Forthcoming "summer of rage"?
Lots of news reports online at the moment on speculation that those hardest hit by the downturn will take to the streets, on both protests and riots, specifically mentioning April's G20 conference.
Whilst G20 will no doubt attract protests, I think the news organisations have missed a trick.
There was an old BBC documentary series called "The Summer Of..." shown a few years ago, one of which was "The Summer Of Rave - 1989", about the new rave culture, but also other social impacts. 1989 had a massive record-breaking heatwave in the UK, and this went on for *months*. Lots of heat leads to hot nights leads to lack of sleep leads to short tempers leads to a national population which acts outside the usual parameters.
Douglas Hurd mentioned that on getting the Home Secretary job he was warned that, should there be an extended heatwave, expect trouble.
If 2009 has a heatwave, then combined with the current downturn (the social effects of which should well and truly have meterialized by the summer) this could be a *very* eventful year.
Whilst G20 will no doubt attract protests, I think the news organisations have missed a trick.
There was an old BBC documentary series called "The Summer Of..." shown a few years ago, one of which was "The Summer Of Rave - 1989", about the new rave culture, but also other social impacts. 1989 had a massive record-breaking heatwave in the UK, and this went on for *months*. Lots of heat leads to hot nights leads to lack of sleep leads to short tempers leads to a national population which acts outside the usual parameters.
Douglas Hurd mentioned that on getting the Home Secretary job he was warned that, should there be an extended heatwave, expect trouble.
If 2009 has a heatwave, then combined with the current downturn (the social effects of which should well and truly have meterialized by the summer) this could be a *very* eventful year.
Post edited by NickH on
Comments
[gv]-880596565305832820[/gv]
Look at winter 1995, the UK was having record low temperatures and heavy snowfall (i remember it well, it snowed on Xmas day). Then come summer 1996 we had a really long, hot, dry summer. It lasted for what seemed like months. It was the best summer i can every remember. Southern England had a really bad drought that year (the worst since the seventies).
I think i'll become a weatherman............
Historically, yes.
That depends how far we are pushed.
Everone has their limit. And baling out the very rich at the expence of the rest of us is doing nothing to help.
The government say they they are going to cut bankers bonuses to the leagal minimums?!? Minimums?? Leagal minimums?? what the f*ck!! Surely bankers only have a right to bonuses it they do well and don't screw up.
Personally I would make the bankers support the banks they own (or chair over) with their own collateral before sponging off the goverment. I know that even the bankers collateral would only be a drop in the ocean but it would teach the b*stards a lesson. It's not like they'll starve the wages them people are on.
I prefer the title ' The Summer of Discontent '
Or more humourously 'The Bummer of a Summer' :lol:
It was 1995 we had a really hot, long summer ;) and, interestingly we also had a very cold winter that same year.
I was actually about to post about the summer of '95 saying that I don't recall it leading to any political or social unrest (although a lot of other very weird stuff - I remember a friend of mine going swimming off the Ayr coast one evening in June and the water being warm).
No, I don't think it's that - I think lots of heat leads to lots of lager drinking leads to lots of drunken violence.
There are plenty of hot places where air conditioning is scarce, but the population generally doesn't get violent. But they don't drink Stella there (known as wifebeater for good reason!)
It all depends on what the contract says. Most of the people who have legal entitlements to a bonus are the front line staff at branch level, not the fat cats at the top.
While there is certainly mileage in saying that these staff should be grateful to have a job at all after all that's happened, that still doesn't mean you can pick and choose which laws to follow. If they are contracturally due a bonus, you can't just turn around and break their contract however annoying it may be if that contract is lawful (and if you do it sets a terrible precedent - because for sure some day someone will be allowed to break a contract that you personally are party to). Perhaps you can renegotiate the contract for future years, but as it stands you're stuck with it.
But as for the fat cats? They ought to pay their bonuses back for previous years voluntarily - they were obviously falsely awarded because the "growth" they created obviously didn't exist. But the fact of the matter is they can't be legally forced to do so.
What governments can do though is refuse to recapitalize banks who's staff (any of them) are due bonuses of any sort. You'll quickly see how much they prefer a basic salary to bankruptcy and unemployment.