April 2, 200916 yr c'mon man, i posted that yesterday..... april 1st! :lol: Erm, the post you wrote that under was respoding to 'police shooting all yobs' which you wrote this morning...
April 2, 200916 yr And, Craig, you are SUCH a fukkin' hypocrite.... You were praising the "mob" who last week trashed Fred the Shred's place and now you're against these bigger, more organised, more effective protests..... You cant compare the 2 mate Goodwin was a DIRECT reason for many of the problems in this country, to me he is fair game, were there protests against HIM personally that affect only him then I would be in full support and would maybe even attend and chuck eggs at the c**t although he deserves a grenade chucked not eggs These protests yesterday and recently target INNOCENTS, that RBS building that was attacked by those Swampy types did they think Goodwin would be in there ? the only people affected there would have been innocent cashiers, financial advisers, clerks and so on, I am in favour of protest against the right targets but not innocents being affected
April 2, 200916 yr I find it pretty funny that people decided to vandalise RBS are going to be footing the bill to repair it, since it's government-owned. And that the bankers were waving £50 notes above them LOL. I love IB'ers :wub: Though i'm probably biased in that respect since it's a career route i'm looking into. It wasn't 'bankers' but the actions of few, perhaps not even 1/2% of the total RBS workforce in the UK, which led to its demise; there is absolutely no need to tar everyone who works in the industry with the same brush, its moronic. The way to protesters were acting, burning hanging dummies dressed like a banker, it's digusting. I have neither sympathy, nor respect for the protesters. Socialism won't work, it won't be implemented. In times of economic/political worries, people always turn to more extreme views, and it dies down. Like i've said before, communism died hard a long time ago. Stop flogging a dead horse. Capitalism is the best route, imo. I'd rather have a world where there's a chance for me to make a $h!tload of money, than everyone being equal. If the bankers work hard, why shouldn't they be rewarded? They work bitch hours, sleep in the office and work on weekends. The country would be a lot poorer without the bankers.
April 2, 200916 yr I find it pretty funny that people decided to vandalise RBS are going to be footing the bill to repair it, since it's government-owned. And that the bankers were waving £50 notes above them LOL. I love IB'ers :wub: Though i'm probably biased in that respect since it's a career route i'm looking into. It wasn't 'bankers' but the actions of few, perhaps not even 1/2% of the total RBS workforce in the UK, which led to its demise; there is absolutely no need to tar everyone who works in the industry with the same brush, its moronic. The way to protesters were acting, burning hanging dummies dressed like a banker, it's digusting. I have neither sympathy, nor respect for the protesters. Socialism won't work, it won't be implemented. In times of economic/political worries, people always turn to more extreme views, and it dies down. Like i've said before, communism died hard a long time ago. Stop flogging a dead horse. Capitalism is the best route, imo. I'd rather have a world where there's a chance for me to make a $h!tload of money, than everyone being equal. If the bankers work hard, why shouldn't they be rewarded? They work bitch hours, sleep in the office and work on weekends. The country would be a lot poorer without the bankers. Agreed While there are a few c**ts like Fred Goodwin and greedy derivitives traders the majority of bankers are good c**ts For all its rights and wrongs the banking system is the reason we are not all living in mud huts being fed by the Red Cross and other aid agencies, banking system is what has made this country the global superpower it is today, the banking system is why people have roofs over their heads (mortgages), the banking system is why every business in this country is still in business (bank lending/finance), the banking system is why we have credit cards, the banking system is why we are wealthy compared with most of the world, we should be GRATEFUL to the banking system/bankers/the city not treat them worse than Gary Glitter like is happening A few have taken things to extremes like that fvckwit Fred Goodwin but 99.9% of bankers and people who work in the financial system in any capacity are good people
April 2, 200916 yr Yeah, because that would really guarantee a peaceful march wouldn't it.....? You're an idiot...... <_< Just what the fukk is your problem....? These people had no interest in "looting" and they were far from being Chavs or "vanadals".... Chavs would just sit at home on their fat, obese arses and have absolutely no opinion on these matters at all, and vandals have no reason behind the destruction they cause, there WAS a reason yesterday, people are utterly p!ssed off..... Why do you think it was RBS in particular that got targeted.....? Gee, MIGHT have something to do with the fact that RBS was the bank that Fred the Shred was the head of, what do you think.....? Fool.... :rolleyes: So what...? A few banking institutions got their windows smashed.....? Big deal.... It was only damage to PROPERTY at the end of the day, INSURED property at that... And, Christ, we fukkin' OWN these banks now anyway, so fukk 'em..... Why should I have sympathy for a bunch of bankers feeling a bit put out....? Christ, THEIR actions have put everyone out.... There are some there with a genuiine grievance, the lecturer, intelligent type But the ones that give protesting a bad name and I would guess are the majority protesting yesterday are anarchists/class war/socialist worker/new age traveller/dole scrounger/rent a mob out for a ruck with the police/jealous have not's who have hatred of bankers because they have money and that type, they are my target for the hatred of these protests You are not going to get uni lecturers smashing windows, attacking police, starting a ruck etc but the ones I listed above are very likely to start a ruck and smash things up and they give the genuine protesters a bad name
April 2, 200916 yr Erm, the post you wrote that under was respoding to 'police shooting all yobs' which you wrote this morning... oops... :lol: still the bait was intended and duly swallowed!
April 2, 200916 yr If the bankers work hard, why shouldn't they be rewarded? Just saw this and you are spot on If Man Utd win the Premiership this season Wayne Rooney will get a 7 figure bonus for kicking a pigs bladder round some grass but is there any fuss about Rooney getting millions in bonuses ? no, but give a banker a 7 figure bonus and it is front page news and the country is in outrage at how someone can make all this money, the banker with the 1m bonus would have made a lot of money for his employer, and as fund managers for instance are investing pension funds on stock exchange then they are making everyone more wealthy at the same time, I really don't see the fuss in a banker getting 7 figure bonus if he has made his employer a lot of money, aside from derivitives which are what essentially bought down the banks the trading arms of banks were highly profitable but those guys get hatred that is reserved for Ian Huntley
April 2, 200916 yr There are some there with a genuiine grievance, the lecturer, intelligent type But the ones that give protesting a bad name and I would guess are the majority protesting yesterday are anarchists/class war/socialist worker/new age traveller/dole scrounger/rent a mob out for a ruck with the police/jealous have not's who have hatred of bankers because they have money and that type, they are my target for the hatred of these protests You are not going to get uni lecturers smashing windows, attacking police, starting a ruck etc but the ones I listed above are very likely to start a ruck and smash things up and they give the genuine protesters a bad name Just saw this and you are spot on If Man Utd win the Premiership this season Wayne Rooney will get a 7 figure bonus for kicking a pigs bladder round some grass but is there any fuss about Rooney getting millions in bonuses ? no, but give a banker a 7 figure bonus and it is front page news and the country is in outrage at how someone can make all this money, the banker with the 1m bonus would have made a lot of money for his employer, and as fund managers for instance are investing pension funds on stock exchange then they are making everyone more wealthy at the same time, I really don't see the fuss in a banker getting 7 figure bonus if he has made his employer a lot of money, aside from derivitives which are what essentially bought down the banks the trading arms of banks were highly profitable but those guys get hatred that is reserved for Ian Huntley I agree with you on both counts. Clearly the bankers need to be more heavily legislated. In other words redeploy the similar legistration/constraints that were put in place in the 1930s that were subsequently removed by dumb (Reagan/Thatcher) in the 1980s & dumber (Bush Jr/Brown - thanks to Alastair Campbell's spin doctor diaries released in 2007 showing how the tail Brown was wagging the head Blair on all things finance within the cabinet, with Blair questioning the wisdom of this removal of financial legislation, but with Brown being the Chancellor and over rulling the Prime Minister, then B-liar can't be blamed for this in the early 2000s).
April 2, 200916 yr ffs who cares, democracyyyy. It wasn't the people who fukked up the economy, it was the greedy bast*rds in the banks. So yeah, I'm all for protest, no matter how extreme.
April 2, 200916 yr Well a guy died in the protests. Are you for that? No, but it doesn't put me off still wanting protest. The more powerful, the better.
April 2, 200916 yr No, but it doesn't put me off still wanting protest. The more powerful, the better. How do you define "powerful" though? If you're talking simply in terms of people making a firm, direct and effective political point in a clever way or with huge numbers, fine. If we're talking louts going around smashing the city up and heading down for a fight...no. That kind of thing does FAR more harm to the cause than good. These incidents have grabbed the attention certainly, but not the right kind. Those in power will become able to turn the protests from being about people making known their valid concerns on how the world is being run, into an excuse for mass violence or thuggery. Not good.
April 2, 200916 yr How do you define "powerful" though? If you're talking simply in terms of people making a firm, direct and effective political point in a clever way or with huge numbers, fine. If we're talking louts going around smashing the city up and heading down for a fight...no. That kind of thing does FAR more harm to the cause than good. These incidents have grabbed the attention certainly, but not the right kind. Those in power will become able to turn the protests from being about people making known their valid concerns on how the world is being run, into an excuse for mass violence or thuggery. Not good. Agree Violence and mayhem and rioting and attacking the police DAMAGES the cause These protests in this last week have been utterly pointless and will achieve nothing, and at the same time will have cost London and London businesses tens of millions of pounds
April 3, 200916 yr i don't think so. The riots made Australian headlines, yesterday it was the lead story.
April 3, 200916 yr Interesting article from Johann Hari... Listen To The Protesters Two global crises have collided, and we have a chance here, now, to solve them both with one mighty heave – but our leaders are letting this opportunity for greatness leach away When this hinge-point in human history is remembered, there will be far more sympathy for the people who took to the streets and rioted than for the people who stayed silently in their homes. Two global crises have collided, and we have a chance here, now, to solve them both with one mighty heave - but our leaders are letting this opportunity for greatness leach away. The protesters here in London were trying to sound an alarm now, at five minutes to ecological midnight. Many commentators seemed bemused that the protesters focused on the climate crunch as much as the credit crunch. What's it got to do with a G20 meeting on reviving the global economy? Why wave banners saying 'Nature Doesn't Do Bail-Outs' today? Because both crises have their roots in the same ideology - and both have the same solution. We are facing a collapsed economy and a rapidly warming world because an extreme ideology has dominated world affairs for decades. It is the belief that markets aren't just a useful tool in certain circumstances; they are an infallible mechanism for running human affairs. If the economy ebbs, the market will put itself right by punishing wrong-doers. If the climate begins to unravel, business will rectify its own behavior voluntarily. Now we know how well this market fundamentalism works. The climate is currently going the same way as the banks. Last month, the world's climate scientists gathered in Copenhagen to explain we are facing "devastating consequences" - not in some distant future, but in my lifetime and yours. Unless we swerve fast, we are soon going to hit global temperatures that no human being has ever lived through. We don't have much time. By 2015, we will have belched so much carbon into the atmosphere that we will cross the Point of No Return: the climate will start to unravel as all its natural cooling processes breaking down one by one, guaranteeing we become hotter and hotter. Once we hit an increase of 4 degrees, much of the world will become uninhabitable, and there will be vast wars for what remains. This isn't the warning of apocalyptic wackos: it's the judgement of the climate scientists who have consistently been proven right up to now. Steven Chu, the Nobel Prize winning scientist who has been appointed Energy Secretary by Barack Obama, says: "I don't think the American public has gripped in its gut what will happen. We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California. I don't actually see how they can keep their cities going either." Goodbye Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego. And that, he stresses, is only the start. The distinguished environmental scientist James Lovelock warns that climate changes tend not to happen gradually, inch-by-inch. They suddenly flip - in our case from a cool world to a very hot one. He believes the hotter new world we are bringing into being could support, at best, a billion people. That would require 84 percent of the world's population to die off. That's why the protestors were talking about the climate. It should be the number one issue at every global meeting. And the way out of the climate crunch and the credit crunch is the same - a Green New Deal. Our leaders are divided about whether we need a fiscal stimulus at all. Obama, Gordon Brown, and the Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso are leading the charge for a burst of big government spending to jump-start the global economy, while Angela Merkel, Nicholas Sarkozy, David Cameron and the US Republicans are arguing this will simply be a debt-funded splurge to nothing. It's a strange debate to have now, because the opponents of any stimulus seem to be mired in a row that was resolved back in the 1930s. John Maynard Keynes transformed the way that we think about recessions. Before him, everybody believed the Merkel-Cameron-McCain line that recessions are like bad weather: you just need to wrap up and sit it out, even though it hurts. But Keynes transformed all that. He showed that recessions are actually caused by a failure of consumer demand. When people sense that they might lose their job, they - perfectly sensibly - cut back on their spending. They buy fewer DVDs or restaurant meals or holidays. But this causes a fall in demand for services - and more people lose their jobs, causing demand to fall further in turn, and on and on, in a spiral. He called it "the paradox of thrift": what is rational for an individual consumer is irrational for the society as a whole. But he also showed there is a way out: the government needs to spend large sums of money, financed by borrowing, to get all the workers waiting idle back into action. This government spending brings consumer demand back - and reverses the downward trend. Then, once you've recovered, you pay off the debt. Keynes stressed you can spend this money on anything: at one point he proposed burying wads of cash and paying people to dig them up. But today, we face an incredible coincidence. At the same moment, we need to spend lots of money on something, anything - and we need an immediate transition to a low-carbon economy. And it gets better: it turns out a green stimulus is best for the economy. A major study by the University of Massachusetts compared the effects of an old-style stimulus that simply gives people more cash to a green stimulus. They found that a green stimulus creates four times more jobs, and three times more "good jobs", defined as those that pay more than $16 per hour. Why? Because a green stimulus is labour-intensive: you spend more money on people and less on machines. And the money you spend stays at home, making it easier to sell: you can only insulate a loft in Hull in Hull; you can only build a wind farms in the Mid-West in the Mid-West. But it's not happening. A study by HSBC has found that only 6 percent of Britain's stimulus so far has gone to green projects. In the US, it is just 16 percent. It's nonsense to claim there aren't enough green projects "shovel-ready": during World War Two, the industrial capacities of our countries was transformed from making consumer goods to making tanks and weaponry in less than sixty days. We could do the same. But this alacrity shouldn't surprise us. The weight of conventional wisdoms and the sway of powerful corporations with vested interests in the old sickening world holds back even the better leaders. The first New Deal wasn't handed down by Franklin Roosevelt as a benevolent gesture. On the contrary: he came to power as a budget-balancing centrist, and only became a great President because he was confronted by massive riots and civil disobedience across the United States. The American people pushed him in a more radical direction, often with behavior that made this week's riot in London look like a Buckingham Palace reception. On Wednesday, one of the young protesters sat in a tent at the edge of the City of London, looked out towards the glistening towers of the financial district, and said to me: "The dinosaurs were killed by an asteroid. Suddenly, we are realising that we are our own asteroid." She shook her head. "How can so many people just sit at home and watch it happen?"
April 3, 200916 yr Interesting article from Johann Hari... Unless we swerve fast, we are soon going to hit global temperatures that no human being has ever lived through. We don't have much time. By 2015, we will have belched so much carbon into the atmosphere that we will cross the Point of No Return: This isn't the warning of apocalyptic wackos: it's the judgement of the climate scientists who have consistently been proven right up to now. ?" utter bollox.... we are all doomed by 2015? :lol: utter tripe. they HAVNT been proven 'right upto now' at all... where is this next ice age we were promised in the 1970's? wheres the irreversable and damaging ozone hole gone too? the ozone was supposed to have disappeared by now! man, im old enough to have witnessed many many predictions of doom from 'scientific experts' in all fields of life.... and guess what... they calmly disappear as they become obvious that they were WRONG. what happened to the mad cow disease epidemic?... thats another prediction they got WRONG too...
April 3, 200916 yr utter bollox.... we are all doomed by 2015? :lol: utter tripe. they HAVNT been proven 'right upto now' at all... where is this next ice age we were promised in the 1970's? wheres the irreversable and damaging ozone hole gone too? the ozone was supposed to have disappeared by now! man, im old enough to have witnessed many many predictions of doom from 'scientific experts' in all fields of life.... and guess what... they calmly disappear as they become obvious that they were WRONG. what happened to the mad cow disease epidemic?... thats another prediction they got WRONG too... Well, the o-zone hole's still there but getting smaller. I think the fact we've all stopped using CFCs might have contributed to it not being gone by now? :P The difference is that this is one we can actually do something about...we DID something about CFCs and look! The o-zone layer is repairing itself!
Create an account or sign in to comment