International 5th wave of French protests today(12/15/18), bigger or smaller?

Man, watching these protests I am struck by the differences between how individual cops maintain themselves.

At one point in the protests, I see this cop. He is waving at people, winking, smiling, giving folks the thumbs up. People are smiling at him, waiving back.

I just saw a cop pursue a protester pass the police line, initiate body cantact, push the protester 3 times, before the protester pushes back, and then watch the cops swarm in and assualt these guys until people ran up to support the protesters, followed by the cops dropping concussion grenades in a group of people, and rain about 30 cannisters of tear gas on them.

I watch the first cop, and am filled with hope for what could be. I watch the second cop, and wish the french people were armed, so it was a fair fight.

As a whole it makes me pessimistic AF. If all it takes is a few assholes to turn things violent, we are fucked in the US.
 
Man, watching these protests I am struck by the differences between how individual cops maintain themselves.

At one point in the protests, I see this cop. He is waving at people, winking, smiling, giving folks the thumbs up. People are smiling at him, waiving back.

I just saw a cop pursue a protester pass the police line, initiate body cantact, push the protester 3 times, before the protester pushes back, and then watch the cops swarm in and assualt these guys until people ran up to support the protesters, followed by the cops dropping concussion grenades in a group of people, and rain about 30 cannisters of tear gas on them.

I watch the first cop, and am filled with hope for what could be. I watch the second cop, and wish the french people were armed, so it was a fair fight.

As a whole it makes me pessimistic AF. If all it takes is a few assholes to turn things violent, we are fucked in the US.

Was the first cop a native Frenchman?

Was the second cop an immigrant?

The matters a lot.

Just as during the fall of the soviet government, the old ladies in the streets were looking into the buses of troops being shipped it. They yelled "nashi nashi" which means "ours ours". The troops were Russians and the Russian people in Moscow felt safe due to that. The Russians were worried about the govt shipping in Uzbek and kazak soldiers to gun down Russians in the streets.

Remember in Spain, that the most violent police stopping the "illegal" elections of Catalonia were all African immigrants who had no pity.

I'd not be suprised if the police blowing off protestors limbs using bombs over the weeks were immigrants trying to put down the natives rebellion. Immigrants want their unearned jobs and benefits from the elite. The elite want immigrants to put down the native people.
 
Was the first cop a native Frenchman?

Was the second cop an immigrant?

The matters a lot.

Just as during the fall of the soviet government, the old ladies in the streets were looking into the buses of troops being shipped it. They yelled "nashi nashi" which means "ours ours". The troops were Russians and the Russian people in Moscow felt safe due to that. The Russians were worried about the govt shipping in Uzbek and kazak soldiers to gun down Russians in the streets.

Remember in Spain, that the most violent police stopping the "illegal" elections of Catalonia were all African immigrants who had no pity.

I'd not be suprised if the police blowing off protestors limbs using bombs over the weeks were immigrants trying to put down the natives rebellion. Immigrants want their unearned jobs and benefits from the elite. The elite want immigrants to put down the native people.

I'll be honest with you man. In the US, we are a nation that needed immigrants for much of our history. Our culture is full of stories of the government giving free land grants to settle the west.

WASP has always been a thing in the US, but even prior to our civil rights movement, the supremacists only called for segregation. They even recognized the right of the dependents of black slaves to be here.

The vast majority in the US have no issue with Asian, Latino, native, or any other kind of American that has assimilated, so it is hard for me to understand where you are coming from.

My opposition of immigration is purely limited to the supply and demand of labor determining it's value.

If rising wages was causing hyper-inflation, I would be calling for immigrants to be brought in to put downward pressure on wages as a potential solution.

I also think too much Immigration is detrimental to assimilation, and that while their is no need for xenophobia, their is also a right for people to keep their own culture, in their own land.
 
What the fuck are you talking about? I had a discussion about this with a woman at work who has lived in France and is married to a Frenchman. These people don't appreciate how good they have it. The cost of living is a bit high in France but they have lots of social welfare goodies to make up for it. A 35 hour work week, tons of vacation time, strict work work rules that handcuff employers, cheap healthcare, etc, etc.
Sounds like things worth fighting for. Here in NA we're brainwashed into thinking we have to bust ass for 40 plus hours a week while being happy with wage stagnation and inflation. These guys are in the right.
 
I'll be honest with you man. In the US, we are a nation that needed immigrants for much of our history. Our culture is full of stories of the government giving free land grants to settle the west.

WASP has always been a thing in the US, but even prior to our civil rights movement, the supremacists only called for segregation. They even recognized the right of the dependents of black slaves to be here.

The vast majority in the US have no issue with Asian, Latino, native, or any other kind of American that has assimilated, so it is hard for me to understand where you are coming from.

My opposition of immigration is purely limited to the supply and demand of labor determining it's value.

If rising wages was causing hyper-inflation, I would be calling for immigrants to be brought in to put downward pressure on wages as a potential solution.

I also think too much Immigration is detrimental to assimilation, and that while their is no need for xenophobia, their is also a right for people to keep their own culture, in their own land.

Well thats the problem, you see as an immigrang living and working with different immigrants, what we have here is an immigration of ressentment, where the immigrant doesn't want to assimilate and thinks thats a country that asks for it is a racist country.

The mentality goes like this.
- The Us exploited our country.
- If it wasn't because of the west, we would have been just as rich.
- So we hate this country, but this country owe us something therefore I'll stay here until everything is even and I will have an advantage.

It becomes really crazy when you hear Saudi or Korean immigrants complaining about american racism, when they are part of one of the mst racist countries out there. Or hispanics acting like they are one identity, when these countries hate the guts of each other. Or Cambodian refugees thinking that they should have the same amount of wealth as people who lived for generations here.

I also tend to notice that second generation immigrants who dont assimilate are some of te biggest entitled assholes out there . And that includes Irish and Italians , like some irish americans in Boston that deserve some daily kick in the balls with their wannabe attitude.
 
Well thats the problem, you see as an immigrang living and working with different immigrants, what we have here is an immigration of ressentment, where the immigrant doesn't want to assimilate and thinks thats a country that asks for it is a racist country.

The mentality goes like this.
- The Us exploited our country.
- If it wasn't because of the west, we would have been just as rich.
- So we hate this country, but this country owe us something therefore I'll stay here until everything is even and I will have an advantage.

It becomes really crazy when you hear Saudi or Korean immigrants complaining about american racism, when they are part of one of the mst racist countries out there. Or hispanics acting like they are one identity, when these countries hate the guts of each other. Or Cambodian refugees thinking that they should have the same amount of wealth as people who lived for generations here.

I also tend to notice that second generation immigrants who dont assimilate are some of te biggest entitled assholes out there . And that includes Irish and Italians , like some irish americans in Boston that deserve some daily kick in the balls with their wannabe attitude.

I don't really worry about 1st generation immigrants. They will have more problems then the native population. I view that as a cost of the transaction.

Now, if second generation immigrants aren't assimilating that is a huge problem.

I haven't experienced that. In fact, what I see from 2nd generation immigrants at work is that they still buy in. I can respect that, but sometimes it causes problems in a union work environment. Hard to get someone to fight, when they are just thankful they weren't raised in a war zone.

I imagine though, that their is a wide variety of outcomes here, like with most things. I imagine working in a union shop with decent pay and benefits has some influence on what I experience.
 
Sounds like things worth fighting for. Here in NA we're brainwashed into thinking we have to bust ass for 40 plus hours a week while being happy with wage stagnation and inflation. These guys are in the right.

It's a trade off and I think they are asking for too much. At some point if you are an able bodied adult who wants a functioning society you have to trade value for what you get. I can understand taking care of the less able (those who are physically or mentally handicapped or elderly) on a sliding scale, but I think this has headed too far in the direction of able bodied adults acting like entitled children.
 
It's a trade off and I think they are asking for too much. At some point if you are an able bodied adult who wants a functioning society you have to trade value for what you get. I can understand taking care of the less able (those who are physically or mentally handicapped or elderly) on a sliding scale, but I think this has headed too far in the direction of able bodied adults acting like entitled children.
While I agree that there needs to be a balance between workers right/benefits and taxation/profit, I'm more on the side of the workers.

Have you heard about the protests in Hungary? The government just instituted mandatory overtime to the tune of 400 hours a week. In the context of this convo, what do you think of that?
 
While I agree that there needs to be a balance between workers right/benefits and taxation/profit, I'm more on the side of the workers.

Have you heard about the protests in Hungary? The government just instituted mandatory overtime to the tune of 400 hours a week. In the context of this convo, what do you think of that?

It's not mandatory. The law is emplyers can now allowed to ask for up to 400 hours of overtime

Employers are guaranteed 250 hours, and all overtime will be paid. Workeeek is 40 hours. 5 eight hour days
 
It's not mandatory. The law is emplyers can now allowed to ask for up to 400 hours of overtime
By my understanding if they ask and you say no then you're not protected from repercussions and the employer can strongarm you. Please correct me if I'm wrong as I haven't read up on it in detail.
 
It's a trade off and I think they are asking for too much. At some point if you are an able bodied adult who wants a functioning society you have to trade value for what you get. I can understand taking care of the less able (those who are physically or mentally handicapped or elderly) on a sliding scale, but I think this has headed too far in the direction of able bodied adults acting like entitled children.

When ever I read something like this, and want to rage at someone, I really need to remember that I used to agree with you.

Do you think the world is more wealthy, or less wealthy, then in 1970?

If your answer is more wealthy, then do you realize that when wages are adjusted for inflation, that the average worker in Europe or the US, has less wealth?

So just to summarize. The pie has gotten bigger, but your slice of that pie has gotten smaller.

Are you really OK with that, or do you just not believe it is true?
 
While I agree that there needs to be a balance between workers right/benefits and taxation/profit, I'm more on the side of the workers.

Have you heard about the protests in Hungary? The government just instituted mandatory overtime to the tune of 400 hours a week. In the context of this convo, what do you think of that?

It sound likes paradise.

giphy.gif


I joke, I joke.

In general I'm for freedom of choice, as long as it doesn't lead to bad outcomes. I don't know enough about what is going on in Hungary to judge that policy, though it sounds very unappealing with how you are presenting it here. But I have to question how its possible to require 400 hours a week of overtime when a week only contains 168 hours.
 
It sound likes paradise.

giphy.gif


I joke, I joke.

In general I'm for freedom of choice, as long as it doesn't lead to bad outcomes. I don't know enough about what is going on in Hungary to judge that policy, though it sounds very unappealing with how you are presenting it here. But I have to question how its possible to require 400 hours a week of overtime when a week only contains 168 hours.
Oops. Per year.
 
When ever I read something like this, and want to rage at someone, I really need to remember that I used to agree with you.

Do you think the world is more wealthy, or less wealthy, then in 1970?

If your answer is more wealthy, then do you realize that when wages are adjusted for inflation, that the average worker in Europe or the US, has less wealth?

So just to summarize. The pie has gotten bigger, but your slice of that pie has gotten smaller.

Are you really OK with that, or do you just not believe it is true?

It has gotten richer no doubt, but I think you are looking at the wrong measurements. Virtually every poor and middle class person in Europe and the US is doing far better than his 1970s counterpart. They have more and better cars, refrigerators and other appliances, computers, cell phones, have better healthcare and a long laundry list of everything else. They may be poorer relative to the rich, but that does not mean they are worse off than they would have been in 1970. If they are doing worse then the average waistline wouldn't have grown so much.
 
It has gotten richer no doubt, but I think you are looking at the wrong measurements. Virtually every poor and middle class person in Europe and the US is doing far better than his 1970s counterpart. They have more and better cars, refrigerators and other appliances, computers, cell phones, have better healthcare and a long laundry list of everything else. They may be poorer relative to the rich, but that does not mean they are worse off than they would have been in 1970. If they are doing worse then the average waistline wouldn't have grown so much.

Little thought experiment for you. Would you rather be the richest person ever before the dark ages ended, or the poorest person in the current industrialized world?

I think the fact that this is a hard question to answer, shows that technology is not wealth. It is technology.
 
Little thought experiment for you. Would you rather be the richest person ever before the dark ages ended, or the poorest person in the current industrialized world?

I think the fact that this is a hard question to answer, shows that technology is not wealth. It is technology.

It's not a hard question for me to answer.

As a sidelight your thought experiment reminds me of Satan in John Milton's "Paradise Lost", "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."

I can think up clever thought experiments too, but I'll answer you. I would rather be the poorest person in the current industrialized world, and I would prefer to not live in the dark ages or any time before the 20th century at all, poor or rich. As long as I can have at least my current level of intelligence, self-control, motivation and outlook on life I think I will do quite well. And I'm not claiming to be some kind of super achiever either.

If I lived prior to the 20th century my odds of ending seriously crippled or dead before the age of 30 are much higher. Also the opportunities available are more scarce because of the technology you mentioned. They require not only more energy, but more violence to exploit and protect than is required today. That may sound like a joke given your outlook but I think an honest reading of history and statistics supports my contention.

There may have been less of a gap between rich and poor in the past, but that does not mean that the poor were doing better. That just means that the overall pie was smaller so the gap was also smaller.

Yes, it's true that technology is not wealth, but it's also true that technology opens up opportunities and allows us to be more productive and to use resources more efficiently and to access resources that were impossible before. This expands the overall size of the pie and the poor are going to do better because there is more opportunity.

That is not to say that there are not serous problems,. I also acknowledge that there may be limits to what the current form of capitalism can accomplish. But I don't believe that the wealth gap is the cause. I also don't believe that government redistribution is an effective long term strategy.
 
It's not a hard question for me to answer.

As a sidelight your thought experiment reminds me of Satan in John Milton's "Paradise Lost", "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."

I can think up clever thought experiments too, but I'll answer you. I would rather be the poorest person in the current industrialized world, and I would prefer to not live in the dark ages or any time before the 20th century at all, poor or rich. As long as I can have at least my current level of intelligence, self-control, motivation and outlook on life I think I will do quite well. And I'm not claiming to be some kind of super achiever either.

If I lived prior to the 20th century my odds of ending seriously crippled or dead before the age of 30 are much higher. Also the opportunities available are more scarce because of the technology you mentioned. They require not only more energy, but more violence to exploit and protect than is required today. That may sound like a joke given your outlook but I think an honest reading of history and statistics supports my contention.

There may have been less of a gap between rich and poor in the past, but that does not mean that the poor were doing better. That just means that the overall pie was smaller so the gap was also smaller.

Yes, it's true that technology is not wealth, but it's also true that technology opens up opportunities and allows us to be more productive and to use resources more efficiently and to access resources that were impossible before. This expands the overall size of the pie and the poor are going to do better because there is more opportunity.

That is not to say that there are not serous problems,. I also acknowledge that there may be limits to what the current form of capitalism can accomplish. But I don't believe that the wealth gap is the cause. I also don't believe that government redistribution is an effective long term strategy.

I appreciate the answer, but the answer doesn't really matter. The idea that two sane people could have different answers to that question, shows it doesn't have a clear logical answer. It's more a matter of preference.

If technology was wealth, then being the richest person in any world would be preferable to being the poorest in any world.

If a person picks being the poorest person in the current industrialized world, they are literally choosing technology over wealth.

The fact that I have cell phone, which I never really wanted, and don't place a high value on, does not make up for me losing my pension.
 
Update for the WR

Another death, raising the toll to 10

New video is out of police pointing guns at demonstrators. The video shows the police in question threw explosives into a group of protesters. The same type of bombs that have been blowing off protester limbs for weeks.

The protesters attacked the police back with bricks. They should have had the same type of bombs but they don't.

The police pull their gun and point it at the crowd.

The video is galavanizing the state and also the protesters. Shows that if protestors fight back against state bombs, they run the threat of being gunned down.

Due to MSM blackout, the revolution will not be televised!!!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...xth-week-chaos-police-pull-gun-protestors/amp
 
Back
Top