they are protesting. It makes us feel like we are a bunch of uneducated idiots!
SmokyDave said:I did mean Goldman Sachs & Greece predominantly but I'm googling it as we speak. I'll read around. You're certainly correct about the fearmongering but I can't help but feel you're doing a little of your own.
I'm not necessarily suggesting that you're wrong, just that you're coming across a little 'heavy'. Things like "The free market is not free and is being manipulated to execute the plans plans of a few" make it sound like you've seen one too many 'loose change' style documentaries.
Might've been an overreaction on my part, but are you honestly suggesting that going on like this is sustainable?CharlieDigital said:lol
This is an abject failure in math and/or basic home-ec level economics.
nvm: didn't read the comment properlyEther_Snake said:No we are going to ignore your comments because it is much more reassuring for us to imagine that the kids in France are too dumb to know what they are protesting. It makes us feel like we are a bunch of uneducated idiots!
2San said:Might've been an overreaction on my part, but are you honestly suggesting that going on like this is sustainable?
The fun part is 62 isn't sustainable either. The government pussied out already by only raising it by 2 years and people are still complaining.CharlieDigital said:I'm not and I haven't once suggested it in this thread. Even empty vessel, champion of Liberal values, hasn't said that that is the case.
The point is that before the people accept cuts, they better make damn sure that there aren't alternatives and that they're really necessary.
I like to think that in negotiations, all parties have to start from the furthest extremes with full intent of heading towards a middle ground compromise. This is a public negotiation and all sides need to start from extremes if they are expected to make concessions down the line. When I buy a car, I start from a low price that I know that the salesman won't sell me the car at. He starts from a high price that he knows that I won't buy it at. We work our way towards some compromise.
Shanadeus said:Good for them!
Time to teach the governments and corporations that the ones holding real power is the people.
VIVE LA RÉVOLUTION AND BURN IN HELL CAPITALIST FASCIST SCUM!
Horsebite said:The French get so much shit, but they are a fucking model for how to stand up and tell your government to eat a dick. They get right down to business by protesting and rioting over there and Americans need to take note: that's how you get shit done, not by complaining all the time but never taking the time to do anything about it.
Clearly it depends on the cause and where you fall for said cause.nyong said:And yes, shutting down the country does "get shit done" but I suspect some of you wouldn't be quite as gung-ho about people using this tactic if it were, say, the Tea Party.
Horsebite said:Clearly it depends on the cause.
nyong said:Historically, the French have been very quick to revolt, and to revolt violently. The likely reason that these young protesters are all smiles is because the issue is raising the retirement age by 2 years. There is very little at immediate stake here. The reason Greece went up in flames is because they faced serious pay cuts, an immediate and substantial decrease to their quality of life. Hardly comparable.
And yes, shutting down the country does "get shit done" but I suspect some of you wouldn't be quite as gung-ho about people using this tactic if it were, say, the Tea Party.
fortified_concept said:That's because the Tea Party is consisted of a bunch of ignorant hicks being used by corporations as their personal puppets. We already have enough puppets in our governments, the use of puppets demonstrating and rioting to protect corporate interests would only cause saturation.
Drkirby said:Let them run out of fuel. I wonder how they will like it when the food runs dry. Its 2 years older to retire, and 1 year more of labor, its not an unreasonable amount. What alternative have the strikers proposed?
wat?nyong said:And who determines which cause justifies shutting down a nation? What percentage of the French populace backs these strikes? What percentage of our nation favors repealing the health care bill?
Horsebite said:wat?
Dude, if a cause is important to you go out and protest if you feel like it. If you don't care, fuck off. It's important to stand up for what you believe in, not to consider how everyone else feels and then gauge your opinion based on that.
nyong said:There's a difference between standing up for what you believe in and holding the nation hostage when you don't get your way.
Because history shows time and time again that a passive, lethargic people will always get what they want from their government, so long as they stand up for their beliefs without inconveniencing anyone else, right?nyong said:There's a difference between standing up for what you believe in and holding the nation hostage when you don't get your way.