According to the article, Macron’s reforms which are being protested, are ideal from the stand point of a classical liberal. He wants pay raises to be based on merit. Which would make us think of a likely follow-up question, “what the hell are they based on now”?
ANGER has erupted against French President Emmanuel Macron’s nationwide reforms with tear gas being unleashed on protestors in angry scenes on the streets of Paris and Nantes. Thousands took part in a rallies across the country over the leader’s enforced changes this morning.
[…] Teachers, train conductors and airline controllers walked off the job across France on Thursday, disrupting transport and public services in a test of public anger with President Emmanuel Macron’s reform drive.
Unions said one in four primary schools were on strike, while electricity generation dropped by over three gigawatts (GW), the equivalent of three nuclear reactors, as gas and electricity sector workers joined the strike.
Some 150 protest marches are scheduled, including two rallies starting at around 1300 GMT in Paris.
Opinion polls show a paradox: a majority of voters back the strike but an even bigger majority back the reforms, including cutting the number of public sector workers and introducing merit-based pay.
Coming from a background of informal classical thought, I tend to subscribe to the theory that there are no paradoxes in nature.
Therefore the two opposing majorities cited are likely because of a very poorly done survey where people were likely to answer some questions in a way which others would answer the opposite. Like tying together a question on abortion rights on a survey on economic reforms. When you add up the numbers you can pretend you have a paradox.