civikl rights for a peaceful protest gone in this country

Gaygle · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:52

Energize said:
The right to protest went when they created the law that made it illegal to protest outside parliament.

I never understood why people were ****ting bricks over this. Who cares? Due to it being the center of British politics, I can totally see why they have done it. All it'd have taken is one small bomb to go off there and the terrorists would use it to say "see, not even one of the most secure places in Britain can escape" - striking fear into people.

And why did u go to this protest if you don't like not being able to move? You have SEEN a protest before right?!

nydryl · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:55

Civil rights protest? You can't even spell the word. Serves you right for taking part in an awful protest. No sympathy whatsoever. Fantastic, you disagree with MP's expenses and with having a crap government! Superb, you also disagree with the bailout of banks. Why aren't the government bailing out my local arts and craft shop that had to close down because the price of bloody glitter went up 5p? Is it perhaps because the banks are rather important whereas an awful lot else plain and simply is not? Absolutely utter trash arguments coming from protestors. One seventeen year old girl said on the news she was there because the government 'had done bad decisions with money'. Says it all really.

Energize · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:57

Gaygle said:
I never understood why people were ****ting bricks over this. Who cares? Due to it being the center of British politics, I can totally see why they have done it. All it'd have taken is one small bomb to go off there and the terrorists would use it to say "see, not even one of the most secure places in Britain can escape" - striking fear into people.

What does a protest have to do with terrorism? :confused:

People were still allowed to walk past the houses of parliament as normal, just not protest, so someone could still have blown them up. It had nothing to do with terrorism. Though banning something because a terrorist attack could occur is horrendously bad law making anyway.

Pilky01 · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:00

6a00fa969b19e6000200fad6b1bf6a0005-500pi

Read it.

mattheman · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:00

Kemik said:
Ok, you seem like someone determined so I'm going to ask you this.

What do you believe was the reason why the credit crisis occurred? Not the recession, but the credit crisis. They are two different things btw.

I only need a few lines, I'm not expecting a full economics answer like what would be expected of me in my degree.

The credit crisis occured because too much money nowhere to really invest it, investors and speculators needed to find a home for there extra cash at the time there was too much cash in the system and no where to go, so they piled into ABS. inorder to keep this exotic financial products going they needed consumers to borrow, mortgage products taken out by consumers creating a housing boom feeding the ABS in this case a branch of ABS called MBS, banks were making profits not from the mortgage itself but from the fees, freeing up capital to lend out again in the form of mortgages but also other froms of consumer debt like credit cards. packing them into tranches bad debt with good debt inorder to sell them at AAA ratings to ofload them quicker.

Gaygle · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:03

Energize said:
What does a protest have to do with terrorism? People were still allowed to walk past the houses of parliament as normal, just not protest, so someone could still have blown them up. It had nothing to do with terrorism.

I thought it was obvious.... but i'll explain anyway.

If you have large scale disruption (ie. a protest) it would be a hell of a lot easier for somebody to sneak a bomb into the area, than if it was a warm Monday morning and you were just walking outside the houses of parliament.

likwid · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:03

nydryl said:
One seventeen year old girl said on the news she was there because the government 'had done bad decisions with money'. Says it all really.

It has to be said that whenever, wherever a large scale protest takes place, the BBC will always find the most inarticulate crusty people there to interview. I saw one guy yesterday who didn't have a single clue what he was talking about and was possibly on speed.

Kemik · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:03

mattheman said:
Sorry but you really have no idea, separate business entity

I'm not one to blow my own trumpet but I bet I have a far better idea on the bailout of the banks than you do.

I just spent the past 13 weeks at University studying it for my third year, comparing it to previous crisis' such as East Asian 5 (EA5) and being examined on it. I also had to know a great deal about it to answer questions at a partner interview to get a job with a Big Four accounting firm last summer so I've been following closely for a while.

I just don't understand how you can protest against something you know little about. You might read the odd newspaper article or some things people have posted on your protest websites and believe that but you're not understanding, your just skimming. The financial system that caused the current situation is much more complex than you think.

Here's a brief overview.

nydryl · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:06

likwid said:
It has to be said that whenever, wherever a large scale protest takes place, the BBC will always find the most inarticulate crusty people there to interview. I saw one guy yesterday who didn't have a single clue what he was talking about and was possibly on speed.

I tend to agree with what you're saying about the BBC and it's choise of interviewees. I wasn't using the quote to comment on the intelligence of the protestors, but their understanding of what they were actually protesting about.

sid · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:07

I think this thread has gone on the tangent.

I was there at Bank station outside BOE and the police blockade was ridiclous tbh. People were trapped for hours without drink or anywhere to relieve themselves. No wonder they urinated on the banks themselves.

Protest itself was badly organised with no real idea what was going on. I'm not sure who to blame for that farce but I was lucky to be able to get out after 4 hours. ( I was photographing before you ask what I was doing there).

Unlucky to the OP, It was bad for the people who just got cordoned by the police in groups.

sid

mattheman · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:07

TFleming said:
Economics is all about finance how and companies structure. I'm studying it. The severity of just letting commecial banks do what they wish and not give them money when they are about to go bust would be highly stupid to say the least. Not only would it go agaisn't every main government economic objective, it would also put our economy at rock bottom, turn our country and indeed many others into termoil and finally, turn this recession into a slump.

Economics is about how resources are used not about how companies are structure.

Energize · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:08

Gaygle said:
If you have large scale disruption (ie. a protest) it would be a hell of a lot easier for somebody to sneak a bomb into the area, than if it was a warm Monday morning and you were just walking outside the houses of parliament.

Much more difficult than driving a truck full of fertilizer into the building so I still don't see your point... The idea of banning a protest because someone could sneak in a terrorist bomb is ridiculous.

Nitefly · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:08

Where do you get your knowledge on economics on, mattheman?

Gackt · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:13

sid said:
I was there at Bank station outside BOE and the police blockade was ridiclous tbh. People were trapped for hours without drink or anywhere to relieve themselves. No wonder they urinated on the banks themselves.

You think the police should have wasted resources setting up toilets that would have probably been trashed by all those 'peaceful' protesters? Hah. Right.

"OH NOES WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO START A RIOT OH NOES"

Geez. There was nothing peaceful about that protest.

mmj_uk · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:13

Andr3w said:
Do you realise what would have happened if they didn't bail out the banks?

Badly run businesses would have gone bankrupt to be replaced by good businesses? isn't that how capitalism works?

The government interfered to keep the status quo and saddled the tax payer with yet more debt it the process, what's that quote about the weak minded man fearing change...

TFleming · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:13

mattheman said:
Economics is about how resources are used not about how companies are structure.

Yes and finance is a resourse is it not. Without finance econmics wouldn't exist as it does :confused:

nydryl · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:13

Nitefly said:
Where do you get your knowledge on economics on, mattheman?

The internet it would appear :rolleyes:

TFleming · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:15

mmj_uk said:
Badly run businesses would have gone bankrupt to be replaced by good businesses? isn't that how capitalism works?

The government interfered to keep the status quo and saddled the tax payer with yet more debt it the process, what's that quote about the weak minded man fearing change...

Your average business and a bank is totally different. This concept may work for a retailer for and example but not for a bank.

mattheman · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:15

Kemik said:
I'm not one to blow my own trumpet but I bet I have a far better idea on the bailout of the banks than you do.

I just spent the past 13 weeks at University studying it for my third year, comparing it to previous crisis' such as East Asian 5 (EA5) and being examined on it. I also had to know a great deal about it to answer questions at a partner interview to get a job with a Big Four accounting firm last summer so I've been following closely for a while.

I just don't understand how you can protest against something you know little about. You might read the odd newspaper article or some things people have posted on your protest websites and believe that but you're not understanding, your just skimming. The financial system that caused the current situation is much more complex than you think.

Here's a brief overview.

If you study it then you know who got conned, and if you studied that then you should know who has the most open economy.

Gaygle · 2 Apr 2009 at 21:18

Energize said:
Much more difficult than driving a truck full of fertilizer into the building so I still don't see your point...

Which is why there are lots of nice policemen with machine guns and huge concrete barriers.

Energize said:
The idea of banning a protest because someone could sneak in a terrorist bomb is ridiculous.

Seriously, how can you not see the implications of allowing tens of thousands of people to get that close to such a sensitive location?