9 ms·

We need a new deal here. If everyone with power is allowed to just follow their incentives, we end up with an awful place for everyone. What is the contract bet

We need a new deal here. If everyone with power is allowed to just follow their incentives, we end up with an awful place for everyone. What is the contract between people, government and corporations that we can make that allows for the freedom in society that we value? It seems like both the corps and gov are teaming up against team people here.

jgtrosh 7y ago
In France we have a contract: if people are unhappy they rise against. If there's no risk of revolting, the fox is fearless in the chicken hen.
- Tharkun 7y ago
  I've heard something similar said about the US, as a sort of justification for their right to bear arms...the government should apparently fear its people, and its people should be armed and able to overthrow said government. I wish you the best of luck with that, in an age of mass surveillance, armed-to-the-teeth governments and unparallelled propaganda machines.
- alex_duf 7y ago
  As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.
  - bamboozled 7y ago
    This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advocate at all, but I can see some people’s motives.
    - nosianu 7y ago
      Can't tell if the comment is satire. I guess it's best to assume it is and move on, since any discussion based on the assumption that it's not satire has already taken place many times, following predictable paths. Except that I can't keep myself from pointing out the orders of magnitude of difference in effectiveness between a cohesive, trained and organised force and a bunch of individuals, even if they were equally armed, so I don't even get the point of this idea if it's made as a joke.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - lovemenot 7y ago
        >> ... the orders of magnitude of difference in effectiveness between a cohesive, trained and organised force and a bunch of individuals True for a head-on conflict, but the story in the article has the organised forces' equipment in a vulnerable place - 65Kft above a city. Asymmetric activity in such a theatre would favour the armed civilian, for now at least. Ground-based coordinated tracking with 1W laser on rudimentary automatic control could ground such devices. The gas-bag being a large, vulnerable target. The relative ease of downing a tracking device, capturing, reverse-engineering then publicly reporting its capabilities should help keep them in check. For now.
        nosianu 7y ago
        You keep making really ridiculous assertions, my dear keyboard warrior. You and all the American gun nuts. Mind you, I served in the army (not the US one), battle tanks, so I'm hardly a pacifist. But you guys are just loudmouths who play too many video games and see too many Hollywood hero movies. No you won't win - and you will not even fight, apart from some very few not so bright people. Because you value your life way too much, liker 99.9% of everybody else faced with overwhelming odds. The forces the US army is up against are not unorganized, they have pretty good training and equipment - and support from foreign governments. They are not desperate lone fighters.
  - CapacitorSet 7y ago
    It's a matter of cost and disincentives. Want to pass a law that cuts on workers' rights in a country that typically doesn't protest? Sure, go ahead. Want to do that in France? You'll think twice about it after the clashes of 1st May and of the gilets jaunes.
- taurath 7y ago
  Here the revolters are completely wedged and pitted against each other.
- jules 7y ago
  The last protest didn't go very well for the protesters.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  The trouble is, you guys seem to 'revolt' over nothing on a regular basis, paralyzing your own economy in the process. You need to learn to pick your battles.
- davesmith1983 7y ago
  How many weeks of protest are in Paris now? It hasn't appeared to change anything.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Be assured that it has changed a lot of things...
    - CamperBob2 7y ago
      OK, I've been duly "assured." Now what?
      - coldtea 7y ago
        "Although President Macron had been insisting that the fuel tax increases would go through as planned, on 4 December 2018 the government announced that the tax rises would be put on hold, with Prime Minister Édouard Philippe saying that "no tax deserves to endanger the unity of the nation"." (...) "On 10 December, Macron condemned the violence but acknowledged the protesters' anger as "deep, and in many ways legitimate". He subsequently promised a minimum wage increase of €100 per month from 2019, cancelled a planned tax increase for low-income pensioners, and made overtime payments as well as end-of-year bonuses tax free." So much for nothing having changed. Not to mention tons of France-wide and regional implications, the political impact on several levels, and the pause and hesitation it would bring to politicians considering to unilaterally pass unpopular laws in the future.
- rienbdj 7y ago
  The US arguably has a much stronger version of this with the right to bear arms.
- rasz 7y ago
  So how did that work out for you lately? 8 months of fires and tear gas with no appreciable effect on the democratic process.
- oceanghost 7y ago
  We have a saying in the US, which I don't think anyone follows anymore: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."
- type0 7y ago
  And what would it end like, bringing back the guillotines?!
rscho 7y ago
What gov? You mean the corp customer inquiries office?

jgtrosh 7y ago

In France we have a contract: if people are unhappy they rise against. If there's no risk of revolting, the fox is fearless in the chicken hen.

Tharkun 7y ago
I've heard something similar said about the US, as a sort of justification for their right to bear arms...the government should apparently fear its people, and its people should be armed and able to overthrow said government. I wish you the best of luck with that, in an age of mass surveillance, armed-to-the-teeth governments and unparallelled propaganda machines.
alex_duf 7y ago
As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.
- bamboozled 7y ago
  This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advocate at all, but I can see some people’s motives.
  - nosianu 7y ago
    Can't tell if the comment is satire. I guess it's best to assume it is and move on, since any discussion based on the assumption that it's not satire has already taken place many times, following predictable paths. Except that I can't keep myself from pointing out the orders of magnitude of difference in effectiveness between a cohesive, trained and organised force and a bunch of individuals, even if they were equally armed, so I don't even get the point of this idea if it's made as a joke.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - lovemenot 7y ago
      >> ... the orders of magnitude of difference in effectiveness between a cohesive, trained and organised force and a bunch of individuals True for a head-on conflict, but the story in the article has the organised forces' equipment in a vulnerable place - 65Kft above a city. Asymmetric activity in such a theatre would favour the armed civilian, for now at least. Ground-based coordinated tracking with 1W laser on rudimentary automatic control could ground such devices. The gas-bag being a large, vulnerable target. The relative ease of downing a tracking device, capturing, reverse-engineering then publicly reporting its capabilities should help keep them in check. For now.
      - nosianu 7y ago
        You keep making really ridiculous assertions, my dear keyboard warrior. You and all the American gun nuts. Mind you, I served in the army (not the US one), battle tanks, so I'm hardly a pacifist. But you guys are just loudmouths who play too many video games and see too many Hollywood hero movies. No you won't win - and you will not even fight, apart from some very few not so bright people. Because you value your life way too much, liker 99.9% of everybody else faced with overwhelming odds. The forces the US army is up against are not unorganized, they have pretty good training and equipment - and support from foreign governments. They are not desperate lone fighters.
- CapacitorSet 7y ago
  It's a matter of cost and disincentives. Want to pass a law that cuts on workers' rights in a country that typically doesn't protest? Sure, go ahead. Want to do that in France? You'll think twice about it after the clashes of 1st May and of the gilets jaunes.
taurath 7y ago
Here the revolters are completely wedged and pitted against each other.
jules 7y ago
The last protest didn't go very well for the protesters.
CamperBob2 7y ago
The trouble is, you guys seem to 'revolt' over nothing on a regular basis, paralyzing your own economy in the process. You need to learn to pick your battles.
davesmith1983 7y ago
How many weeks of protest are in Paris now? It hasn't appeared to change anything.
- coldtea 7y ago
  Be assured that it has changed a lot of things...
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    OK, I've been duly "assured." Now what?
    - coldtea 7y ago
      "Although President Macron had been insisting that the fuel tax increases would go through as planned, on 4 December 2018 the government announced that the tax rises would be put on hold, with Prime Minister Édouard Philippe saying that "no tax deserves to endanger the unity of the nation"." (...) "On 10 December, Macron condemned the violence but acknowledged the protesters' anger as "deep, and in many ways legitimate". He subsequently promised a minimum wage increase of €100 per month from 2019, cancelled a planned tax increase for low-income pensioners, and made overtime payments as well as end-of-year bonuses tax free." So much for nothing having changed. Not to mention tons of France-wide and regional implications, the political impact on several levels, and the pause and hesitation it would bring to politicians considering to unilaterally pass unpopular laws in the future.
rienbdj 7y ago
The US arguably has a much stronger version of this with the right to bear arms.
rasz 7y ago
So how did that work out for you lately? 8 months of fires and tear gas with no appreciable effect on the democratic process.
oceanghost 7y ago
We have a saying in the US, which I don't think anyone follows anymore: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."
type0 7y ago
And what would it end like, bringing back the guillotines?!

rscho 7y ago

What gov? You mean the corp customer inquiries office?