Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : 5spl -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: WaveSeeker who wrote (1786)	1/30/2005 8:59:18 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2534

Ah, socialism. I felt that this article was well worth posting, but believe that it unduly stresses issues pertaining to the morality of prostitution versus this situation as illustrative of the coercive nature of welfare states. Having said that... *** 'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits' by Clare Chapman Jan 20, 2005 A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.** Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers. The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe. She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel. Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990. The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse. When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer. "There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits." Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting. Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued. Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits. "Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova. Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them. Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in women and cut links to organised crime. Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services. "They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said. "Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do." © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited, 2005 telegraph.co.uk

To: WaveSeeker who wrote (1786)	2/8/2005 9:10:46 PM
From: LPS5	Respond to of 2534

As many issues as I have with Bush, I have to give him hearty kudos for this. *** Fight Expected Over Bush Plan for Amtrak** 1 hour, 11 minutes ago by FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - The leading House Democrat on transportation issues predicted a "test of wills" Tuesday over the Bush administration's proposal to eliminate subsidies to Amtrak. "You're either for Amtrak or you're for letting it expire," said Minnesota Rep. Jim Oberstar, the senior Democrat on the Transportation Committee. Congress has resisted previous attempts by the Bush administration to cut funding for Amtrak, but Oberstar said the effort appears more serious this time. "They really intend to eliminate Amtrak," he said. "It's going to be a test of wills between the Congress and the administration to restore funding." In his budget Monday, Bush proposed eliminating Amtrak's operating subsidy and setting aside $360 million to run trains along the Northeast Corridor if the railroad ceases operating. Amtrak is getting $1.2 billion this year in operating subsidies and capital investment. The White House predicts that without subsidies, "Amtrak would quickly enter bankruptcy, which would likely lead to the elimination of inefficient operations and the reorganization of the railroad through bankruptcy procedures." "Ultimately, a more rational passenger rail system would emerge, with service on routes where there is real ridership demand and support from local governments," the administration said in documents supporting its proposal. David Gunn, who took over as Amtrak's president nearly three years ago, has cut costs but not enough to stem the railroad's annual loss of more than $500 million. In a statement Monday, he called the administration's proposal "irresponsible and a surprising disappointment.... Our costs are more under control than ever before. That's quite an accomplishment." House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young, R-Alaska, has not decided what he will do about the Amtrak proposal, said his spokesman, Steve Hansen. news.yahoo.com

To: WaveSeeker who wrote (1786)	2/22/2005 1:28:45 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2534

Mass brawl on the trading floor Rob Singh and Catherine Bowen, Evening Standard, 18 February 2005 VIOLENT clashes between City traders and environmental protesters left 27 people in police custody today. Oil traders reacted in fury when Greenpeace activists stormed the International Petroleum Exchange yesterday afternoon. There were further confrontations when protesters invaded an oil industry dinner at London's five-star Grosvenor House hotel. Greenpeace members today accused traders of attacking peaceful protesters and behaving like 'Friday night thugs'. One said he had never seen such violence in 15 years of campaigning. But traders said they were only acting in self-defence and had feared for their safety. More than 30 protesters invaded the IPE trading floor sounding whistles, horns and panic alarms in a bid to paralyse oil deals on the day the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to reduce global warming, came into force. Two Greenpeace members unfurled a banner outside after scaling the walls and abseiling down the front of the building. But the traders fought back and two of the protesters inside were taken to hospital with injuries. A Metropolitan Police spokesman said the arrests related to offences under Criminal Justice and Public Order Acts. Dozens of police were called to the fracas and roads were closed around the premises near Tower Bridge causing traffic chaos. The protest began just after 2pm when two smartly dressed protesters walked into the exchange, distracting security by dropping money on the floor. They then made their way to the trading floor, linking up with another group and sounding horns to drown out 'open outcry' trading. But the campaigners were forced to retreat by the reaction from irate traders. Peter Mulhall, 49, was taken to St Thomas' hospital with a swollen jaw after he was hit with shelving and punched in the face. Colin Newman was treated for concussion at the Royal London. Mr Mulhall said: 'Right away when I got hit I said, 'It's okay we are going now - there's no need for violence.' But there was still kicking, punching and swearing. 'One trader pushed me against a wall and as I turned back, a very tall trader punched me full in the face. There was a guy unconscious on the floor, so we dragged him out. But initially he was still getting kicked by the traders. 'I thought this was supposed to be professional business. I did not expect it to be like the worst hooligans you see on a Friday night. I have been campaigning for 15 years, but I have never experienced violence like that. Never.' Trader David Collins said: 'I was scared. I thought they might pull out weapons. We didn't hurt them but we made sure they didn't hurt us.' A senior trader who would not be named said: 'We wanted to get on with our business. These people are an irritant.' Activists dressed in dinner suits hijacked the hotel dinner, pouring red wine on banqueting tables. One protester was taken to St Mary's Hospital, Paddington. thisislondon.co.uk