Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

what exactly are G8 Protesters protesting about?

123468

Comments

  • #152
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Yea predictable and trite; if you can't come up with something other than a boring and lazy comparison to Communism (which btw, you know full well is nonsense), why do you even bother.
    Yes, communism is retarded so why are you arguing in favour of a state controlled and centrally planned economy??


  • #153
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    jank wrote: »
    How about these people make themselves useful? Go back to school or learn a new skill. Why not volunteer?
    There are plenty of 'useful' people on the dole. I know that when I emerge from college with a professional and a postgraduate qualification, I am likely to be unemployed, just like last years crop and the year before that - and this is across a broad range of faculties and schools. They're emigrating jank, maybe you noticed something about it on the news.

    The European unemployment problem is a clear illustration of the shortcomings of right wing economic beliefs. Here, you have plenty of people with practical and valuable skills completely without work - architects, engineers, lawyers, accountants, designers, technicians, scientists - people who build, and make, and do, who can build infrastructure and improve productive capacity for exports in services and goods - yet they have to put down their tools and wait. They cannot access work, and they cannot access credit to engage in productive enterprise. Why? All because of the mental belief that this is all in the name of abstract ideas like "economic freedom", which mean nothing to people worrying about where their groceries are going to come from.

    And when anyone challenges this, when anyone promotes intervention in order to promote demand and economic activity, we're the crazy ones?

    This is more Obama than Communism, tbh. Leave the straw man alone.


  • #154
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    old hippy wrote: »
    Always boils down to the immigrants, eh, jank?

    And how do you know the protestors don't have skills? I've been on protests with doctors, nurses, people from all works of life.
    I am an immigrant myself so your cheap and typical left wing insinuation that anyone who has a different opinion than your good self must obviously be a racist has backfired.


  • #155
    Nitochris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 122 ✭✭Nitochris


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I asked you two questions in the quote above and you didn't answer either of them.

    "If there is no market who determines price, output and wage levels? And how can you be sure output is going to match demand?"
    All addressed in my earlier post actually, price and wage levels were removed by the removal of currency, and barter and haggling also exist as options. The idea of production to match human need addressed output and demand - basically mutualism.

    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    From the paragraph this company has 163% higher employment then it needs. This inefficiency raises wages prices and lowers output, consumers lose.

    Partially addressed by increased efficiency in production by changing raw material and the removal of top level wages. As I indicated before I do not completely subscribe to this model but it is a good bit better than Menem's which proceeded it, and which by the way you and others here seem to subscribe to.

    I will point out as I am intellectually honest that the theoretical weakness I alluded to in my previous post was that existing in a market economy undermines worker democracy dragging it back to the previous model. However the point remains that they provide an example of a challenge to traditional capitalism.

    I am an individual and a member of society not merely a consumer - so are the Argentinians who back this.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    No in fact the opposite, you've helped convince me no real alternative exists.

    And yet these ones are/were real and worked, not a theoretical construct or philosophical utopia, unlike the "perfect real free market" which has not yet been given a practical example of in this thread or elsewhere.


  • #156
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    IM0 wrote: »
    I meant in the grand scheme of things. but you are zooming in on the economics, economics becomes a moot point if you want the world to burn. the fact is you are living in one of the safest and most peacefull times IN ALL OF HUMAN EXISTANCE! and in one of the most stable countries in the world too relative to our population size and arms manufacturing base [as in none].
    these are truly the only sticks that matter if the game of life, its just what life is about, survival! why you lot feel the need to help make the world a better place when it is doing just fine Ill never know, ESPECIALLY since you come from that part of the world yourself which benefits the most :o

    there is only one explanation i can think of, you missed out on the lottery of life [well no you won it by being born in ireland] so to justify it to yourself you blame others and the bad 'man' who has nicer things and holds all the power. in effect you want annarchy, its a dying breed, ironically you are the kind of guys who went raping and pillaging around the world like the vikings and ghengis khan. there is no place for warriors in the world anymore, well there is in the third world, you are free to leave anytime you want to see how that works out for you, let us know how you get on with that :o
    As good a position we are in relative to some of the worst parts of the world, that is never an excuse to stop seeking better standards.

    If we compare how things are here, with how things are in some of the worst places in Africa for instance, and say that we should not complain or strive for better standards due to our relatively good position, then that creates a race to the bottom where we can not complain, until things have gotten so bad, that they are like some of these other destroyed nations.

    The rest...well the rest isn't really worth replying to.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    jank wrote: »
    What rubbish. Nobody is unemployed in cuba, USSR of old or North Korea yet their economies resembles the Great Depression only lasting decades!

    Economic activity is measured by trade and the selling, buying of goods and services.

    Why does someone have to step in and offer employment! As I said why not just pay hem to dig holes in fields! By your theory that will produce another Celtic tiger. Why do lefties always see solutions in theories that have been debunked for Years? Where will the money come from for all this hole digging?
    Seriously, come up with something a bit less lazy than stupid Communist comparisons. You don't need Communism to provide full employment.


  • #158
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    There are plenty of 'useful' people on the dole. I know that when I emerge from college with a professional and a postgraduate qualification, I am likely to be unemployed, just like last years crop and the year before that - and this is across a broad range of faculties and schools. They're emigrating jank, maybe you noticed something about it on the news.

    The European unemployment problem is a clear illustration of the shortcomings of right wing economic beliefs. Here, you have plenty of people with practical and valuable skills completely without work - architects, engineers, lawyers, accountants, designers, technicians, scientists - people who build, and make, and do, who can build infrastructure and improve productive capacity for exports in services and goods - yet they have to put down their tools and wait. They cannot access work, and they cannot access credit to engage in productive enterprise. Why? All because of the mental belief that this is all in the name of abstract ideas like "economic freedom", which mean nothing to people worrying about where their groceries are going to come from.

    And when anyone challenges this, when anyone promotes intervention in order to promote demand and economic activity, we're the crazy ones?

    This is more Obama than Communism, tbh. Leave the straw man alone.

    If your skills are in demand, you will get a job. May I ask what you are studying? Emigration is not the end of the world especially if you are young and able and driven. In fact it might be the best thing for you. I know it was for me and no, it wasn't forced on me. I CHOOSE to go.

    European unemployment is of course at a record high but that is because of European socialism such as that displayed by France, Greece etc. meanwhile over in the US unemployment is down to 7.5% much less than France 11% or Spain 23% . Tell me is the US more or less economically right wing than Europe. If more than why is unemployment coming down?


  • #159
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    jank wrote: »
    I am an immigrant myself so your cheap and typical left wing insinuation that anyone who has a different opinion than your good self must obviously be a racist has backfired.

    Yes because immigrants couldn't possibly be racist. Typical thinking of the extreme right :rolleyes:


  • #160
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Seriously, come up with something a bit less lazy than stupid Communist comparisons. You don't need Communism to provide full employment.

    Well apart from Bertienomies and state backed property bubbles care to share examples?


  • #161
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    jank wrote: »
    Well apart from Bertienomies and state backed property bubbles care to share examples?
    Ok, it's clear your either not reading the thread (where I have done this), or are just deliberately being obtuse; back on the ignore list.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    goose2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,798 ✭✭✭goose2005


    jank wrote: »
    How about these people make themselves useful? Go back to school or learn a new skill.
    Yes, that way they could be unemployed and indebted.
    You see it is not the responsibility of the government or the state to look after everyone and their infinite needs. People have to learn to look after themselves too.
    Does this apply to all the businesses in receipt of grants and tax breaks? And farmers in receipt of payments? And all the companies who pay their workers so little that the state has to step in to keep their employees financially secure?


  • #163
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    old hippy wrote: »
    Yes because immigrants couldn't possibly be racist. Typical thinking of the extreme right :rolleyes:

    Yes, I also drink the blood of Jews and have a few lampshades made from a polish lad that built my shed.

    Seriously if you think my post was racist then you are more deluded than I thought.


  • #164
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Ok, it's clear your either not reading the thread (where I have done this), or are just deliberately being obtuse; back on the ignore list.

    So that is a no then! :)


  • #165
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,720 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    jank wrote: »
    So that is a no then! :)
    Here, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85135909&postcount=139, is just one post from KyussBishop outlining a proposal which does not require a command economy. There are several other similar posts by him in this thread if you are willing and capable of reading them.


  • #166
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    goose2005 wrote: »
    Does this apply to all the businesses in receipt of grants and tax breaks? And farmers in receipt of payments? And all the companies who pay their workers so little that the state has to step in to keep their employees financially secure?

    Yes.


  • #167
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    Here, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85135909&postcount=139, is just one post from KyussBishop outlining a proposal which does not require a command economy. There are several other similar posts by him in this thread if you are willing and capable of reading them.

    I read that but did not take it seriously as it is putting the cart before the horse. As I said we could archive full employment and maximum economic activity by paying people to dig holes but the actual output is of no value. That is the key. The production of goods and the availing of services have a value in the real world of private industry.

    An we have an example of a country that does what KB is saying?


  • #168
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Nitochris wrote: »
    All addressed in my earlier post actually, price and wage levels were removed by the removal of currency, and barter and haggling also exist as options. The idea of production to match human need addressed output and demand - basically mutualism.
    The idea of currency removal is ludicrous you don't really subscribe to that do you? What if a grape farmer needs tractor tires from a producer who doesn't like grapes? Am I to pay my college fees in bread?

    Nitochris wrote: »
    Partially addressed by increased efficiency in production by changing raw material and the removal of top level wages. As I indicated before I do not completely subscribe to this model but it is a good bit better than Menem's which proceeded it, and which by the way you and others here seem to subscribe to.
    Both of which would be achieved under the current system of competition. With the benefit of having a smaller workforce working for less pay. Efficiency maximises output and minimises prices and society wins.

    Under your model society is paying too much for too little. Or make that trading.
    I will point out as I am intellectually honest that the theoretical weakness I alluded to in my previous post was that existing in a market economy undermines worker democracy dragging it back to the previous model. However the point remains that they provide an example of a challenge to traditional capitalism.
    It's no challenge because as you admit yourself the business is not efficiency enough to survive. That these "worker co-ops" cannot achieve worker efficiency equal to or greater then their free market counter parts is all the evidence I need to dismiss the idea. If in the future we are to feed a growing population and continue our technological advance we need greater efficiency, not less.
    I am an individual and a member of society not merely a consumer - so are the Argentinians who back this.
    Implying every member of society is not a consumer.

    And yet these ones are/were real and worked, not a theoretical construct or philosophical utopia, unlike the "perfect real free market" which has not yet been given a practical example of in this thread or elsewhere.
    They worked, but in the long term the less efficient firm will be swallowed up.


  • #169
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 55,264 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BM_ym65CUAAeghE.jpg

    :pac: :pac:


  • #170
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,308 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    tin79 wrote: »
    Being a lot less well off than last year does.
    And what better way then to annoy someone who helps give us jobs?

    =-=

    Also, were there many travellers there? They may have misheard that the "gate" summit was on... :pac:


  • #171
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    jank wrote: »
    If your skills are in demand, you will get a job. May I ask what you are studying?
    Not really, no, because the personal is not important. There is no one field or vocational pursuit, outside of the public service, which is perpetually immune from unemployment as the economy grows and develops... or stagnates and contracts
    Emigration is not the end of the world especially if you are young and able and driven. In fact it might be the best thing for you.
    Of course it is the best thing for many graduates-that's the problem. The issue is that many people don't want to emigrate long term, and further that it is detrimental to the Irish economy to educate people and then export them to foreign economies.
    European unemployment is of course at a record high but that is because of European socialism such as that displayed by France, Greece etc. meanwhile over in the US unemployment is down to 7.5% much less than France 11% or Spain 23% . Tell me is the US more or less economically right wing than Europe.
    Keep up with this line jank, because you're displaying your own lack of knowledge here- the US are visibly more interventionist, the US are printing money to stimulate economic activity via QEII and associated interventions - something European Governments are legally proscribed from doing, based on a very conservative German economic and monetary policy.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    jank wrote: »
    I read that but did not take it seriously as it is putting the cart before the horse. As I said we could archive full employment and maximum economic activity by paying people to dig holes but the actual output is of no value. That is the key. The production of goods and the availing of services have a value in the real world of private industry.

    An we have an example of a country that does what KB is saying?
    Oh right, so you read it, meaning you knew full well that I had presented solutions, thus showing that your previous post was you being deliberately obtuse, in requesting I present my solution when you already knew what it was.

    Don't pretend to be engaging in honest argument with people here, when you make it this clear that you are only interested in one-way rhetoric based argument.


  • #173
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    jank wrote: »
    Yes, I also drink the blood of Jews and have a few lampshades made from a polish lad that built my shed.

    Seriously if you think my post was racist then you are more deluded than I thought.

    In that case, I apologise & I'm gladdened you have no problems with immigrants.


  • #174
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,687 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    jank wrote: »
    You see it is not the responsibility of the government or the state to look after everyone and their infinite needs.

    Yeah. Pity it serves the finance sector, socialises debt and risk, and upholds the privileges and rights of corporations.

    Thats the problem with so-called 'libertarians'; they focus their 'critical' lens on the people at the bottom of the ****-heap and say 'get on with it' and tend to completely ignore the massive corporate welfare programs, the finance sector reaping ever greater profits, high unemployment for lack of jobs rather than idleness, socialised debts due to the failure of neo-liberalism, etc etc.

    Yawn.


  • #175
    Nitochris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 122 ✭✭Nitochris


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The idea of currency removal is ludicrous you don't really subscribe to that do you? What if a grape farmer needs tractor tires from a producer who doesn't like grapes? Am I to pay my college fees in bread?
    And it happened and worked. For two years before it was forcefully repressed. Under mutual aid everyone is entitled to a fair portion of the communities produce. Edit 2: I am pointing out alternative models with actual precedent to correct a strawman you put forward in the post I first replied to that suggested central planning was the only alternative model to capitalism.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Both of which would be achieved under the current system of competition. With the benefit of having a smaller workforce working for less pay. Efficiency maximises output and minimises prices and society wins.

    Under your model society is paying too much for too little. Or make that trading.
    How is it my model you clearly are not reading. Given that the change to an alternative raw material happened only after worker democracy took hold and the business led capitalist management had been replaced clearly it does not happen under the current system of competition.
    Edit 3 Are you sure this will happen in the free market are we expected to believe that the bosses will reduce their pay to the same level as the workers or as happened in the cases of the Argentinian examples just no longer exist.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    It's no challenge because as you admit yourself the business is not efficiency enough to survive. That these "worker co-ops" cannot achieve worker efficiency equal to or greater then their free market counter parts is all the evidence I need to dismiss the idea. If in the future we are to feed a growing population and continue our technological advance we need greater efficiency, not less.
    The weakness of the model actually comes from existing within the market system, and despite that many of them do survive.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Implying every member of society is not a consumer.
    Not at all, however not reducing people's agency to just that of the consumer.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    They worked, but in the long term the less efficient firm will be swallowed up.
    When? Edit: and actually assuming by being swallowed up you mean being bought surely that means that the supposed inefficient firm has become efficient enough to be valued by owners of capital.


  • #176
    IM0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,390 ✭✭✭IM0


    goose2005 wrote: »
    Does this apply to all the businesses in receipt of grants and tax breaks? And farmers in receipt of payments? And all the companies who pay their workers so little that the state has to step in to keep their employees financially secure?

    the business which get the tax breaks give back to the ecomomy by hiring employees [so thats x amount of people that are not being supported financially on the dole], giving employees money in wages, which is then spent in the wider economy through food, accomodation, entertainment/luxuries and everything LEGAL which money can buy, and as a result are giving back to the exchequer by paying taxes and vat on almost EVERYTHING they buy. the system works because it works if it didnt EVERYONE would be revolting, people in the minority are usually in the minority for a reason, because they are wrong. a little knowledge is one of the most dangerous things there are. ill informed protests are one of the best examples of this


  • #177
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    IM0 wrote: »
    the business which get the tax breaks give back to the ecomomy by hiring employees
    No, that's not so, and I really don't think this statement can go unchallenged - there is no onus on firms to stimulate demand in the economy (as opposed to allocate profits to shareholders) via corporation tax cuts or rebates. This is reflective of what we have seen throughout the supply-side reforms in Europe to date, and particularly in Ireland - that despite the fall in unit wage costs, investment in production has been falling at an alarming rate.

    I sometimes have a hard time understanding what it is that conservatives oppose about full employment programmes. They're usually the ones demanding that people be made work for their welfare, and cribbing about how welfare rates are only marginally lower than wages for work. Well lets put that to the test shall we. Lets put people to work doing socially and economically productive pursuits - building infrastructure and producing goods - can't hurt if there is already such a thin line between work and welfare, as some people at least claim. give them a days wage and let them work instead.


  • #178
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 55,264 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    No, that's not so, and I really don't think this statement can go unchallenged - there is no onus on firms to stimulate demand in the economy (as opposed to allocate profits to shareholders) via corporation tax cuts or rebates. This is reflective of what we have seen throughout the supply-side reforms in Europe to date, and particularly in Ireland - that despite the fall in unit wage costs, investment in production has been falling at an alarming rate.

    I sometimes have a hard time understanding what it is that conservatives oppose about full employment programmes. They're usually the ones demanding that people be made work for their welfare, and cribbing about how welfare rates are only marginally lower than wages for work. Well lets put that to the test shall we. Lets put people to work doing socially and economically productive pursuits - building infrastructure and producing goods - can't hurt if there is already such a thin line between work and welfare, as some people at least claim. give them a days wage and let them work instead.

    So you are saying that there is absolutely no correlation between lower costs for business through lower corporation tax and the number of people they employ in Ireland?

    Are you also saying there is no correlation between these companies having offices in Ireland in the first place and Ireland's low corporation tax rate?

    Are you saying it's coincidental that other european countries want us to raise our corporation tax rate? Do you think they want us to do this to benefit people in Ireland, or so they can attract this investment to their countries instead?


  • #179
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    awec wrote: »
    So you are saying that there is absolutely no correlation between lower costs for business through lower corporation tax and the number of people they employ in Ireland?
    Eh, no, I'm not saying that.

    I'm saying that lowering tax and the issuance of rebates is a very inefficient, if not a very risky way, of reducing unemployment, in that a firm is entirely within its rights to distribute its profits to shareholders or lodge them in a Bermudan bank account, or whatever it is they want to do. A firm acting alone, or even in loose co-ordination with others doesn't necessarily have the capacity nor the motivation, sometimes, to enhance economic demand throughout the economy.
    Are you also saying there is no correlation between these companies having offices in Ireland in the first place and Ireland's low corporation tax rate?
    It's not just the corporation rate, its the transfer pricing rules that exist here. And no, I'm not saying that at all. I'm sure you'd much prefer if I were.
    The rest of your questions are of course redundant,these questions having been answered in the negative.


  • #180
    323
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭323


    American friend an I watching on the news this morning, he laughed at the "tax havens" folks on the viking boat. Saying "You Europeans, even your protesters are afraid to show Obama as he is, he is in fact black" when seen protester wearing a white Obama mask.

    “Follow the trend lines, not the headlines,”



  • Advertisement
  • #181
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Cathal Cloch wrote: »
    Yeah. Pity it serves the finance sector, socialises debt and risk, and upholds the privileges and rights of corporations.

    Thats the problem with so-called 'libertarians'; they focus their 'critical' lens on the people at the bottom of the ****-heap and say 'get on with it' and tend to completely ignore the massive corporate welfare programs, the finance sector reaping ever greater profits, high unemployment for lack of jobs rather than idleness, socialised debts due to the failure of neo-liberalism, etc etc.

    Yawn.

    You probably typed that on a laptop right? Where did the technology and research come from to produce that laptop? The state? Cuba?

    Also, you do know that it was the state that bailed out the banks! Yet people want to give them more power and money to 'distribute' as they please? Libertarians will also look for the government to get out of the way of people, they do far too much and do far too much damage. All we get in response is the usual ad hominem attacks and no alternatives, apart from give me more money!


Advertisement