• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Violent protests in the U.K. over budget cuts?

cpgrad08

American
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
5,681
Reaction score
3,023
Location
WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It's merely what the mobs are told to do when their leaders are confronted with maybe losing a political battle over benefits.

Same thing happened in Wisconsin. The mobs trashed the state capitol, the legislature ended their privilege of a closed shop. The taxpayers won a round, finally.
 
It's a reflection of how a couple of hundred anarchists can steal the headlines from the biggest demonstration in years, involving people from trade unions to church groups and Womens' Institutes. The middle class spoke out against the savage cuts being made to disability support, home care services for the elderly, Early Start programmes for toddlers, and against the general principle of making the poor pay for bankers' gambling debts while the bankers award themselves bigger and bigger bonuses.
 
Protests Turn Violent in London Over Budget Cuts - FoxNews.com
Demonstrators swarm central London to protest spending cuts - CNN.com
London protesters clash with police - World news - Europe - msnbc.com

Protest in the U.K. turn violent during protest over the government trying to cut 100,000,000,000 dollars from the budget. Is this normal style European protest or this an example of when people become too dependent on the Government and feel entitled to all government programs?

99.8% of the protesters were peaceful.

As for "normal sytle".. do you mean we actually protest against things we are against? Yes we do.. I know it is alien to you yanks, but we Europeans do so. Are they always violent.. well there are anarchists, far right wingers and criminal elements who just love to infiltrate such protests to stir up trouble.

As for Europeans protesting the cuts.. yes, and especially in the UK where the cuts are highly disproportionally hitting the worst off and benefiting the wealthy.

As for Europeans being "dependent" on government programs.. what do you base your assertion on? Most people are not on any sort of "government program" and unlike the US, we in Europe care about our fellow citizens when they are in need.
 
99.8% of the protesters were peaceful.

As for "normal sytle".. do you mean we actually protest against things we are against? Yes we do.. I know it is alien to you yanks, but we Europeans do so. Are they always violent.. well there are anarchists, far right wingers and criminal elements who just love to infiltrate such protests to stir up trouble.

As for Europeans protesting the cuts.. yes, and especially in the UK where the cuts are highly disproportionally hitting the worst off and benefiting the wealthy.

As for Europeans being "dependent" on government programs.. what do you base your assertion on? Most people are not on any sort of "government program" and unlike the US, we in Europe care about our fellow citizens when they are in need.

There is different of not caring and not be able to afford something Pete.
 
There is different of not caring and not be able to afford something Pete.

No, you find out away to afford it if you care.

The UKs problem (and many others) is that of waste and corruption.
 
Protests Turn Violent in London Over Budget Cuts - FoxNews.com
Demonstrators swarm central London to protest spending cuts - CNN.com
London protesters clash with police - World news - Europe - msnbc.com

Protest in the U.K. turn violent during protest over the government trying to cut 100,000,000,000 dollars from the budget. Is this normal style European protest or this an example of when people become too dependent on the Government and feel entitled to all government programs?

I don't believe the handful of individuals who acted violently represent the British people in general any more than the rogue elements who went on a violent rampage in Seattle in 1999 during a WTO trade ministerial conference represented the American public. I fully expect that the British people will overwhelmingly remain peaceful, even those who oppose the budget cuts. I also expect that the UK government will press ahead with fiscal consolidation and, in the medium-term, the UK will be better for that decisive leadership.
 
I've always admired the European ability to violently riot over the slightest thing, rock on Europe, rock on. :lol:

But in seriousness, watching the footage on the news, you obviously aren't planning to protest peacefully if you show up in balaclavas and hoodies, waving anarchist flags, and this was just a small lot of bastards being bastards.
 
I was just glancing at the telly and assumed it was a demonstration in some ME capital until the crawl said London. A jolly good time indeed.
 
No, you find out away to afford it if you care.

The UKs problem (and many others) is that of waste and corruption.

and the U.S. budget isn't.
 
No, you find out away to afford it if you care.

The UKs problem (and many others) is that of waste and corruption.

Yes, and extravagant social spending is that waste and corruption.
 
Define "extravagant social spending" first.

ukgs_line.php


30% of GDP??? That's extravagant.
 
Government in the UK has the balls to do what our U.S. Congress doesn't. 'Course we'll be much bigger crybabies.
 
That's the education segment. The 2010 total looks to be around 74% of GDP :shock:

I am pretty sure it is cumulative, Tash. So, ~7% for Welfare, ~8% for Pensions, ~8% for Health Care and ~7% for Education.

Total Spending looks to me to be ~45% of GDP.
 
big picture---what's going on from greece to sacramento, with the uk and wisconsin in between, is of a piece

it's a PHYSICAL force of seismic proportions which is rocking the entire planet

ie, there's nothing any of you are gonna be able to do to stop it

stay up
 
I am pretty sure it is cumulative, Tash. So, ~7% for Welfare, ~8% for Pensions, ~8% for Health Care and ~7% for Education.

Total Spending looks to me to be ~45% of GDP.
Thanks hun. That parsing makes much more sense (in an extravagant manner).
 
big picture---what's going on from greece to sacramento, with the uk and wisconsin in between, is of a piece

it's a PHYSICAL force of seismic proportions which is rocking the entire planet

ie, there's nothing any of you are gonna be able to do to stop it

stay up

I hope you are right.
 
The Prof is right, what is going on cannot be stopped and it is only inevitable. The anarchists might as well resign themselves to the fact that adults are now in charge. Their opinion isn't worth anything anyway.

The BBC has a great page of articles and links detailing the cuts. Moving the retirement age up to 66 was a good start. There also appears to be rate hikes for those who use rail services.

I for one, just don't buy the claims of "unfairness" regarding the proposals and the poor

If you take 3% of a family's total income and public services way from them, do you need to know how rich they are to judge whether the cut is fair? The government says you don't: a 3% hit is a 3% hit.

Polly Toynbee - and other campaigners for the poor think it is relevant, because the rich family has the means to get that service another way. If they lose their right to free child care they can go out and pay for it. The poor family probably can't.

What is fair? I leave that up to you. But perhaps it's another tribute to the Blair years that we have had weeks of political debate centred around a concept that is almost impossible to pin down.

The rich will be able to afford anything, under that logic, nothing should be done as it will automatically be "unfair." Quite frankly, if you have babysitting problems, that is YOUR problem, not the government's. Form a Co-op, call your friends, call family, or find another sitter. That is what everyone else does day in and day out without government involvement or money. Suck it up and accept the new reality. Then again, if I was a 30 year old unemployed anarchist living at home, I would be upset that mom's check for me was reduced or cut out entirely too.:lamo
 
Protests Turn Violent in London Over Budget Cuts - FoxNews.com
Demonstrators swarm central London to protest spending cuts - CNN.com
London protesters clash with police - World news - Europe - msnbc.com

Protest in the U.K. turn violent during protest over the government trying to cut 100,000,000,000 dollars from the budget. Is this normal style European protest or this an example of when people become too dependent on the Government and feel entitled to all government programs?

Just think. The US is in worse shape economically than is the UK. What's happening in the UK will happen in the US. Long live American style DE-REGULATED, Ronald Reagan style ECONOMICS.
 
ukgs_line.php


30% of GDP??? That's extravagant.

The US has almost 40% of GDP.

The UK is around 45ish%. Most European countries range from lower 40s to upper 40s in % of GDP.

Again, what is extravagant?

Universal Healthcare? Free schools? unemployment insurance? Spending 400 dollars on a toilet seat? Going to war with countries? What is extravagant?
 
I get a kick out of these types of violent incidents when ...notice how the news outlets & even most of the posters here will not associate which side of the political spectrum these radicals are from when we all know they are far left wingers. But then you have a tea party rally for people whom are merely esposing fiscal responsibility & at least some adherance to the constitution and you get the right wing radical mantra smeared all over the Liberal press, hypocrisy.....double standard? you bet.

I also find it astounding the naivete of the left in seeing that it was mostly the excess of there big goverment socialist like spending programs that brought us (& Britain) to the brink. Then when the answer is clearly standing in front of them, instead of taking the common sense approach of cutting these programs to pay off the debt, they then propose more taxes, more spending & more programs as if what they've already done wasnt enough to see that it clearly doesnt work. Definition of insanity ? Some might say


It's a reflection of how a couple of hundred radical Left wing anarchists can steal the headlines from the biggest demonstration in years, involving people from trade unions to church groups and Womens' Institutes.
Lets insert the true description of who were dealing with here.


The middle class spoke out against the savage cuts being made to disability support, home care services for the elderly, Early Start programmes for toddlers, and against the general principle of making the poor pay for bankers' gambling debts while the bankers award themselves bigger and bigger bonuses.

You sound very Marx like....

A banking exec is paid to make money for the bank, if the board of directers think he/she is doing a good job it is there decision (in a free society) to give that exec a bonus, as many of there salaries are structured for them (incentive based) to make most of there money in bonuses based on how they perform and not in base wages. Your argument is silly in that even if what you espose was true, its small potatoes compared to how much the goverment is ripping you off by taxing you on these social programs that are fiscally unsustainable.

Also if a bank go's under its not the governments position to hand out the taxpayer money to bail them out, they should be allowed to go thru the bankruptcy process like any other business. If a handout is given then blame the politicians not the bank.
 
Well now. since the US has about the same unemployment rate as those disaffected Libyans, but the US does not have free education and housing and healthcare, does that infer that rebels will be organizing to protest in the USA and the major manipulators will be tripping over themselves to arm and support them, or is the air a bit mythy? The USA is run by and for Corporations. Corporations are "fictitious entities" that do not live and breathe and have allegiance to strong currency. Would these Corporations that own much of the media try to get more by using these "owned Media" to promote policies to take away from other beneficiaries of gov't largesse. Bet your ass on it. Corporations do not live and breathe and only survive on the "profit" motive and are definitely not patriots because they cannot shed their blood to help the people. That would be bad business. Is there something wrong with this picture. Looks like an opportunity for a genuine "neocon" to step in and straighten me out. You know what I mean, "get me on that right thinking path", the one that requires no thought.
 
Well now. since the US has about the same unemployment rate as those disaffected Libyans, but the US does not have free education and housing and healthcare, does that infer that rebels will be organizing to protest in the USA and the major manipulators will be tripping over themselves to arm and support them, or is the air a bit mythy? The USA is run by and for Corporations. Corporations are "fictitious entities" that do not live and breathe and have allegiance to strong currency. Would these Corporations that own much of the media try to get more by using these "owned Media" to promote policies to take away from other beneficiaries of gov't largesse. Bet your ass on it. Corporations do not live and breathe and only survive on the "profit" motive and are definitely not patriots because they cannot shed their blood to help the people. That would be bad business. Is there something wrong with this picture. Looks like an opportunity for a genuine "neocon" to step in and straighten me out. You know what I mean, "get me on that right thinking path", the one that requires no thought.

Yes.. you are confused, although I am not a neo-con, I am a regular conservative and will straighten you out or at least try.

Corporations are not evil empires they are groups of citizens banded together to try & make money. They actually provide jobs and consumer goods that actually enrich many peoples lifes. The money made by these people is then spent elsewhere...hence you get the " spreading the wealth effect" as Obama would put it. I'm not sure where I see this as them taking anything from anybody, in fact the government is the one who takes (in the form of taxes and regulation) and spends profusly on programs that more often than not end up being a waste or just benefits a small number of elites (example- goverment unions) and are not held to account nearly as much as corporate execs who would be fired if they lost money in most cases. The government is the only job where you can consistantly perform poorly while wasting tax revenues & yet still get rewarded while most private companies or corporations would go bankrupt.

The government should stay the hell out and allow free citizens who want to work and make money do so. They should be allowed to make sure companies are playing by the rules & abiding by the law but little else IMO. If all these wasted tax reveues where allowed to flow back into the free market you'd see more companies hiring and more new business's ...hence more jobs and more money for those who have the ambition to work.

Of course you always have the deadbeats that are just looking for a handout & continue to try & vote themselves a raise or benefit with the taxpayer money which in turn hurts business and peoples ability to gain from there own hard work which in turn lowers moral & productivity.

Alot of what you see now in London, Wisconsin and elsewhere is a product of this mentality.
 
Back
Top Bottom