Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Flickr standards  (Read 10931 times)
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2653


« Reply #20 on: November 23, 2010, 04:20:25 AM »
ReplyReply

We don't need feedback all of the time but as humans we like a pat on the back from time to time. I once knew someone who thought he was a good photographer with 40 years experience behind him. In other photographer's opinion he wasn't good. He however refused to listen to what others thought because he had 40 years experience. He thought he knew it all. If only he could have opened up his mind and listened he would have been better and possibly reached a reasonable level. Ironically he now does weddings and has a card advertising the fact. Woe betide anyone who risks using him. This is an example of someone who thinks other people's opinions don't matter. They do matter but the difficulty is listening to the RIGHT person. Smiley
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #21 on: November 23, 2010, 04:51:07 AM »
ReplyReply

We don't need feedback all of the time but as humans we like a pat on the back from time to time. I once knew someone who thought he was a good photographer with 40 years experience behind him. In other photographer's opinion he wasn't good. He however refused to listen to what others thought because he had 40 years experience. He thought he knew it all. If only he could have opened up his mind and listened he would have been better and possibly reached a reasonable level. Ironically he now does weddings and has a card advertising the fact. Woe betide anyone who risks using him. This is an example of someone who thinks other people's opinions don't matter. They do matter but the difficulty is listening to the RIGHT person. Smiley
Stamper, I certainly don't complain about sharing. Sharing is powerfull and great.

My idea has more something to do with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM&feature=related

Much better explained than my english can do.

Cheers.
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2653


« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2010, 06:09:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Very good Fred. The first thirty seconds or so I thought the dialogue was BS but I listened to the whole of it and I can heartily concur. Yesterday I bought a jacket. I looked in only two stores - deliberately - and bought one. Afterwards I kept thinking what if I had checked some more. Would I have got a better one for the money? I still don't know but I will wear the one I bought. Choice is only good if you know all about what is on offer. There are two big supermarkets near me. Some people swear that one is better and cheaper than the other one. How do they know unless they check the prices in each on a daily basis? It would be worse if there was more. Smiley
Logged

Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 682



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2010, 11:34:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the link Fred. Took me an hour to watch due to my internet connection speed but worth it nonetheless. Interesting observations noted here by the speaker and rather good, I think, food for thought. Talking about food: I do wonder though why a supermarket would actually want to stock 176 ( unless it is different brands but even still) varieties of salad dressing.   
Logged
shutterpup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 490


« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2010, 11:35:26 AM »
ReplyReply

We don't need feedback all of the time but as humans we like a pat on the back from time to time. I once knew someone who thought he was a good photographer with 40 years experience behind him. In other photographer's opinion he wasn't good. He however refused to listen to what others thought because he had 40 years experience. He thought he knew it all. If only he could have opened up his mind and listened he would have been better and possibly reached a reasonable level. Ironically he now does weddings and has a card advertising the fact. Woe betide anyone who risks using him. This is an example of someone who thinks other people's opinions don't matter. They do matter but the difficulty is listening to the RIGHT person. Smiley

I don't think I know it all, but I am ever mindful of the fact that my view of life is very different from the mainstream. So if I put my "quirky side" photos on a place like Flickr or even here, I'm not going to get much in the way of useful feedback because most of those viewing them will be from the mainstream frame of mind. So... I'm careful how I share them, or my expectation level changes. I have a very annoying friend that I shared a couple of "cute" snapshots with of wildlife at my bird feeders; her comment of "absolutely brilliant" to a so-so photo was an insult, so much so that I no longer share any of my photos with her.

The only reason I have a Flickr account is that I used to not be able to directly download photos to any site to share using Aperture directly. Now that I can do that easily, I'm not sure why I still have the Flickr account.
Logged
Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2010, 01:27:07 PM »
ReplyReply

The web and mobile phone  have together brought about the most tremendous change in communication between individuals that the world perhaps as ever known. Greater than the telephone certainly for that was just an extension of the distance over which people could talk to one another and its relatively slow speed and inconvenience put limits on its use (you had to be at a certain point to connect and dialling and waiting for someone to arrive at the certain point the other end took so much time). But now it's all instant, we carry the instrument of broadcast in our pockets and speak via voice or text to whom we wish immediately we feel the urge. It is the same with images, these to can be displayed to all or a chosen few within a very short time of taking and the cost of doing so is minimal. Given such circumstances we are mistaken to believe that the motivation for taking pictures is anything like the same as it was merely 7 or 8 years ago.

If we go all the way back to the turn of the century photography generally had a purpose with say 90% of shots being taken for a reason that could be articulated, but what is it's purpose now? That 90% is now probably 10% with the billions of today's exposures being little more than an exercise in gadget operation for the sake of it rather than an expression of any artistic thought or desire. Judging Flickr, Facebook et al  by the old standards is meaningless because the old standards do not apply. The craft of photography has been invaded by the disinterested who have no knowledge or respect for the values that have evolved over past 150 years and longer still if we assume that they in turn are based on the centuries of artistic endeavour that has gone before.

I have mentioned elsewhere that photography as a craft needs to re-establish its credentials and rise out of the swamp, the formation of which it gladly participated in during the embryonic days of the web. Oh how we were all told that digital and the web was the way forward for every professional photographer and how rich we would all become by enthusiastically participating in the glorious IT revolution. The exact opposite came to pass of course and those who who sang the hymn of digitalisation most loudly are now strangely silent as we view the havoc brought about the the insidious silicon.
Logged

Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2010, 01:27:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I disagree with this. Maybe all those uploaded photographs do not conform to any 'purpose' that you personally would deem valid, but for sure most of the photographs uploaded are purposeful. I suggest that the dominant purpose of most current picture taking is to capture emotions personal to the photographer, such as their pets and groups of friends. Ignoring the commercial photographer, is this really any different from the goals of photographers in the past?

100 years ago, 99% of people never had the option to do this. Now they can, why is it a problem? It reveals something fundamental about the human condition today and nothing stops people taking pictures for other styles or purposes, both old and new.

If the volume of material is an issue, then filter what you look at. Choose carefully the websites you read. Use Flickr's 'contact' mechanism to track images from other Flickr photographers whose work you like, and so on.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2010, 02:47:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, I don't see or look at any other site than LuLa in the sense of mainstream - a couple of small, more or less private ones are the exception - and I do look at all the professional photographic ones I can find.

Why?

For the same reason I became a photographer: I love photographs, particularly those that strike me as better than any I might have taken, and that allows plenty of scope.

I think Justin has hit the nail firmly on the head.

I also remember vividly the start of the digi revolution, where the magazines were pointing to it as the great professional step forward. Yeah, right. That step, in my view, has been to bankrupt many who had modest but stable businesses, to put many good and reliable camera and film companies either out of business or into dire straits. Those photograhers who survived have found themselves chained to a computer when otherwise they might have had free time to spend with their family; stress levels have increased and the capital expenditure needed (and consequent debt in many cases) to stay valid has not only made life very tough but also put ever more difficulty in the face of new people starting up a real, legitimate business. Those it has helped, however, are the amteurs whose need for ego massage has allowed them the opportunity of cutting the throats of those who paid their dues, both in the learning and in the tax system associated with earning a living with the camera.

I have no intention of getting into the circular argument about pro/am reality and the open sesame of the ball-breaking shit stock market of the corrupted version of picture libraries of this post digi world. I can tell you only that I remember the days of the rights managed world, of getting the odd cheque for well over a thousand pounds for a single use of a single picture in an agency where I was but a relative minnow. Today? I thank all those clones of the micro world for putting me on the photographic hungry list and a relatively bloody tight retirement. You destroyed my pension.

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2010, 07:35:09 AM »
ReplyReply

You guys sound as if you think the digital revolution has changed the business of photography in a way that's unique in history. But how about the poor sods who used to sit at adding machines in the back room at the bank before mainframes and COBOL came along? Those green-eyeshade guys had to learn something new to survive so they went to work for H&R Block. How about the guys who made those beautiful buggies and buggy whips before the automobile arrived on the scene? They all became hotel doormen.

Some call it progress, but I call it just plain old change. A whole lot of it has taken place in my eighty years on earth. I like some of it and I hate some of it. But it's always there and there are only two things you can do about it: adapt, or drink a nice glass of Hemlock. Of course you also can sit around and bitch, but you have to realize that the reach and the impact of your bitching is greatly enhanced by computers and the web. So, you see, there's an upside to nearly everything.

But with respect to photography, nothing has changed: photographing still is nothing -- in fact, with digital, less than nothing -- and looking still is everything.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, 07:37:27 AM by RSL » Logged

Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2010, 10:38:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I think the comparison is not between car makers and coach builders but more accurately between motorists and coachmen and even then I'm not sure that it is particularly pertinent. I'd also point out that photographers were never afraid of change or improvement, fashions in photography came and went and the practitioners  had to keep up with the latest trends or go out of business and even in mundane 'industrial photography' new techniques for inspecting such things as the inside of nuclear reactors had to be developed so the craft was never stagnant.

What I think that many find objectionable is the assumption that the advent of digital technology and rapid dissemination of images has rendered everyone a competent photographer whose work is worthy of uncritical viewing. Many, if not all, of the old school would have suffered their work being torn to shreds by their peers, where does that happen today? If I were to go on to the critique section of this forum and let loose about what I really think of much of what is presented I'd be hounded out altogether. And if poor work goes unchecked and therefore condoned what becomes of our critical faculties overall? We very quickly reach the stage of any old rubbish will do because there are few people left to discern or care about standards.

On a personal note I should like to point out that I have in fact moved with the times and taught myself the rudiments of website building and even here I find that aesthetic standards often come second to the "poetry of code". One thing I do try and insist on is the use of is clear and meaningful photography in the sites. I see so many websites that are so tickety boo when it comes to functionality but contain awful images or are immeasurably tedious because they look just like all the other tickety boo websites built to the prescriptive orders of W3C. A little bit of tough love wouldn't go amiss at times but the egos of the guys and gals that put these things together.......!
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2010, 11:45:29 AM »
ReplyReply


But with respect to photography, nothing has changed: photographing still is nothing -- in fact, with digital, less than nothing -- and looking still is everything.



On the contrary, Russ: everything has changed.

You are right regarding the sentiment of what constitutes good or bad photography, but my personal scream is about the business of photography. As Justin points out, change was always present as were the changes in who was or was not 'making it' at the time - ten to fifteen good years as an artist was thought p.d.g. but that has vanished in the main, because the price structure that allowed a vast array of people to run a business at whatever level has gone with the advent of digi, exactly as and for the reasons Fred outlined. It's pointless for people to say oh, good stock will still sell to good clients; at one time, all clients were good clients, and the many millions of hundred dollar sales and the fewer big bangs over the grand provided not only money but, importantly, incentive, much as drives the Lottery market to this day. I see the world of stock very similar to that of gambling, but now the big wins have vanished from sight because clients have been spoiled for both choice and sellers: how many stock agencies counted internationally a few years ago? Maybe ten, fifteen?

Let's be clear: I have no beef with anybody running a website and selling prints of his hobby; that's not competition for the professional loaf of bread. The pro's breakfast came from big business or local people with a wedding in mind or a passport or something of that ilk. Take travel photography for example: I did several entire brochures for various companies; atmospherics, hotels, apartments, the lot. And I got quite well paid. Where did it go? Students, resort travel guides, brothers with camera. Quality suddenly lost its meaning because somebody made an offer that greed couldn't resist. And did any of those shamateurs pay a cent of tax on any of that? Today, it's not even students: it's the twenty cents a pop micro world. As I said, thanks for killing my pension! (Not you, of course, but those new micro whores.)

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2010, 03:02:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob,

Believe me, I understand where youíre coming from. Before I moved out of my long-term Colorado Springs office and into my new studio this past spring I had Ė still have Ė two very good pro photographer friends in the building. One used to do large weddings at the Broadmoor hotel, our local, internationally-known, 5 star establishment. He also had contacts with several large companies in the area that would throw annual vacation-style conferences for their top employees in places like Cancun. Mark always went along, with all expenses paid, and made the shots for the newspaper releases and for the companiesí walls. Just one of those trips could mean big bucks for him. I was downtown talking to him a few days before we left for Florida and he was considering what business he might go into now that the photography business has collapsed. Heís giving up and getting out. The other pro in the building is a very pleasant, very sharp woman who does weddings and high school graduations and anything else she can lay hands on. She advertises intensively, but sheís barely hanging on. Their problem isnít just the price structure. Itís the absence of work at any price in the current economy.

But photography isnít the only business thatís been hit by changes in the way things are done. I used to have the same problem in my computer software business. Once the price of microcomputers plummeted and their availability soared everybody became a programmer. In another thread I think I described the gal with the shop who sold a wide variety of things, some on consignment and some with outright purchase, to whom I gave a very reasonable quote on a system tailored to her business. But a friend of hers had just learned to write software and he was going to do the job for free. About a year later sheíd lost complete track of what was going on in the business and she went under. I can think of at least three other experiences like that one. Barnum badly underestimated human gullibility.

When an amateur does a friendís wedding or a family memberís wedding, if the friend or family member gets pictures at all, he gets pictures that are worth exactly what he paid for them. But thatís not much consolation when youíve lost your pension.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2010, 03:57:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Russ

Too true!

There's a sort of irony at the moment regarding Britain and Ireland (southern): Britain isn't in the Euro currency zone but has decided to help out the folks across the water, who are, with a multi-billion loan. The recipients don't want it, nor that from the Eurozone itself which amounts to many more billions. So, there we have folks that are tottering on the edge of bankruptcy spitting in the face of the rescue team, and staging demos in the streets in protest at savage domestic cuts. So, what do they suggest in place of cutting your spending of what you don't have? God knows. And the lenders in Britain are also demonstrating against, and facing, huge cuts of their own. I do believe the world has lost its marbles. Along with my pension plans.

And some of us worry about megapixels.

But look at it this way, Russ: with events in Korea you may well have another job, a real blaster from the past!

Rob C
Logged

Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2010, 05:10:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Ah Rob, you have touched upon a raw nerve there and I suspect with something of a glint of mischief in your eye as well (I shall refrain from putting a smiling smiley here being aware of your disdain for such things). As an expat Brit now living in the Emerald isle for several years I feel that I may hold some qualification to answer your note which has something of the tincture of imperialism about it if you will forgive me for saying so.

I think it necessary to consider how this country arrived at this point before passing disparaging judgement upon the motives of its people. The Celtic Tiger was a property based bubble that relied upon the magic of ever increasing values to sustain its jungle roar, alas, as we all know, such edifices are unsustainable and so with the first cough of the US banking system it all started to collapse and unravel. But why did it reach such preposterous proportions in the first place? From where did the fuel of plentiful credit come? Who allowed, nay, encouraged, this to happen despite the plethora of warnings received and wilfully ignored? It was the present Government led by Fianna Fail, a party comfortably corrupt enough to hold its place amongst any gathering of sub Saharan generals and Asian presidents which was the catalyst of empty growth but it was the European banks that fed the furnace and now we, the Irish taxpayers, are expected to pick up the tab for their folly.

Unsurprisingly greed is fingered by just about everyone for motivating the whole process. Not just the greed of the property developers but also of the politicians and most of all the banks. They threw money at the Irish in a most irresponsible fashion. When applying for a mortgage over here the nice lady got quite upset when I refused to take out a little extra to buy a shiny new car as well as the house, an incident which I shall not forget for it places in a nutshell the very cause of our woes. The Irish banks had other banks from the US, Germany, France, UK, Spain and just about everywhere else insisting that they take the money in a grossly irresponsible orgy of free market capitalism and now that it has landed them in the manure they turn to the EU to bail them out via the Irish people. For make no mistake, this is not about the EU helping Ireland it is about the EU keeping the European banking system solvent and the Euro intact and we poor sods in the middle are meant to be grateful!! We are told by our new lords in Brussels through the windows of their ministerial Mercs that we must sacrifice and suffer to rebuild our country, well I'm afraid the miserable peasants are revolting and it is not only today's march in Dublin that must be noted but also the election of a Sinn Fein TD in Donegal on Thursday. This former Fianna Fail stronghold would appear to be returning to republicanism in protest at the present plans for 'Irelands' bailout which estimates put at between 90 and 200bn Euros. You cannot extract that amount of money from an econmy the size of Ireland without totally trashing it. It is not a rescue package, it is a millstone hung from our neck and I really don't see it happening. Angela Merkel herself has indicated her belief that the Banks must take some of the hit and I would suggest a 50/50 split is reasonably fair. Wouldn't you?
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, 05:27:27 PM by Justinr » Logged

Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2010, 01:56:16 AM »
ReplyReply

There is a very good summary of the banking crises on Paul Masons' BBC blog (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2010/11/ireland_corpse_bank_vs_zombie.html). Of course Ireland should receive help - its problems are in part the result of the interconnected nature of banking and economics, and the consequences likewise.

The sad thing is that the banking and property booms were obvious to anyone. I knew people in investment fincance who were warning about this four of five years before the actual bust hit. As with the 2000 dot com collapse, what seems to drive the bubble is the aggregate effect of individual greed, and no politician is courageous enough to stand against this (the best example here in Spain was the way that local planning laws were relaxed by both national and local politicians because that meant more money tomorrow for voters - now there are something like 1 million new build flats unsold here on the coast!).

I work in software, and the last ten years have been very depressing. I have seen the commercial value of hard work rendered close to zero by a combination of open-source and off-shoring to India and China. At the same time, I have seen my living costs driven through the roof by an asset and loan driven ponzi scheme. There are several analyses that suggest that much - if not essentially all - the economic growth in the West over the last 30 years has been driven by the increasing contribution of credit rather than any actual productive increase.

People here worry about the commercial impact of the micro stock sites and Flickr. In software, I guess that a good analogy is the Apple 'app store'. If you are extremely lucky, your app may go viral and you may make some money. But more typical is to put in months of work and not get enough back to cover your living costs. This is why the store is dominated by cheaply produced 'fart apps' and commercial tie-ins, which don't need to pay their own way.
Logged

Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 28, 2010, 04:05:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Lost for that most instructive link although I find the reaction to it in the comments section perhaps more enlightening and relevant to the Irish situation than the article itself. Just how far can you push a population in trying to save the precious euro and maintain a corrupt global financial system is an experiment that should be embarked upon with a little more forethought than has been hitherto employed. 
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #36 on: November 28, 2010, 11:36:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I think there are many factors getting confused in all of this, not least of all the fact that there is now a huge society that believes in its right to government hand outs whenever it hits bad times or doesn't want to work.

In Spain, you can expect unemployment benefit for around six months after you lose your job as long as the right number of contributions has been made. Or so I understand it, though I could well be wrong in the detail (as applies to the rest of the posters on this topic!) but there is no long-term incentive to the state of mind of being a professional idler. That doesn't bring work if none exists, but it sure pushes the person to try and the family to think in group terms: the best loans come from within that group.

Now, many blame banks for over-easy loans. Maybe they are correct, but I remember clearly my start in business in '66 when I was introduced to a bank manager with a view to opening business accounts separate from my personal stuff. The man said: when it's sunny we lend you an umbrella, Rob; when it rains, we want it back. That stuck with me. Is anyone buying anything large, such as cars, houses etc. really really so honestly naÔve as never to think about their ability to pay back the loans?

I think I see here a huge abrogation of personal responsibility mirrored, on the other side, by the agents who sell the mortgages, the hire-purchase deals, all of the shit that lives in never-never land. I grew up in an ethos that said: if you can't go out and pay for it, you can't afford it. I only twice bought a car on installments, both times on the 'advice' of my accountants and I regretted it on each occasion because of the nervous tension it gave me in what was always a precarious occupation. I see that as the basis of so much that's gone, and is still going, wrong. As Suzi Quatro's mum said: there is no free sex; somebody always pays.

So, do I agree with the cries of 'we didn't do it; make the banks pay' for their mistakes, greed, whatever? I'm still looking for the first guy with the right to cast the first stone. It's like complaining to a whore because you caught the crabs.

Rob C
Logged

Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 28, 2010, 12:58:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Just as photography has changed dramatically over the last few decades so has the world of finance. When I went to open a bank account at sixteen I went and met the local bank manager with my father. Today my teenage daughters are actively pursued by the banks for their business. Those of us of forty or more years were likely to have been conditioned in an industrial based economy to save rather than borrow. Nowdays in a service based economy the opposite applies, and must apply for a service based economy is dependent on money being moved around for little reason other than to generate more money without it passing through the hands of industrialists. I can urge my children to save 'til I'm blue in the face (and we do) but what hope do we as responsible parents have when competing against banks and shops actively marketing all sorts loans and credit agreements whilst they are taught the mechanics of money in business studies at school rather than the setting of lathes?

Delaying the paying of social benefits for six months is to condone the exploitation of labour. What sort of primitive working conditions and practices will be tolerated by those who are aware that should they lose their jobs then the family risks going unfed? The black economy, crime and corruption are more likely to flourish under such a regime which is hardly desirable I would have thought.

Yes we must all share the blame to a certain degree ( I suggested 50/50 in an earlier post)  but saving rather than borrowing is a moral judgement in many respects and desire for material goods is very much part of the human condition so I think we can agree that we needed a new morality. What I would ask though is where was that to come from, a church riddled with priests indulging in unsavoury practices and rapidly losing its authority over its flock or a governing system built on deception and corruption? It was a bleak choice and it is little wonder that people turned to a third institution who we believed were honest and trustworthy, the banks themselves, how little did we know.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #38 on: November 28, 2010, 02:27:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Delaying the paying of social benefits for six months is to condone the exploitation of labour. What sort of primitive working conditions and practices will be tolerated by those who are aware that should they lose their jobs then the family risks going unfed? The black economy, crime and corruption are more likely to flourish under such a regime which is hardly desirable I would have thought.



No, you picked that up in reverse: you get paid the first six months, but after that period you're on your own.

Employment. Well there's the school of thought that says every employer has to keep on his workers regardless, and the other that says every worker is only needed whilst there's work to be done.

Why would anyone want to pay anyone else for doing nothing if there comes the time when there's nothing to be done? I don't subscribe to the job for life concept; that's what a life of self-employment teaches you: life owes you squat. However, very often clients do owe and won't pony up because they smell a loophole or can't pay anyway.

It's always tough. Always was.

Rob C
Logged

Justinr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2010, 03:03:13 PM »
ReplyReply

My apologies Rob, I did indeed get it the wrong way round. Just as a further note here in Ireland if you are self employed and your business goes belly up then you get no unemployment benefit at all. There is no safety net for entrepreneurs, hardly the greatest incentive if you are looking to new businesses to help the economy along.

One of the great criticisms of the now infamous four year plan is that there is nothing in it to encourage recovery, it's all cuts to the minimum wage, public spending reductions, tax hikes, interest rates, repayment schedules and so on. The purpose is clear,  saving the banks is foremost and naff all about putting the country back on its feet again. The Irish are to be squeezed to save the rest of Europe it feels to us. Will it work? Of course not, this is just the beginning of a European meltdown.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad