I genuinely don’t know what point you’re trying to make.
You agree that french workers have strong protections, and that these were achieved by their aggressive protests, so that’s not it…
Is it only about the effectiveness of recent protests?
Because the explanation for that seems fairly simple: €1 billion of business costs are very easily absorbed by today’s multinational corporations, but not so for a small local company, so the mega wealthy come out even stronger.
Huge multinationals need to be cut up by governments, like the robber barons they are, except that we’re in such a globalised economy that no country wants to shoot itself in the foot that hard, hence the current downfall.
My hope for Europe is that trump eventually pushes so hard that we outright restrict market access to the likes of Amazon, Microsoft etc, and put in place a system that prevents any one company from obtaining such huge shares.
Is it only about the effectiveness of recent protests?
Yes, the last decade or two.
€1 billion of business costs are very easily absorbed by today’s multinational corporations
Whey you burn schools, cars and small businesses you’re not hurting multinational corporations in any way.
What I’m saying French protests are mostly performative. Government knows that violent protests like that will eventually fizzle out and they just have to wait them out.
What does work are long term disruptions. For example railway workers announcing they will only provide minimal services during some time. This affect not just profits but other parts of economy. If they are loosing €1B every month and you can sustain the strikes during a year… making a deal with workers quickly starts making economical sense. Showing your discontent on the streets (in a peaceful) also makes sense as it gives visibility to the cause and helps to get more people involved. Rioting achieves very little.
I genuinely don’t know what point you’re trying to make.
You agree that french workers have strong protections, and that these were achieved by their aggressive protests, so that’s not it…
Is it only about the effectiveness of recent protests?
Because the explanation for that seems fairly simple: €1 billion of business costs are very easily absorbed by today’s multinational corporations, but not so for a small local company, so the mega wealthy come out even stronger.
Huge multinationals need to be cut up by governments, like the robber barons they are, except that we’re in such a globalised economy that no country wants to shoot itself in the foot that hard, hence the current downfall.
My hope for Europe is that trump eventually pushes so hard that we outright restrict market access to the likes of Amazon, Microsoft etc, and put in place a system that prevents any one company from obtaining such huge shares.
In the meantime, I’ll protest.
Yes, the last decade or two.
Whey you burn schools, cars and small businesses you’re not hurting multinational corporations in any way.
What I’m saying French protests are mostly performative. Government knows that violent protests like that will eventually fizzle out and they just have to wait them out.
What does work are long term disruptions. For example railway workers announcing they will only provide minimal services during some time. This affect not just profits but other parts of economy. If they are loosing €1B every month and you can sustain the strikes during a year… making a deal with workers quickly starts making economical sense. Showing your discontent on the streets (in a peaceful) also makes sense as it gives visibility to the cause and helps to get more people involved. Rioting achieves very little.