Is the end nigh for the Euro? [vol. 2]
Discussion
WhoseGeneration said:
You really don't understand, the "no longer workers" have to be able to afford the fruits of the new technologies.
In a world where the prevailing orthodoxy is that all should have more.
That "more" is not just an iPhone or tablet it's more foreign holidays, a new car every two years, refitting the house every five years, giving the kids all the toys advertised.
Well, whatever you say, we seem, at least in the UK, to have stalled with regards to consumption.
Also, I'm old enough and libertarian enough to worry about technology and the possibilty it provides for denying individual freedom, which was why I mentioned assisted suicide.
They said Ned Ludd was an idiot boy,In a world where the prevailing orthodoxy is that all should have more.
That "more" is not just an iPhone or tablet it's more foreign holidays, a new car every two years, refitting the house every five years, giving the kids all the toys advertised.
Well, whatever you say, we seem, at least in the UK, to have stalled with regards to consumption.
Also, I'm old enough and libertarian enough to worry about technology and the possibilty it provides for denying individual freedom, which was why I mentioned assisted suicide.
That all he could do was wreck and destroy,
The history books tell you Ned's reason had fled,
When he bashed the monster engine till it was dead,
Ned Ludd, Ned Ludd,
He turned to his workmates and said: 'Death to Machines'.
Lyrics by Robert Calvert.
The conversation we are having now, has been had many times in the past, by many people, and will be had many times again.
You can not stop the world from changing, only grab the passing handles of opportunity and make sure you are the one standing on top, though being mindful of those around you because there is no point on being the master stig if all you have is a dump.
There has always been and always will be people who are surplus to economic requirements. While there may be problems with our current benefits system, it is the mark of a civilized society that we do not leave them to starve.
Europe is not growing now because of stupid decisions like the euro and because of politicians, those false prophets who tried to borrow money to hide the fact that we are but one part in a bigger world. That world is still growing even if we are not. This too will come to pass.
Euthanasia is a tricky hole, it's one small step from your right to die to your responsibility to die, lest you burden your children. There is no easy answer.
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Thursday 24th May 22:20
Tartan Pixie said:
Euthanasia is a tricky hole, it's one small step from your right to die to your responsibility to die, lest you burden your children. There is no easy answer.
For some it is the way to 'save the planet' and a would be policy rather than a matter for personal choice.Shedding a few billion souls here and there, preferably within a generation, would make them feel more comfortable about humanity's alleged desecration of it's home.
Clearly humanity, as a democratic entity, is confused about its policies.
Edited by LongQ on Thursday 24th May 22:49
Tartan Pixie said:
They said Ned Ludd was an idiot boy,
That all he could do was wreck and destroy,
The history books tell you Ned's reason had fled,
When he bashed the monster engine till it was dead,
Ned Ludd, Ned Ludd,
He turned to his workmates and said: 'Death to Machines'.
Lyrics by Robert Calvert.
The conversation we are having now, has been had many times in the past, by many people, and will be had many times again.
You can not stop the world from changing, only grab the passing handles of opportunity and make sure you are the one standing on top, though being mindful of those around you because there is no point on being the master stig if all you have is a dump.
There has always been and always will be people who are surplus to economic requirements. While there may be problems with our current benefits system, it is the mark of a civilized society that we do not leave them to starve.
Europe is not growing now because of stupid decision like the euro and because of politicians, those false prophets who tried to borrow money to hide the fact that we are but one part in a bigger world. That world is still growing even if we are not. This too will come to pass.
Euthanasia is a tricky hole, it's one small step from your right to die to your responsibility to die, lest you burden your children. There is no easy answer.
Have you considered that it might be different this time, that "the past is no (longer a) guide to the future".That all he could do was wreck and destroy,
The history books tell you Ned's reason had fled,
When he bashed the monster engine till it was dead,
Ned Ludd, Ned Ludd,
He turned to his workmates and said: 'Death to Machines'.
Lyrics by Robert Calvert.
The conversation we are having now, has been had many times in the past, by many people, and will be had many times again.
You can not stop the world from changing, only grab the passing handles of opportunity and make sure you are the one standing on top, though being mindful of those around you because there is no point on being the master stig if all you have is a dump.
There has always been and always will be people who are surplus to economic requirements. While there may be problems with our current benefits system, it is the mark of a civilized society that we do not leave them to starve.
Europe is not growing now because of stupid decision like the euro and because of politicians, those false prophets who tried to borrow money to hide the fact that we are but one part in a bigger world. That world is still growing even if we are not. This too will come to pass.
Euthanasia is a tricky hole, it's one small step from your right to die to your responsibility to die, lest you burden your children. There is no easy answer.
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Thursday 24th May 22:16
Feck me, you're younger and you're relying on past theories and sayings.
I've tried to tell you that, at any time, what the soothsayers foretell, is to be considered with more than a pinch of salt.
You try to have it both ways, look after oneself and stop others starving.
Mutually incompatible, which is the, at heart, problem facing the Eurozone.
Derek Chevalier said:
LongQ said:
With respect, it is the case in the UK if you have savings or planned pensions and investments.
Look at the FSA report where is said that ~45% of mortgage holders had no moneyh left after bills before the bubble burst. Millions of pople have been bailed out.Could you explain how this means, that millions of people have been bailed out, please?
Derek Chevalier said:
LongQ said:
With respect, it is the case in the UK if you have savings or planned pensions and investments.
Look at the FSA report where is said that ~45% of mortgage holders had no moneyh left after bills before the bubble burst. Millions of pople have been bailed out.Of course the younger ones, presumably still in work of some sort for the most part, have some potential for partial recovery whereas the older one have less. Maybe none. Whatever they thought they ahad saved for their old age care (or to pass on to the children/taxman when they die) will have been sucked into the black hole to disappear who knows where.
The younger ones may be grateful now (though probably not appreciative) but will themselves be rapidly heading towards the same financial pit.
Meanwhile the world population of Superyachts grows apace, the price of expensive property in London and other major cities increases out of line with any other values and auctions of vanity objects - cars, art work, other things that are 'collectable' - report record values at the top of the market with some surprising bids. Maybe the black hole is not so opaque after all.
PRTVR said:
I have paid into a private pension from when I was 20 and fingers crossed if the government do not raid the pension fund again I will be Ok but my point is that there is a lot of people out there that have not, take for example a scaffolder working at heights hard on the knees and hips is it realistic to expect them to work longer? And shift workers, I read a report from Sweden that every year you work shifts over 56 it takes 1 year of the end of your life, not to take these different factors into account will make it unfair.
I totally agree but one thing I've learned is live isn't fair. I've seen and had more the my fair share of redundancies over the years - most of the people, including myself, were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Live is a series of peaks and troughs, not a continuous upwards path to retirement. If you're lucky the peak will be just before retirement, if you are really unlucky the trough will be just before retirement. It would be madness to try to introduce a system where certain jobs have different retirement ages to others. PRTVR said:
You talk of just getting another job, I take it from that comment that you live in the south?
In the north east its not that easy, I remember when my daughter went to work in swindon due to there being no jobs around here, and each shop we went in was asking over the tanoy for people to come and work for them, it is a different world, perhaps that is one of the problems ,
you talk of friends having problems getting staff it may just be that the factories are in the wrong place,
Along with the state of our universities, my wife visited our local one,she came back shaking her head at the lack of common sense along with very little intelligence when dealing with the students.
Well spotted. I move to the South East in the early 90's recession when work in the West Country was nye on impossible to find. I do think the government should be trying to support the growth of manufacturing in the regions with higher unemployment. The policy of previous governments of maintaining employment in these regions via government organisations was always unsustainable and high risk - better 50 businesses employing 100 people than 1 large on employing 5,000.In the north east its not that easy, I remember when my daughter went to work in swindon due to there being no jobs around here, and each shop we went in was asking over the tanoy for people to come and work for them, it is a different world, perhaps that is one of the problems ,
you talk of friends having problems getting staff it may just be that the factories are in the wrong place,
Along with the state of our universities, my wife visited our local one,she came back shaking her head at the lack of common sense along with very little intelligence when dealing with the students.
I grew up in Wales in the 80's and in those days there was a lot of investment in infrastructure and subsidies to bring electronics companies to the areas which helped maintain employment as the mines closed down around us.
I stopped working in manufacturing in the early 2000's when it was clear that the government of the time weren't supporting it and all my customers were moving their production overseas to East Europe or the Far East.
I agree that lack of students with appropriate skills and common sense is a big problem as well. There are some very bright people out there but the "cash for people" funding given to universities (and the expansion of higher education) has meant that many people who weren't really suited to that option were given places. Mentioning no names but I stopped interviewing students from one university as none of the students I'd interviewed were anywhere near fit for employment.
PRTVR said:
As for the company forward planning I chuckled at that, most companies fire fight and the people are just number in a spread sheet, I remember a few years ago a friend was leaving the company, on the friday and on the afternoon he received a phone call from HR saying that he still had 4 hours still to work and would have to come in on Monday,this was a worker who had worked for them for 30 years, as I said numbers on a spread sheet.
It's true there are some poor companies and employers out there, best to vote with your feet and go somewhere that values it's employees and is organised - there are also plenty of good companies too. In my experience European companies are better at this and more employee focussed than British or American ones (though there are plenty of good ones from these countries as well I'm sure). My experience also is that generally good employers are able to attract the best employees.I do accept that this will be harder in areas such as the North East where employment opportunities are harder to find.
WhoseGeneration said:
Apology for quoting the whole post but what it demonstrates, from those who Steffan references, is the belief in perpetual growth.
Perpetual growth is, without doubt, what is required to meet what has become the avowed aim of most politicians across this World.
Growth in the producing countries to feed the consuming countries.
As bosscerbera has previously pointed out, much of this ia also due to the belief in the value of each Human on this planet, it's the overriding belief, manifested in the Human Rights declarations we're all aware of.
This perpetual growth, of course, is also basic to the requirements of those who produce, that's Capitalism.
What we now see, not previously really considered by the West, is the growth of the East and the challenge to growth in the West.
Me, I just wonder how the current 7 billion will be able to consume as much as me, now and into the future.
DJRC probably provides the best advice, protect yourself.
Then, I also tend to the view that any species exploit their environment until there are too many of that species such that the environment can no longer support that species.
Are we approaching that point, in terms of all that we discuss here?
Personally I think we're going down the other side now with declining consumption rather than growth. What isn't foreseeable to me is how inflation will impact that - i.e. we will decline vs the east for sure, but how our domestic economy will fare vs the Eurozone and the US I don't know. Perpetual growth is, without doubt, what is required to meet what has become the avowed aim of most politicians across this World.
Growth in the producing countries to feed the consuming countries.
As bosscerbera has previously pointed out, much of this ia also due to the belief in the value of each Human on this planet, it's the overriding belief, manifested in the Human Rights declarations we're all aware of.
This perpetual growth, of course, is also basic to the requirements of those who produce, that's Capitalism.
What we now see, not previously really considered by the West, is the growth of the East and the challenge to growth in the West.
Me, I just wonder how the current 7 billion will be able to consume as much as me, now and into the future.
DJRC probably provides the best advice, protect yourself.
Then, I also tend to the view that any species exploit their environment until there are too many of that species such that the environment can no longer support that species.
Are we approaching that point, in terms of all that we discuss here?
The laws of economics made it thus that all countries will balance out theoretically in the end.
As you and DJRC suggest, all you can do is protect yourself, at the end of the day I don't read this thread for entertainment (well not too much) but to try to get myself ahead of the curve in how this will play out and therefore how I can best protect and maximise my own interests and family.
I'm a real doom monger I know but I find that the three most interesting historical events I find myself looking to learn from right now are the fall of the Roman Empire/Mayans, etc the thirties/rise of fascism and second world war and the extinction of dinosaurs.
It's going to get very messy before it gets better.
GBB said:
It would be madness to try to introduce a system where certain jobs have different retirement ages to others.
Well of course there are already some jobs where age related retirement is mandatory or others where it is very likely. If one knows about that risk for the job and the potential for retirement option to shift, leaving an income gap, one might be able to plan for it far enough in advance. GBB said:
It's true there are some poor companies and employers out there, best to vote with your feet and go somewhere that values it's employees and is organised - there are also plenty of good companies too. In my experience European companies are better at this and more employee focussed than British or American ones (though there are plenty of good ones from these countries as well I'm sure). My experience also is that generally good employers are able to attract the best employees.
I do accept that this will be harder in areas such as the North East where employment opportunities are harder to find.
How would you know where to go? Would they have enough vacancies for all?I do accept that this will be harder in areas such as the North East where employment opportunities are harder to find.
Perhaps EU laws, as applied by the European companies, make them appear more supportive of their workforce but I have to say that my experience, observed working alongside staff in European owned organisations, suggests attitudes to staff have been mixed. Parent country coltures may (or may not) be in play.
Of course your time frame overlaps mine a little so things may not be the same these days. However one has to wonder whether they mostly seem different because thay have been cushion, within the EU/EZ, in ways that have allowed them to follow Brussels' led guidance that favours employees more than, say, UK laws demand. The further thought is about whether that will continue to be the case as things change.
LongQ said:
How would you know where to go? Would they have enough vacancies for all?
Perhaps EU laws, as applied by the European companies, make them appear more supportive of their workforce but I have to say that my experience, observed working alongside staff in European owned organisations, suggests attitudes to staff have been mixed. Parent country coltures may (or may not) be in play.
Of course your time frame overlaps mine a little so things may not be the same these days. However one has to wonder whether they mostly seem different because thay have been cushion, within the EU/EZ, in ways that have allowed them to follow Brussels' led guidance that favours employees more than, say, UK laws demand. The further thought is about whether that will continue to be the case as things change.
In terms of where, then due diligence is always needed. Talking to existing and former employees and also treating the interview as an assessment of them as much as of you. My biggest mistake was where I was interviewed and appointed by my bosses boss, I got on with them well but not with the person I was assigned to work for.Perhaps EU laws, as applied by the European companies, make them appear more supportive of their workforce but I have to say that my experience, observed working alongside staff in European owned organisations, suggests attitudes to staff have been mixed. Parent country coltures may (or may not) be in play.
Of course your time frame overlaps mine a little so things may not be the same these days. However one has to wonder whether they mostly seem different because thay have been cushion, within the EU/EZ, in ways that have allowed them to follow Brussels' led guidance that favours employees more than, say, UK laws demand. The further thought is about whether that will continue to be the case as things change.
A difference is that my "best" employers were large multinationals competing in highly competitive industries where the quality of staff was an important factor in company performence. EU regulations may have helped but the most important factor to them was finding the best/right employee in the first place (some of the selection processes were long winded to say the least and not exactly cheap (flying to Holland for assessment centre solely for myself)) but once they found good employees they did try to develop them keep hold of them if possible. For both such companies there was a high level of empowerment and self-motivation to get the job done which suited my style of work.
Edited by GBB on Friday 25th May 00:50
The luddite comment was meant to be taken humorously, sorry if it offended at all.
I'm relying on a good understanding of Benjamin Libet, Ray Kurzweil, Albert Einstein, Buddha, Charles Darwin and much more. I devour the sort of books that make most people run for the hills.
You're right about the "possibility [technology] provides for denying individual freedom" and the fact that there will be "no longer workers", but were these not the arguments of the luddites? Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on that.
The only difference this time is that we are further along homo sapiens timeline, closer to the next split in the evolutionary tree. Through technology man and machine will merge, there will be problems but evolution will take its course.
Fear it if you want but you can not stop Darwin. Personally I intend to enjoy the ride
Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded f
kwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.
ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
WhoseGeneration said:
Have you considered that it might be different this time, that "the past is no (longer a) guide to the future".
Feck me, you're younger and you're relying on past theories and sayings.
Heh, No.Feck me, you're younger and you're relying on past theories and sayings.
I'm relying on a good understanding of Benjamin Libet, Ray Kurzweil, Albert Einstein, Buddha, Charles Darwin and much more. I devour the sort of books that make most people run for the hills.
You're right about the "possibility [technology] provides for denying individual freedom" and the fact that there will be "no longer workers", but were these not the arguments of the luddites? Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on that.
The only difference this time is that we are further along homo sapiens timeline, closer to the next split in the evolutionary tree. Through technology man and machine will merge, there will be problems but evolution will take its course.
Fear it if you want but you can not stop Darwin. Personally I intend to enjoy the ride
WhoseGeneration said:
I've tried to tell you that, at any time, what the soothsayers foretell, is to be considered with more than a pinch of salt.
Agreed on that one, nothing wrong with educating yourself on the possibilities though.WhoseGeneration said:
You try to have it both ways, look after oneself and stop others starving.
Mutually incompatible, which is the, at heart, problem facing the Eurozone.
So you want to disagree with the founding pillars of evolutionary theory? Good luck with that one Mutually incompatible, which is the, at heart, problem facing the Eurozone.
Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded f
kwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Friday 25th May 01:41
GBB said:
LongQ said:
How would you know where to go? Would they have enough vacancies for all?
Perhaps EU laws, as applied by the European companies, make them appear more supportive of their workforce but I have to say that my experience, observed working alongside staff in European owned organisations, suggests attitudes to staff have been mixed. Parent country coltures may (or may not) be in play.
Of course your time frame overlaps mine a little so things may not be the same these days. However one has to wonder whether they mostly seem different because thay have been cushion, within the EU/EZ, in ways that have allowed them to follow Brussels' led guidance that favours employees more than, say, UK laws demand. The further thought is about whether that will continue to be the case as things change.
In terms of where, then due diligence is always needed. Talking to existing and former employees and also treating the interview as an assessment of them as much as of you. My biggest mistake was where I was interviewed and appointed by my bosses boss, I got on with them well but not with the person I was assigned to work for.Perhaps EU laws, as applied by the European companies, make them appear more supportive of their workforce but I have to say that my experience, observed working alongside staff in European owned organisations, suggests attitudes to staff have been mixed. Parent country coltures may (or may not) be in play.
Of course your time frame overlaps mine a little so things may not be the same these days. However one has to wonder whether they mostly seem different because thay have been cushion, within the EU/EZ, in ways that have allowed them to follow Brussels' led guidance that favours employees more than, say, UK laws demand. The further thought is about whether that will continue to be the case as things change.
A difference is that my "best" employers were large multinationals competing in highly competitive industries where the quality of staff was an important factor in company performence. EU regulations may have helped but the most important factor to them was finding the best/right employee in the first place (some of the selection processes were long winded to say the least and not exactly cheap (flying to Holland for assessment centre solely for myself)) but once they found good employees they did try to develop them keep hold of them if possible. For both such companies there was a high level of empowerment and self-motivation to get the job done which suited my style of work.
Edited by GBB on Friday 25th May 00:50
As I said - your suggestion are good - but really only for those who choose to be selective (and can be so successfully) earlier in their careers. Things are more likely to be challenging even those inverted interviewing concepts later in life.
Tartan Pixie said:
So you want to disagree with the founding pillars of evolutionary theory? Good luck with that one
Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded fkwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.
ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
You don't sound argumentative, just stating your view and I'm too old to be offended.Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded f
kwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Friday 25th May 01:41
However, within your post you contradict yourself.
WhoseGeneration said:
How old are you?
Old enough, like me and some here, to remember the forecasts of technology would mean a life of leaisure for all?
You say that, but there are 9 million economically inactive people in the UK, some 25% of the population available to work. That's the highest proportion ever. Old enough, like me and some here, to remember the forecasts of technology would mean a life of leaisure for all?
I think that begs a bit of a question. What if we're sleepwalking into the life of leisure? Is it possible that we've arrived at a point whereby there just isn't any suitable work for a broad swathe of the population? What should they do instead?
Tartan Pixie said:
So you want to disagree with the founding pillars of evolutionary theory? Good luck with that one
Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded fkwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.
ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
Interesting.Survival of the fittest has always been about cooperation as much as individual strength. - 10 weak men acting in concert are quite capable of killing 20 stronger individuals who fail to cooperate.
With regards to the eurozone cooperation is a fundamental point because its a matter of survival. Consider for a moment how collective security has progressed through history:
Tribe (150 people)
Settlement (300 people)
City State (a few thousand people)
Nation State (millions of people)
Power Block (hundreds of millions of people)
Historically the largest group of people who cooperate together wins. In purely darwinistic terms the EU makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately we've got a bunch of retarded f
kwits in Brussels trying to force everyone together regardless of cultural differences, risking the very security they were put there to protect.ETA - Apologies if that came across a bit argumentative, it's not meant to be but being Scottish I can't help sounding that way
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Friday 25th May 01:41
Years back I recall reading about the opinions of the Chief Exec of a company (Dutch at the time but I think it had evolved from elsewhere originally) who had instigated a policy a nodal structure for the group rather than monolithic. So when it first hit 100 people he split it into 2 parts. And that policy continued as the company grew and went global.
The idea was that in a smaller dedicated group communications were easier and management could be more aware of everything that was happening.
At the time I was working for a branch of a company that had grown to be just over 100 in number and with a few new 'management' people introduced ostensibly to enable further growth the signs of expansion stress were appearing.
People are basically tribal, socially, at work or interacting at leisure. Tribes are usually smaller groups - as your list identifies. Larger associations are nearly always made up from smaller groups who finds ways to work together and maybe interchange members of the group but still retian their own identities even if they too change over time.
I'm really not sure the analiogy about collective security stands up - other than when some other dynamic is oin play to force the issue. For levels where a smallish group of individuals can avail themselves of at least some personal influence those that work with and for each other may well see off a larger group that is less cohesive - as you intimate. The group may well get a better outcome despite its lask of size.
Whilst the smaller groups and subgroups remain in a fragmented larger society - such as the EU - they all leave themselves open to challenges over which they can have no control in any circumstances. This may not be good for them as a group.
WhoseGeneration said:
However, within your post you contradict yourself.
Oh, where?Only one I can think it might be is the line about forcing people together contradicting the line about EU being good for collective security.
That's not really a contradiction though. EFTA and Shengen were fine for trade security, I see no problem with the free movement of trade and labour. We've also got NATO for collective security.
If they'd left it at that, plus the occasional multilateral agreement, I suspect Europe would be getting on fine as a collective entity. People naturally integrate of their own accord, though this takes time and involves a messy little thing called democracy.
What really pisses people off is being forced to do stuff against their will. Even if the federalization plan goes through it will carry huge resentment with it because of the way it's being done. If Greece ends up as a poor suburb of Germany they will remember these years with bitterness, such a situation would inevitably give rise to a resentful nationalist movement who look back to the drachma with rose tinted spectacles.
Or did I totally miss your point?
davepoth said:
WhoseGeneration said:
How old are you?
Old enough, like me and some here, to remember the forecasts of technology would mean a life of leaisure for all?
You say that, but there are 9 million economically inactive people in the UK, some 25% of the population available to work. That's the highest proportion ever. Old enough, like me and some here, to remember the forecasts of technology would mean a life of leaisure for all?
I think that begs a bit of a question. What if we're sleepwalking into the life of leisure? Is it possible that we've arrived at a point whereby there just isn't any suitable work for a broad swathe of the population? What should they do instead?
What seems to be happening is that fewer people work longer hours and retire later.
So few of any of he many 'Future Predictions' ever made have come to anything resembling how they were described that it seems almost possible to wait for a futuroligist to create a list and then use that as things that will NOT come to pass.
LongQ said:
I'm really not sure the analiogy about collective security stands up - other than when some other dynamic is oin play to force the issue.
There's lots of dynamics forcing the issue, trade and threat of invasion being the obvious ones.Good points about the tribal thing. I remember an article in New Scientist saying how we seem to be hard wired for a tribal sized group of about 150, which is where I picked the number from.
IIRC it went on to say about how social media was changing this through identifiers, a good example of which would be PH. Quite a few people have a PH smiley on their car which allows us to identify each other even if we're not part of the same group in real life, allowing tribal type connections over often quite large groups of people٭.
An interesting experiment would have been to not build an EU parliament but instead have a democratic vote in each country to put a little yellow star in the corner of their flag. All you would need is to ask people to be part of a group of their own free will and give them an identifier.
٭Though if the whole of PH was put in one confined space together it probably wouldn't be a happy family for long and it would revert to smaller tribal groups.
LongQ said:
So few of any of he many 'Future Predictions' ever made have come to anything resembling how they were described that it seems almost possible to wait for a futuroligist to create a list and then use that as things that will NOT come to pass.
Arthur C Clarke - Geostationary satellites among other things.Isac Asimov - In 1950 predicted pretty much everything we still argue about today concerning AI.
Buck Rogers wasn't quite so accurate though.
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Friday 25th May 03:15
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff