According to today's electronic edition of Der Spiegel, 250,000 students have been at it again on the streets of Paris, with 300 arrests. Ah, Paris in the Spring, tra-la, tra-la.

That was yesterday, Thursday. Tomorrow, Saturday, there should be more students in the streets -- and probably some more rioting by anarchists and "uncontrolled elements" few of whom are actual students.
Thank god there are still a few countries in the world where people are willing to stand up for what they believe.
As for "collateral damage" it can't really be avoided.

"Thank god there are still a few countries in the world where people are willing to stand up for what they believe."

Ah yes, and if standing up for those beliefs involves looting, burning innocent bystanders' cars, or damaging businesses that have nothing to do with those beliefs -- well, cie la vie.

Well said, Neopolitan.

So, in your opinion, the actions of 0.01% of the demonstrators invalidate the action of the others? I guess that's how G.W. Bush stays in power.

Although I don't condone the destruction of innocent's property, it is refreshing to see a government be somewhat receptive to listening to the people.

It's interesting that you comment on a college situation, since with this kind of logic, it is obvious you have no education.
How on earth do those two things logically relate?
But thanks for the laugh.

oops, got delayed with my posting. My comments above were aimed towards the "logic" of kerouac.

Yes, it's just a question of not seeing the forest for the trees, Neopolitan, just like you ignore the actions of 99.99% of the demonstrators and pay attention only to the other ones.

Please consider the basic problem: French businesses lack labor agility and flexibility attributes. The students are attempting to maintain the present 'status quo'. Chances are that all they will accomplish is to force businesses to increase 'outsourcing'.

Quite so. The students are protesting against their own best interests, and they apparently have no idea that they are doing so. Very strange.

>The students are protesting against their own best interests, and they apparently have no idea that they are doing so. <

Not necessarily.

If workers under 26 can be dismissed within their first two years, then the next step is workers under 30, workers under 50, etc, etc, etc.

It's a slippery slope folks.

The next thing you know they'll be wanting workers to pay their own health insurance.

Where will it end?

It will end with imports from China, India, and other rapidly growing economies with free-market labour out-competing Europe's (and possibly North America's) altogether, just as Mexico is out-competing the US for manufacturing jobs.

Perhaps this scenario will come anyway, even with the new law. Nonethelss, I can't blame Villepin for trying, because there ain't much status to the 'status quo' in France these days.

I'm not surprised the ethnic groups in France are wary of the government, and accusing it of enacting laws that will favour selective firing of ethnic groups. What other legacy do they have in an economy which is so bound by government regulation? (Nonetheless, an interesting logic they have there: to object to a law that could increase the possibility of being hired, on grounds that this would increase the possibility of being fired. And you know, they're absolutely right.....one cannot possibly be fired, ever, unless one is hired first......)

Speaking of the fears of racial (colour) discrimination in the workplace, perhaps this is why the US persists in its single colour currency, regardless of denomination. Not that it works. Consumers in other countries are most emphatically not colour-blind, given the choice. All other things being more or less equal, they'll pull out that little red euro (the 10) before the blue (the 20) and both red and blue afficianados discriminate shamelessly against the yellow-brown (the 200).

Economics. No profitable business will discharge a productive employee. Businesses in the USA are allowing potential employees opportunities to work without pay as a means of qualifying their abilities and personalities. Another view notes,"Hire smarter, don't fire later". What company is going to hire someone who has spent the last month torching public and private property? I imagine that kilometers or megabytes of riot coverage are being studied to learn the identity of participants.

Gsteed, you have it the wrong way around. The thinking of employers will be: what person, productively employed, has time or motive to go around torching cars, not to mention my business?

It ought to be that law-abiding souls are hired first, but in life, good deeds rarely go unpunished.

Meanwhile economics is travel-related. As the competition with western economies by those of other countries increases, the era of the Western tourist reigning supreme will come to an end. The supply of historical sites in Europe is more or less fixed, while the ability to develop additional hotel space is not limitless, given development control laws. Meanwhile demand for tourist services in Europe is increasing rapidly as Chinese and Indians start spending their new disposable income abroad. Prediction: We will pay more, a lot more, for hotel rooms and other services in the not-so-distant future.

Odd, to think that Chairman Mao might have been the reason I was able to travel as much as I have up until now.

"No profitable business will discharge a productive employee."

Well, yes they will, if they can find an equally productive and less expensive way to get the job done. Often though outsourcing, locally, or far afield.

The students know exactly what they're doing, and they're doing for their own interest.

What the new law does is to give incentives for business to hire the less-educated (i.e. NOT Sorbonne graduates). Young people's unemployment in France is like 20%+.

Those without university degree with therefore be more competitive in the marketplace. Therefore, it's not a good thing for Sorbonne graduates.

They're not protesting for the good of all young people, nor the good of the country. Instead, it's mostly about THEMSELVES and their peers.

Plenty of profitable companies fire workers just to please the shareholders. Is this normal? Not all of the world thinks so.

But Rkkwan, the Financial Times of London interviewed a number of those disadvantaged youths who have trouble finding employment, in the rundown Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. Overwhelmingly, they said the new legislation was bad!

Dave - I am sure there are plenty of unemployed youths who fear that the next step will be cutting unemployment benefits; and that in the future they really need to work to get money.

Matter of fact is that unemployment is an issue in France and many other European countries, especially among young people. The French government is trying to do something about it, but then the top university students are protesting about it?

If the new law's going to hurt the non-college educated poor and young, wouldn't the protest be occuring at the poor neighborhoods (like last fall) instead? Why at the top university?