Тема: Презентация Банк «Industrial and commercial bank of China». Учебная работа № 397417

Контрольные рефераты
1 Звезда2 Звезды3 Звезды4 Звезды5 Звезд (4 оценок, среднее: 4,75 из 5)
Загрузка...

Тип работы: Презентация
Предмет: Международные экономические отношения
Страниц: 18
Год написания: 2018
Презентация на тему: Банк «Industrial and commercial bank of China»Стоимость данной учебной работы: 300 руб.

 

    Форма заказа работы
    ================================

    Укажите Ваш e-mail (обязательно)! ПРОВЕРЯЙТЕ пожалуйста правильность написания своего адреса!

    Укажите № работы и вариант

    Соглашение * (обязательно) Федеральный закон ФЗ-152 от 07.02.2017 N 13-ФЗ
    Я ознакомился с Пользовательским соглашением и даю согласие на обработку своих персональных данных.

    Учебная работа № 397417. Тема: Презентация Банк «Industrial and commercial bank of China»

    Выдержка из подобной работы

    …….

    Stanley Bruce’s great industrial relation blunder

    …..ional program
    in the labour movement about the dangers of the conservative industrial proposals
    and about historical precedents.

    A campaign for a militant industrial response has to be combined
    with exploring all the legal possibilities for defeating the Liberal offensive.
    Rhetoric about industrial mobilisation, on its own, won’t get very far.

    It’s also necessary to construct the broadest united front, including
    the bureaucracies in the labour movement, whose interests are threatened to some
    extent, and state Labor governments, whose traditional prerogatives are threatened.

    The Liberals have a tall order before them, legally. They’re
    talking about using aspects of corporations law to grab control of state industrial
    systems, forcing most industrial matters into the federal sphere and then abolishing
    most of the functions of the state systems.

    Legally, that is a high-risk strategy. Even the current conservative-dominated
    High Court is likely to reject such proposals if they’re strenuously opposed by
    the states.

    A big danger in this situation is left talk by sections of the
    union bureaucracy and state Labor governments about handing over the state systems
    to the federal government on traditional Labor centralist grounds.

    Such moves should be strenuously resisted. The striking thing
    about the Liberals’ proposals is that they are an extraordinary rerun of the policies
    of the Bruce-Page conservative government in 1926 and 1928-29, which were defeated
    firstly in a referendum in 1926 and finally by the electoral defeat of the Bruce-Page
    government in 1929.

    In some ways the social circumstances of the late 1920s were similar
    to now. The labour movement was in a relatively defensive situation and the economy
    was in a relative boom.

    The political situation in the labour movement was quite similar
    too, with Matt Charlton, the federal parliamentary leader, supporting the transfer
    of industrial powers to the federal sphere, rather like Gough Whitlam did more
    recently.

    The major difference is that in the late 1920s there was quite
    a bit of conflict on the conservative side about the proposals, with the turbulent
    figure of Billy Hughes opposing Bruce every inch of the way. There doesn’t seem
    to be the same scale of dissent on the conservative side in current conditions.

    The most recent example of successful industrial resistance to
    conservative attack is the struggle of the Maritime Union a few years ago. That
    was a classic agitation combining industrial militancy, community mobilisation and
    the intelligent exploitation of every legal mechanism, which largely contributed
    to achieving the desired outcome: the preservation of the MUA.

    In Jack Lang’s useful memoir, The Great Bust, which was largely
    ghost-written by Norm Macauley, there is a useful account of the Bruce-Page government’s
    failed attempt to do what the Howard government is hoping to do. The two relevant
    chapters are available below to assist the beginnings of a discussion, which will
    have to take place pretty fast if the next few months are to be used to prepare
    for mobilisation.

    Imagine a referendum in which every political leader in the Commonwealth
    was rejected in his own sphere of influence. That was what happened in Australia
    on September 4th, 1926. No one escaped the axe. It was a referendum to hand over
    industrial powers to the Commonwealth, and to provide limited powers over trusts
    and combines. Prime Minister Bruce sponsored the proposal. He was not only defeated
    throughout Australia but in his own state of Victoria as well. The federal leader
    of the Labor opposition, Matt Charlton, supported Bruce. He also had his advice
    rejected throughout the Commonwealth and couldn’t even carry his own electora…