Why are anarchists targeting HSBC?

ILW

padington wrote: »

So no one actually has anything of substance to counter the basic premise that the economy is uneconomical and is causing fragrant vandalism to our precious planet ?

Don't worry, the Earth will still be here millions of years after we are all gone.

michaels

Yeah - imagine how much compensation the protesters would win in court for having their human rights abused in this way.

ess0two wrote: »

Bring it on,no need for the !!!!!! these to55ers cause.

padington

ILW wrote: »

Don't worry, the Earth will still be here millions of years after we are all gone.

I dont care what it looks like when we're gone. I just don't want the muppet show above who bemoan the ecosystem of oxford street but care little of the real one to be allowed to set the political agenda, as they try to do.

vivatifosi

Ilya_Ilyich wrote: »

The economist has a strong neoliberal bias, as does the mainstream academic establishment. Not to back up the opinions of whoever made that video, just to say it's important to consider the origin and bias of all your sources, not just the ones who aren't established authorities.

Fair point on the former, not sure about the latter as there are plenty of marxian and socialist economists. I also think economic measures such as the Gini coefficient help identify inequalities. Personally I'm pretty centrist politically, but I do like to read from across the spectrum.

pompeyfaith

In answer to the subject title it was not just HSBC that was targeted but Lloyds too

ILW

padington wrote: »

I dont care what it looks like when we're gone. I just don't want the muppet show above who bemoan the ecosystem of oxford street but care little of the real one to be allowed to set the political agenda, as they try to do.

Not sure I get your point.

padington

Ilya_Ilyich wrote: »

If by 'pay for' you mean 'suffer a reduction in wealth from' then the very wealthy in particular and owners of corporations in general. Wages are a transfer of wealth from consumers to X, where X depends on the economic system. In an economy primarily driven by the private sector (such as ours), wages are decided in a manner that maximises the wealth transfer to company owners. This is why in strongly capitalist countries (such as ours and the USA) the richest portion of society tends to get richer while real wealth for the majority of the population either decreases at a much lower rate, stagnates, or decreases over time. The rich are primarily increased with increasing their relative wealth and thus have little or no interest in creating wealth (and thus increasing their absolute wealth) when it's easier or more efficient to simply increase their share.

In an economy primarily driven by the public sector, wages can be allocated in a manner that prioritises a minimum 'acceptable' level of net wealth. Thus the X will be 'the consumers'.

Interesting take on things. Personally think we need to think much more radically and utilise science to manage, distribute and sometimes share key resources far more efficiently too.

Errata

pompeyfaith wrote: »

In answer to the subject title it was not just HSBC that was targeted but Lloyds too

And Anne Summers! What was that about :rotfl:

geri1965_2

Because it's degrading to women.

padington

ILW wrote: »

Not sure I get your point.

My point is some people care more about the window of Anne Summers on oxford street than they do about the the worlds reserve of coral reef or rainforest .