Sprinkler Systems
Uhaul move
Lawn care
Roses and trees
Ford Parts
Chrysler Parts
Lake Powell
New IPod Touch Apps
New IPhone Apps
IPhone Apps
IPad Information
IPad Apps
Android APPS
Android Games APPS
Android Systems
Android Tablets APPS and Beyond
Smartphone Apps
Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools
Tablet PC
Car Sharing Car Leasing
Tabler Pc
Fly Fishing
Toyota Cars
Vacation Rentals
Stock market
NYSE
SSE Stock
Freight & Shipping News
Gluten
Lactose
Gout
My Coupon Life
Campgrounds Check
Outdoor
Kitchen Design and Redoo
Bath Remodeling
Palm Springs
Las Vegas Vacation Tipps
Lake Powell Boating
Homes for lease
|
Finances / Finanzen » uk.finance » The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain.
| The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375958] |
Do, 30 März 2006 18:50 |
|
We can't afford complacency. They're rioting in France but the problems
building up in Britain may result in even worse consequences argues
Dalrymple in The Times .....................
The Times March 30, 2006
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2110039,00.html
The striking idiocy of youth
Theodore Dalrymple
THE SIGHT OF MILLIONS of Frenchmen, predominantly young, demonstrating
in deep sympathy and solidarity with themselves, is one that will cause
amusement and satisfaction on the English side of the Channel. Everyone
enjoys the troubles of his neighbours. And at least our public service
strikers just stay away from work, and spend the day peacefully
performing the rites of their religion, DIY, and not making a terrible
nuisance of themselves. In fact, many of them are probably less of a
public nuisance if they stay at home than if they go to work.
Of course, demonstrating in huge numbers is what the French do from
time to time. We should never forget that to break a shop window for
the good of humanity is one of the greatest pleasures known to Man.
Trying to topple governments by shouting insults is also great fun.
We like to think of France as having a deplorably statist and centrally
controlled economy, while the French like to think of Britain as a land
of savage liberalism (in French parlance, the two words are as
inseparable as Siamese twins), divided unequally between plutocrats and
beggars. In fact, the two countries differ far less than is often
supposed. While it is true that there remain some differences -
despite Gordon Brown's best efforts, the British labour market is
still more flexible than the French - the similarities grow daily
more striking (as it were).
The ultimate cause of the demonstrations and strikes in the two
countries is the same: the State has made promises that it is
increasingly unable to keep. It has pursued policies that were bound in
the end to produce not just cracks but fissures that could no longer be
papered over. The main difference is that while Dominque de Villepin is
tentatively dragging France, albeit kicking and screaming, and with
every likelihood of failure, in the right direction, Mr Brown is still
stuck on the royal road to disaster, for which the British people, but
not of course Mr Brown, will ultimately pay very dearly. When the crash
comes, the social dislocation in Britain will make French disaffection
seem positively genteel.
Whether they know it or not, the people on the streets in France were
demonstrating to keep the youth of the banlieues - who recently so
amused the world for an entire fortnight with their arsonist antics -
exactly where they are, namely hopeless, unemployed and feeling
betrayed. For unless the French labour market is liberalised, they will
never find employment and therefore integration into French society.
You have only to speak to a few small businessmen or artisans in France
- the petits bourgeois so vehemently despised by the snobbish
intellectuals - to find out why this should be so. The French labour
regulations make employment of untried persons completely uneconomic
for them.
It is often pointed out that French unemployment under the age of 26 is
the highest in Europe, running at about 25 per cent. Moreover, in the
banlieues it is 50 per cent. These banlieues are homes to millions of
people, disproportionately young. It follows - does it not? - that
there must be a considerable section of the young population in which
unemployment is less than a quarter, actually much less. One would
hardly have to be de Tocqueville to guess in which section of the young
population the unemployment was less: the section from which the
demonstrators, or at least their leaders and agents provocateurs, are
drawn. In an increasingly desperate situation, the demonstrators are so
afraid of the future that they want to hang on to their privileges and
job security by hook or by crook, even if it means that the youth of
the banlieues will eventually have to be kept in order by the
Compagnies R=E9publicaines de S=E9curit=E9, the much-feared riot police,
the CRS. There is nothing idealistic or generous about the
demonstrators, just as there wasn't in 1968.
There are of course deeper but intangible problems that are even more
difficult to solve than the inflexibility of the labour market. If you
speak to small businessmen in France, they will tell you that the young
in any case do not want to do the kind of work of which there is no
shortage. At a time of such high unemployment, artisans have no one
willing to be trained by them, even if they are willing to take the
risk by taking them on. This is even though such artisans are so
overwhelmed by work that a carpenter, for example, is booked up for
more than a year in advance and can charge almost anything he likes.
We have no reason to condescend to the French, however, for the British
are in fundamentally the same boat, with a few extra problems of our
own. The vast and fraudulent expansion of tertiary education, which
leaves students indebted for their own useless education, is merely a
means by which the Government disguises youth unemployment and keeps
young people off the streets. Contrary to government propaganda,
unemployment is not low in Britain: but it is now called sickness.
Our economy is corruptly creating public service jobs - endless
co-ordinators of facilitation and facilitators of co-ordination - but
not many in the private sector, the only true measure of economic
health and growth. Any fool can create public sector jobs, and Mr Brown
has done so: but not even the most brilliant man can make them
economically productive in the long term.
The British economy has all the brilliance of a fish rotting by
moonlight, and eventually - to change the metaphor slightly - the
bill will come in. And since so large a proportion of the population is
now dependent, wholly or partly, on the State, the bill will be a large
one, not only in financial terms but in social terms as well. We will
need our very own CRS.
It can't be said either that we won't deserve what we get. It is
we, after all, who have listened to the urgings of demagogic confidence
tricksters, and believed their promises of irreconcilable goods. We
should have paid attention instead to the wise words of Benjamin
Franklin that apply as much to economics as to politics. He who gives
up freedom for security, he said, will end up with neither.
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=3 D27020
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375960 ] |
Do, 30 März 2006 20:18 |
|
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:50:49 -0800, Crowley wrote:
> We can't afford complacency. They're rioting in France but the problems
> building up in Britain may result in even worse consequences argues
> Dalrymple in The Times .....................
>
> The Times March 30, 2006
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2110039,00.html
>
> The striking idiocy of youth
>
> Theodore Dalrymple
>
> THE SIGHT OF MILLIONS of Frenchmen, predominantly young, demonstrating
> in deep sympathy and solidarity with themselves, is one that will cause
> amusement and satisfaction on the English side of the Channel. Everyone
> enjoys the troubles of his neighbours. And at least our public service
> strikers just stay away from work, and spend the day peacefully
> performing the rites of their religion, DIY, and not making a terrible
> nuisance of themselves. In fact, many of them are probably less of a
> public nuisance if they stay at home than if they go to work.
>
> Of course, demonstrating in huge numbers is what the French do from
> time to time. We should never forget that to break a shop window for
> the good of humanity is one of the greatest pleasures known to Man.
> Trying to topple governments by shouting insults is also great fun.
>
> We like to think of France as having a deplorably statist and centrally
> controlled economy, while the French like to think of Britain as a land
> of savage liberalism (in French parlance, the two words are as
> inseparable as Siamese twins), divided unequally between plutocrats and
> beggars. In fact, the two countries differ far less than is often
> supposed. While it is true that there remain some differences -
> despite Gordon Brown's best efforts, the British labour market is
> still more flexible than the French - the similarities grow daily
> more striking (as it were).
>
> The ultimate cause of the demonstrations and strikes in the two
> countries is the same: the State has made promises that it is
> increasingly unable to keep. It has pursued policies that were bound in
> the end to produce not just cracks but fissures that could no longer be
> papered over. The main difference is that while Dominque de Villepin is
> tentatively dragging France, albeit kicking and screaming, and with
> every likelihood of failure, in the right direction, Mr Brown is still
> stuck on the royal road to disaster, for which the British people, but
> not of course Mr Brown, will ultimately pay very dearly. When the crash
> comes, the social dislocation in Britain will make French disaffection
> seem positively genteel.
>
> Whether they know it or not, the people on the streets in France were
> demonstrating to keep the youth of the banlieues - who recently so
> amused the world for an entire fortnight with their arsonist antics -
> exactly where they are, namely hopeless, unemployed and feeling
> betrayed. For unless the French labour market is liberalised, they will
> never find employment and therefore integration into French society.
> You have only to speak to a few small businessmen or artisans in France
> - the petits bourgeois so vehemently despised by the snobbish
> intellectuals - to find out why this should be so. The French labour
> regulations make employment of untried persons completely uneconomic
> for them.
>
> It is often pointed out that French unemployment under the age of 26 is
> the highest in Europe, running at about 25 per cent. Moreover, in the
> banlieues it is 50 per cent. These banlieues are homes to millions of
> people, disproportionately young. It follows - does it not? - that
> there must be a considerable section of the young population in which
> unemployment is less than a quarter, actually much less. One would
> hardly have to be de Tocqueville to guess in which section of the young
> population the unemployment was less: the section from which the
> demonstrators, or at least their leaders and agents provocateurs, are
> drawn. In an increasingly desperate situation, the demonstrators are so
> afraid of the future that they want to hang on to their privileges and
> job security by hook or by crook, even if it means that the youth of
> the banlieues will eventually have to be kept in order by the
> Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité, the much-feared riot police,
> the CRS. There is nothing idealistic or generous about the
> demonstrators, just as there wasn't in 1968.
>
> There are of course deeper but intangible problems that are even more
> difficult to solve than the inflexibility of the labour market. If you
> speak to small businessmen in France, they will tell you that the young
> in any case do not want to do the kind of work of which there is no
> shortage. At a time of such high unemployment, artisans have no one
> willing to be trained by them, even if they are willing to take the
> risk by taking them on. This is even though such artisans are so
> overwhelmed by work that a carpenter, for example, is booked up for
> more than a year in advance and can charge almost anything he likes.
>
> We have no reason to condescend to the French, however, for the British
> are in fundamentally the same boat, with a few extra problems of our
> own. The vast and fraudulent expansion of tertiary education, which
> leaves students indebted for their own useless education, is merely a
> means by which the Government disguises youth unemployment and keeps
> young people off the streets. Contrary to government propaganda,
> unemployment is not low in Britain: but it is now called sickness.
>
> Our economy is corruptly creating public service jobs - endless
> co-ordinators of facilitation and facilitators of co-ordination - but
> not many in the private sector, the only true measure of economic
> health and growth. Any fool can create public sector jobs, and Mr Brown
> has done so: but not even the most brilliant man can make them
> economically productive in the long term.
>
> The British economy has all the brilliance of a fish rotting by
> moonlight, and eventually - to change the metaphor slightly - the
> bill will come in. And since so large a proportion of the population is
> now dependent, wholly or partly, on the State, the bill will be a large
> one, not only in financial terms but in social terms as well. We will
> need our very own CRS.
>
> It can't be said either that we won't deserve what we get. It is
> we, after all, who have listened to the urgings of demagogic confidence
> tricksters, and believed their promises of irreconcilable goods. We
> should have paid attention instead to the wise words of Benjamin
> Franklin that apply as much to economics as to politics. He who gives
> up freedom for security, he said, will end up with neither.
>
> http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=2 7020
****************************
How many of those in France from the banlieux were male?
.. How many were immigrants?
How many were female.
What I didn't notice till my daughter pointed it out..none of those
involved in donations for peerages were women in the pix on the front of
the telegraph. AND not many feature on the "most wanted posters of the
major cop forces:-)
******************************
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375961 ] |
Do, 30 März 2006 20:34 |
|
"Welsh Witch" <ww [at] nospam.never.cop> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.03.30.18.18.00.328725 [at] nospam.never.cop...
> ****************************
> How many of those in France from the banlieux were male?
> . How many were immigrants?
> How many were female.
> What I didn't notice till my daughter pointed it out..none of those
> involved in donations for peerages were women in the pix on the front of
> the telegraph. AND not many feature on the "most wanted posters of the
> major cop forces:-)
> ******************************
Sigh. The feminists told us women could have a family *and* a life of
crime... how wrong they were.
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375978 ] |
Do, 30 März 2006 23:17 |
|
"Crowley" <crowalas1234 [at] yahoo.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de news:
1143737449.931953.222220 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
We can't afford complacency. They're rioting in France but the problems
building up in Britain may result in even worse consequences argues
Dalrymple in The Times .....................
They are rioting in USA, it is not ?
http://jameshudnall.com/archives/images/911.jpg
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375979 ] |
Do, 30 März 2006 23:26 |
|
"DVH" <dvh [at] vhvhvhvh.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
HbKdncJhHb7gubHZRVnygw [at] bt.com...
>
> "Welsh Witch" <ww [at] nospam.never.cop> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.03.30.18.18.00.328725 [at] nospam.never.cop...
>
>> ****************************
>> How many of those in France from the banlieux were male?
>> . How many were immigrants?
>> How many were female.
>> What I didn't notice till my daughter pointed it out..none of those
>> involved in donations for peerages were women in the pix on the front of
>> the telegraph. AND not many feature on the "most wanted posters of the
>> major cop forces:-)
>> ******************************
>
> Sigh. The feminists told us women could have a family *and* a life of
> crime... how wrong they were.
>
>
According the French Fox news, they are rioting in NY
http://jameshudnall.com/archives/images/911.jpg
and in London also
http://www.greatdreams.com/london-bombing.jpg
I hope you are well, my dear friend
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #375994 ] |
Fr, 31 März 2006 03:01 |
|
<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:442c4d05$0$21289$8fcfb975 [at] news.wanadoo.fr...
>
> "DVH" <dvh [at] vhvhvhvh.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> HbKdncJhHb7gubHZRVnygw [at] bt.com...
>>
>> "Welsh Witch" <ww [at] nospam.never.cop> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2006.03.30.18.18.00.328725 [at] nospam.never.cop...
>>
>>> ****************************
>>> How many of those in France from the banlieux were male?
>>> . How many were immigrants?
>>> How many were female.
>>> What I didn't notice till my daughter pointed it out..none of those
>>> involved in donations for peerages were women in the pix on the front of
>>> the telegraph. AND not many feature on the "most wanted posters of the
>>> major cop forces:-)
>>> ******************************
>>
>> Sigh. The feminists told us women could have a family *and* a life of
>> crime... how wrong they were.
>>
>>
> According the French Fox news, they are rioting in NY
>
> http://jameshudnall.com/archives/images/911.jpg
>
> and in London also
>
> http://www.greatdreams.com/london-bombing.jpg
>
> I hope you are well, my dear friend
>
Wow!!!
Do you have any of Tianinmen Square?
|
|
|
| Re: The disaster to come. It may be bad in France but it's going to be worse in Britain. [message #377747 ] |
Di, 04 April 2006 20:40 |
|
In uk.finance Crowley <crowalas1234 [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> We can't afford complacency. They're rioting in France but the problems
> building up in Britain may result in even worse consequences argues
> Dalrymple in The Times .....................
> The Times March 30, 2006
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2110039,00.html
> The striking idiocy of youth
> Theodore Dalrymple
The more I read by Dalrymple, the more I like him. He never calls a
spade a digging implement.
FoFP
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 19 03:26:58 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,02608 Sekunden |
