CyclopsRock
Member
CHEEZMO™;57170814 said:
If we're going to start Off-Topic'ing about grammar, we should probably get the name right.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
If we're going to start Off-Topic'ing about grammar, we should probably get the name right.
PJV3
Member
UKIP are the British tea party, their policies are all over the place. Banning Al Gore films, health vouchers and a 40% increase in defence spending.
So when somebody says things about democracy not working because of stupid people, it's a reasonable opinion. It doesn't mean they favour a dictatorship and cancelling elections.
No, it means they are the only party who are managing to resonate with what they are thinking.
It doesn't matter whether you think it is right, wrong or stupid we are in a democracy and if that is what the people want and your party is not listening or willing to compromise then you lose. The UK is steadily turning from a mostly pro EU thinking nation to a Euro Sceptic one frightened that unfettered immigration is going to mean our children are less safe and our pay is going to be squeezed (Which has already happened in a big way in construction.)
Its not up to the people to be "less stupid," that kind of head in the sand thinking will not win votes, people need to be told why the current status quo will benefit them comprehensively over the situation they are asking for, but even the politicians are struggling with what to tell them other then "the EU is good!"
CHEEZMO™;57170814 said:
Forum habit that doesn't extend to my real life. I suppose sub consciously it means I have more to say on the subject but can't be arsed to type it.....
PJV3
Member
You need to take off your Daily Mail perception goggles, you said it was a trait of the left to dismiss people, what was the loony leftie stuff then?, or abolishing the GLC etc. Why do we all of a sudden have to respect an extremist libertarian tea party.
I wouldn't call UKIP voters stupid, I'd call a good proportion of them dangerous stupid cunts(BNP vote collapsed). it's just an opinion, someone on the right would call me deluded knob head etc, and they have every right to do so.
Nobody with a functioning brain, should be voting for a party that wants more Nukes and a vastly increased military budget, while at the same time slashing taxes on the rich to 30%.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Don't forget a flat tax mjlaughing.gif
Don't they oppose the working time directive and holiday pay for part-time workers too? I wonder how many of the poor working class people who vote for them know that.
CyclopsRock
Member
CHEEZMO;57245330 said:
I wonder how many of them would care, either. Every employment contract I've ever signed has included an opt-out of the working time directive. Indeed, it's often working class jobs that are affected the most in a negative way by the working time directive (which is to say shift work, which typically only exists in low-pay work), I'm not sure - even if it weren't opted out more or less by default in most jobs - the "working class" would be clamouring for more of that please sir.
As a total aside, the way holiday pay used to work at McDonalds when I worked there was very odd, but actually makes perfect sense. Instead of actually giving you paid leave, they'd put a small portion of money in a pot for every hour that you worked, which worked out at being proportionally what you'd have earnt in paid leave. In other words, if you worked 3 shifts a week, you'd be entitled to 16.8 days of paid leave per 365 day period. So, instead, they'd take your shift pay, divide it by your number of shifts in a year (3 x 52 = 156) and multiply it by 16.8. You could request the total of the pot at any point, so you could get that money paid each week if you wanted, or wait til the end of the year for what the staff used to bizarrely refer to as a "bonus". I don't think anyone there really understood what was going on.
People aren't being stupid, they are protesting using their vote and its a damn effective protest looking at the news.
Democracy is working, most people voting for UKIP could not give a shit about their other "policies." Even UKIP does not give a shit about them and they will be pulled apart come the general election and people will return to the party who gives the most focus to the ONE UKIP policy they care about. You don't have to respect any party, no-one is asking you to. You do have to accept the democracy we live in even if you think everyone who doesn't think like you do is "stupid."
A growing amount of people are scared of uncontrolled immigration rightly or wrongly and the main parties are not explaining why they shouldn't be very well. UKIP appear to be getting closer to what they want, which is *GASP THE HORROR* the British public being asked what they think to staying in the EU. A vote in a democracy? Who'd have thought?
Better not give them it though, they might be too stupid to vote for the right thing.......
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
But I thought there was a study showing that EU membership was not the prime motive for a majority of UKIP voters? If I recall, it was more about a vague return to 'traditional values', or a lack of faith in the current political class.
Personally, they are a flash in the pan, and when it comes down to a General Election there is nothing to worry about.
Personally, they are a flash in the pan, and when it comes down to a General Election there is nothing to worry about.
The new voters they picked up would not see that as important.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Yep, we talked about this three pages back.
And again, here's that anaylsis if anyone wants to take a look.
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
Nigel Farage is the best thing that happened to European politics. I fucking love the man.
I wish we had a nigel farage here in sweden.
The post war European political class must go. Regardless if they are Tories or labour. They live lives far to detached from the general populace, they are inbred, self-righteous and intolerant. They must go, all of them. Ukip is a sign that democracy works.
Finally.
I wish we had a nigel farage here in sweden.
The post war European political class must go. Regardless if they are Tories or labour. They live lives far to detached from the general populace, they are inbred, self-righteous and intolerant. They must go, all of them. Ukip is a sign that democracy works.
Finally.
Absolutely.
How else do the people send a message to the EU that they think they are taking things too far and they feel they are being ignored?
The EUs mission creep is substantial and unrelenting. How else can the electorate tell them to wind their necks in?
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
While I disagree with the latter part of this, I think the former is accurate.
CyclopsRock
Member
You really don't think the mission creep is significant? It's undeniably a vastly different organisation now than it was in the 70's. That it was done with the complicity of our elected governments doesn't alter this.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Mission creep is of course a factor that needs to be monitored. However I think that the EU does a whole lot more good than it does bad. I trust it far more than our own government, particularly in regards to the ECHR, its Environmental policies and its willingness to prosecute anti-competitive practices.
The EU is pushing for a united states of Europe, and using the financial mess it's in as a lever to try to force it. We will only end up as a insignificant satellite in the face of it.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
So who was right? zomg was right.
Construction data for Q1 2012 has been revised upwards and the -0.1% GDP should be revised upwards to 0.0%, so what's the significance? Well economically not very much the revision is only £100m in extra output. However, it means that there was no double dip recession, and coupled with the fact that there was no triple dip it leaves Labour searching for a new line on the economy. Sure they can use the double dip line for another couple of weeks until the official statistics come out, but after that if Balls trots out the double dip line he will be in trouble from the statistics authorities and from any interviewer worth their salt.
Construction data for Q1 2012 has been revised upwards and the -0.1% GDP should be revised upwards to 0.0%, so what's the significance? Well economically not very much the revision is only £100m in extra output. However, it means that there was no double dip recession, and coupled with the fact that there was no triple dip it leaves Labour searching for a new line on the economy. Sure they can use the double dip line for another couple of weeks until the official statistics come out, but after that if Balls trots out the double dip line he will be in trouble from the statistics authorities and from any interviewer worth their salt.
Especially since some of the EU officials are elected only by the European council. How the hell is that democracy?
It's not. Can they be replaced through the ballot box? No. Not democracy.
CyclopsRock
Member
I honestly think that'd be a better solution than the current EU. Either stay independent, or combine into a federated system. But I don't need to re-diagnose the problems with the current system; It's financial integration without political integration, which ends up with nations being a debt union (as we've seen by Germany finding itself repeatedly bailing out other nations whilst simultaneously utilising their drag on the Euro to cheapen their own exports).
It's not a union I'd want to see the UK become a part of, but from a productivity POV, I think a properly integrated federal Europe is preferable to the two-bit solution they have right now.
vcassano1 said:
Well, I disagree on a significant amount of that but eitherway, I think it's mostly besides the point; I'm not sure support for the legitimacy of a parliament should be based upon whether you like its current output or not. The same EU that promotes the environmental policies you like also gives half its significant budget to French farmers to produce crops no one wants, whilst levying tarifs against foreign agricultural produce that makes African farmers lose an enormous market. But again, that's not really the point either; Supporting a body on the grounds that you like its output is a bit like supporting an unelected house of Lords on the grounds that, over the past 15 or so years, they've done a demonstrably better job at protecting the civil liberties of the average Brit than the elected Commons has. But the point is more about setting up and maintaining a framework that ensures the people chiefly affected by legislation are those that are in control of its passing. With the EU, that's rarely the case, where the entirety of the UK could be against something and it still be implemented.
This is a genuine question; If the French government were impressing you, implementing policies that you liked and that you thought would be good for the nation, would you be happy for them to take control of the legislative and executive process in the UK? If not, why not, and why's this different to the EU - other than our ability to leave if we want to?
Yep, although my definition of democracy stems much further than the other people in this thread. I can't believe people are OK with this, beyond mind boggling.
PJV3
Member
I'm not arguing you're right to believe that, I'm arguing for the right of people to believe the opposite.
If a Marxist party was enjoying UKIP levels of success, I would expect right wing voters to say something similar about the electorate.
I don't have to respect UKIP or the people who vote for them, I only have to accept the results as a fact.
UKIP are bat-shit insane, people who vote for them as a protest, are risking the unintended consequences of US Tea party style lunacy. The left is dead in the UK, we will end up sleepwalking into a mess because there is no resistance from opposing voices(there aren't any besides the guardian and a timid shitty Labour party).
The anti EU stuff is not what I'm bothered about, Socialists have plenty of problems with its dedication to the free market, and limits on state intervention etc.
It's the right wing loons taking that sentiment and using it to further their own agenda that bothers me. If we didn't have such a shitty electoral system I could tolerate the situation more.
CyclopsRock
Member
You reckon? I'd argue that any other system would be worse with regards to a desire to not have UKIP affect the electoral landscape. As it stands, UKIP are very unlikely to get a seat in Westminster, and whilst they may drag the Tories slightly towards them, the reality is that the Tories know this. The Tories will see some pain at the European elections in 2014 but ultimately they know they won't lose any/many at all seats in the general election in 2015 to UKIP. Under any other electoral system, it's very likely they would, which would only increase the desire for a Tory lurch to the "right" (read: towards UKIP).
AV, full on list-based PR etc would all see the Tories forced further to the right, imo. As it stands, UKIP are almost entirely ignored by the main parties except when they're asked in interviews about them.
PJV3
Member
I'm not opposed to UKIP or any party having seats in parliament. I am opposed to the free ride UKIP and Farage get from the media. He is just a funny bloke insulting foreign diplomats etc.
When every party is getting under 30% of the vote under FPTP all bets are off for the General election as far as I'm concerned. UKIP will probably win the Euro elections and they still won't be any proper scrutiny, The press is broadly right wing and love his style and TV news isn't much better at serious in depth discussion(5 minute interviews that go nowhere)
Because the left is almost extinct under this system, there is nothing to counteract the drift rightwards, which is one of the reasons why I want electoral reform. more voices of differing opinion and ideas is a good thing anyway.
The Tories aren't going to ignore UKIP much longer, Cameron will have to react or he will he gone, the party isn't happy with him as it is.
There are significant elements of our political system that cannot be changed at the ballot box. We don't vote for our government, we vote for our legislators who then determines our government.
I don't think it's that unfair to say that the difference, democratically between the following:
1) 34k out of 58k people electing David Cameron in his constituency, him heading the government while 27,100,000 people in the UK had no direct choice on the matter.
2) 27 EU governments proposing members for the commission, with popularly elected MEPs approving or disapproving the selection.
Yes, David Cameron was elected in his constituency. But 58k out of 27.16m is 0.013% which is pretty damn close to the 0% a commissioner has in my eyes.
To be honest it won't be democracy until we start running things, the people, and we are equally accountable for decision making. But enough of that, these are my anarchist dreams.
I had a day-dream once, about a system where voters delegate their decision making in ad hoc networks of representatives. Telepresence and computers allowed for infinitely scalable delegation rules. A voter could delegate his vote to one person on economic matters, his vote to another on legal matters; voters could allow their votes to be sub-delegated upward even further. Local government would just be a subset of national government.
So I would delegate my vote to the woman who was previously a local councillor. I'd allow her to sub-delegate national issues, but not local issues. She'd sub-delegate to the guy who was previously an MP candidate for the area. Delegation rights would last a pre-determined period of time, requiring voters to re-affirm their choices. At any point, voters could override the vote of their delegate, in cases of disagreement.
CyclopsRock
Member
I think the problem is a peculiarly Tory problem, though - If it were any other issue rather than Europe, I don't think this'd be happening. I don't think it's UKIP per se that'll draw the Tories to the right - it's their own backbenchers. If the rise of UKIP had happened during Labour's time in office, Labour wouldn't have been drawn to towards UKIP'ish policies on Europe, because they know a) they have no external threat from UKIP in terms of seats at the GE and b) they have no internal threat from mutiny in their own party. For the Tories, that's not the case. I don't think it's a result of the electoral system that this is the case, though.
Similarly, I don't think UKIP's prominence is a result of the "death of the left". The left, as you say, have their own reasons to dislike the EU. I don't think the Tories are "drifting rightwards" at all. This is the most liberal Tory party that's ever existed. Offering a (very popular) referendum on the EU is the surest sign of UKIP's influence on them, and I don't think that's indicative of a rightward lurch, really.
Psychotext
Member
They've had it for a number of weeks now... the downgrade.
PJV3
Member
Labour are irrelevant, they're not going to offer anything radically different, it's going to take international cooperation to sort this mess out, but most of Europe has retreated into nationalism.
Any nation that tries to go it alone and try something different will get slaughtered by the markets.
Delusibeta
Banned
I think this sentence deserves elaboration.
Question.
How many voters vote for their mp or the dude on the who's on the telly a lot in a general election?
PJV3
Member
It's really complicated I think.
The base of the party certainly isn't, and the latest batch of MPs are incredibly Thatcherite, but socially they have moved in terms of minorities I think.
Having the LibDem's as partners has muddied everything and allowed Cameron some space to be more classically liberal.
CyclopsRock
Member
Well, the obvious answer is with another question; who was more liberal? Thatcher, with her section 28 and support of Pinochet? Major, with his back to basics and train privatisation? The current day Tory party has legalised gay marriage, ringfenced NHS and foreign aid spending in the face of cuts, raised the tax free allowance by a good 60% (a lib demand policy, to be sure, but not much got into the coalition agreement that the Tories didn't already want) but , got more green tax cuts and carbon charges than any government before etc. Perhaps liberal was the wrong word - I guess I meant 'lefty' (again, in the context of the Conservative party history, not the wide political spectrun). But again I ask, who has been *more* Liberal than Cameron at the helm of the Tories?
A timely story about the Tory's privatisation of court & police interpreters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-22483076
Good, ol' shitty Capita. Fuck up everything they touch but still get gov contracts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-22483076
Good, ol' shitty Capita. Fuck up everything they touch but still get gov contracts.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Fixed.
Look at G4S. Can't even manage to take care of some people running in circles and throwing things yet they've just been awarded a contract to help look after the 8 most powerful people in the world.
This sort of shit happens constantly. I wouldn't be surprised if it's all just massive corruption and conflicts of interest.
Problem is there are only 3-4 companies interested/capable of sort of handling the contracts for government. And since they are all set to privatise everything we get stuck with shitty companies regardless of capability or performance.
It really is privatising purely for ideological reasons.
Edit eventually we're going to hit a point where there is no purpose to having a minister 'in charge' since it will all be corporate with no democratic accountability. The English nhs is heading that way.
It really is privatising purely for ideological reasons.
Edit eventually we're going to hit a point where there is no purpose to having a minister 'in charge' since it will all be corporate with no democratic accountability. The English nhs is heading that way.
Don't forget they have charged on average 6% more tax to the higher rate tax payer than the previous government.....
PJV3
Member
Fabricant, Tory vice chair and election strategist. his joke about foreigners bombed pretty hard.
And Merton telling him he was embarrassing himself was a bit awkward(but true).
Nicktendo86
Member
Yeah he was really embarrassing