Large British anti-Austerity protest. 30K policemen joined

[alhoon]

http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-brit...141105856.html

Staggering numbers here.

"Unions predicted some 400,000 public sector workers would walk out, a smaller protest than in November when Britain saw the biggest strike in years "

"The government said only about 150,000 had taken part and dismissed the action as "futile". Cabinet Office minister Frances Maude said, "public services were mainly unaffected". "

"
Budget cuts and a government-commissioned report that recommended allowing officers to be sacked, introducing pay reductions and raising the pension age, have all caused disquiet.

However, the sight of some 30,000 police officers marching through London will be embarrassing for Cameron's centre-right Conservatives, who pride themselves on being the party of law and order."


30K policemen in an anti-austerity protest? That's something big...
I think those numbers, even the 150K one the goverment "dismisses" as small dwarfs even our protests.

I think it's complete arrogance by a goverment to say that 150K people fighting and protesting about their rights is a "futile" action and dismiss it. That's dismissing the population of a good sized town.

Also this "The Police Federation, which represents 135,000 low-ranking officers in England and Wales" 30K out of 135K low ranking is about 30% of the whole workforce!

[Big War Bird]

The purpose of a police force is to adequately enforce the law, not to provide jobs and pensions to police school graduates. The compensation tables for police officers should be focused on achieving the former.

[Thorn777]

^Yeah, free law for freedom.

Pensions...what are they thinking. Anyway. Good to see the system shooting itself in the foot. They would need those coppers the coming austerity cycles.

[alhoon]

Whether you think or not that cuts should be made, to simply dismiss a protest that 30% of the hurted profession takes part is arrogance.

[Big War Bird]

Whether you think or not that cuts should be made, to simply dismiss a protest that 30% of the hurted profession takes part is arrogance.

If one thinks they are wrong of course it is dismissed.

[alhoon]

If one thinks they are wrong of course it is dismissed.

I can understand them disagreeing. But we're talking about a huge number of people that went on the street. At least treat them with respect, say (again) the reasons you did what you did and try to see if you can do something different.

[Their Law]

In this case it's largely a reaction to the pension reform plan proposed by the government.

[Claudius Gothicus]

Will we be seeing a full blown class war, with street rioting, police deployments all over London and Conservative/Libdem Offices getting burned down?

[sabaku_no_gaara]

Will we be seeing a full blown class war, with street rioting, police deployments all over London and Conservative/Libdem Offices getting burned down?

No, modern times don't have uproar that results in civil wars and revolutions anymore. Times have changed, people have a lot to lose, distraction is allways around us, policing is more effective, people are more passive, and even the poorest guy knows that his children won't starve as long as he or his social worker fill in the propper forms to receive living salary from whatever welfare organisation your civilised country has. Every poor fellow also knows that if his child wants, it will have every chance to go to university as the state will fund it to a degree (depending on the income of the parents) and eventually have a better life that his or her parents. So why would any poor hungry bugger rise up against the system that is actually giving him and his family a chance? That would just be dumb, the rest of society stays in lince because we are decent civilised people.

[magpie]

No, modern times don't have uproar that results in civil wars and revolutions anymore. Times have changed, people have a lot to lose, distraction is allways around us, policing is more effective, people are more passive, and even the poorest guy knows that his children won't starve as long as he or his social worker fill in the propper forms to receive living salary from whatever welfare organisation your civilised country has. Every poor fellow also knows that if his child wants, it will have every chance to go to university as the state will fund it to a degree (depending on the income of the parents) and eventually have a better life that his or her parents. So why would any poor hungry bugger rise up against the system that is actually giving him and his family a chance? That would just be dumb, the rest of society stays in lince because we are decent civilised people.

Its all a bit ancient Rome sabaku. The emperor and the ruling classes knew that free bread and circuses would keep the mob quiet. While they went on with the serious business of amassing wealth and enjoying an elite lifestyle. This system lasted for a good few years.

[Phier]

This just in, Unions think they are deserved special treatment over other citizens, news at 11.

[justicar5]

This just in, Unions think they are deserved special treatment over other citizens, news at 11.

This just in Bosses have been receiving special treatment forever, if austerity bites well they are the ones who got us into this they can pay for it. Confiscate the estates of all the cities management teams, that should help alot, then exile them, do it the Roman way, if they stop within 500 miles of the border hunt them down and crucify them. (Ah Fred Goodwin nailed to a cross, now there's an image to warm the heart.)

[Sir Pignans]

This just in, Unions think they are deserved special treatment over other citizens, news at 11.

Why is it special treatment? If you work in the private sector and you feel you deserve a higher wage, or a better pension plan you go to your boss and make a case for yourself. Sometimes you get a raise, sometimes you don't.

This seems to be what the unions are doing, complaining to their bosses over actions that affect their pay, pensions, etc. Unless I've got it all wrong that is.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

Oh bloody nuggets, those pesky puny peasants dare walk the streets in protest again?

*Puffs a big wide cuban*

Quickly! Contact our man within BBC, get the word out just how ruinous this demonstration is to at least 6 other groups of people!

*Sips on fine wine*

[removeduser_487563287433]

The strike was significantly smaller than all that. Alhoon's figure comes from the Unions, who have a motivation to inflate. The Government estimate was 150,000 people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18010526

It's also not really an anti-austerity strike, but a public sector strike:

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news-i...-2012051026619

[ivan_the_terrible]

The strike was significantly smaller than all that. Alhoon's figure comes from the Unions, who have a motivation to inflate. The Government estimate was 150,000 people.

The OP mentions both figures...

[Rolling Thunder]

The strike was significantly smaller than all that. Alhoon's figure comes from the Unions, who have a motivation to inflate. The Government estimate was 150,000 people.

Not that the government have any motive to understate the scale of the action either...

[alhoon]

The strike was significantly smaller than all that. Alhoon's figure comes from the Unions, who have a motivation to inflate. The Government estimate was 150,000 people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18010526

I have also given the goverment's estimation and I commented based on that. Although the goverment has motivations to deflate too. I believe in truth, there were like 200-250k.

For a democratic goverment to dismiss it as "Just 150K people" is arrogance IMO. And not all policemen are in Unions. For 30% of all the policemen to go on strike... it means 99% strongly oppose it. Since as people said those were off-duty, it's actually more than 30% of those available to go on strike.

[YukonTrooper]

For a democratic goverment to dismiss it as "Just 150K people" is arrogance IMO. And not all policemen are in Unions. For 30% of all the policemen to go on strike... it means 99% strongly oppose it. Since as people said those were off-duty, it's actually more than 30% of those available to go on strike.

The BBC gladly relays the British government's message that ~150,000 protestors in London, population ~8 million, is a non-issue; but when ~15,000 protestors take to the streets in Moscow, population ~11 million, all of a sudden the BBC declares democracy is in jeopardy and the world might end.

[Guy]

This just in, Unions think they are deserved special treatment over other citizens, news at 11.

Haven't you heard? This is the Big Society! We're all in this together. Just not if you're in the public or private sector. Then you're not.

The strike was significantly smaller than all that. Alhoon's figure comes from the Unions, who have a motivation to inflate. The Government estimate was 150,000 people.

The government also described the "rogue minority" from last year's student demonstrations as a group of "200 or so" (who later went on to storm the Tory HQ).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Not that I trust the word of the unions who are pushing money into the pragmatic stupidity of the Labour Party, but what the Tories say is often a long shot from the truth - as well as the fine old BBC.