[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So you think if there's a flat rate of income tax, those 1,001 ways will disappear for those that have the money to use and abuse them

In which case, I'm an anarchist. If only people would simply take responsibility for their place and responsibilities in society everything would be really lovely.

And as for a voting system which forces Johnson and Patel to hold hands merrily with Ken Clarke and Rory Stewart, all in the name of 'Getting and Keeping Power', there should be at least three Tory parties and probably the same number of Labour parties if people really wanted to vote for MPs with principles. FPTP encourages 'career politicians' to get on side with the 'winners'. Meanwhile the country gets f***ed

Whereas PR gives you Berlusconi, and that ponce in charge of France.

And no, on its own a flat rate of tax won't stop tax dodging. We would need to repeal the laws that allow tax dodging, too. Cunning plan

 

[A1X]

 

[WATFORD zero]

Whereas PR gives you Berlusconi, and that ponce in charge of France.

And no, on its own a flat rate of tax won't stop tax dodging. We would need to repeal the laws that allow tax dodging, too. Cunning plan

It's going to take more than a bottle of Malbec to get us agreeing on this Harry, but it'll be a good night and I look forward to it

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It's going to take more than a bottle of Malbec to get us agreeing on this Harry, but it'll be a good night and I look forward to it

Indeed.

I have no idea if I'm right, by the way. Just exploring an idea....alas it will never be tested so we shall never know if it may work.

 

[beorhthelm]

Whereas PR gives you Berlusconi, and that ponce in charge of France.

And no, on its own a flat rate of tax won't stop tax dodging. We would need to repeal the laws that allow tax dodging, too. Cunning plan

France isnt PR, its convoluted FPTP. get 50% or have a run off, where FPTP applies. expect many others are not PR when look at them more closely.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

France isnt PR, its convoluted FPTP. get 50% or have a run off, where FPTP applies. expect many others are not PR when look at them more closely.

That’s the for the President not the government.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I am not necessarily against a coalition government. Albeit nobody ever voted for any such coalition. But I am implacably against PR.

If Labour cannot sort itself out so it is electable, so be it. And I say that as a member of the Labour party

Wouldn't you rather have a government formed by parties that 60% of the electorate voted for, working together for the common good, rather than one party representing 40% of the electorate working to line their own pockets?

 

[Chicken Run]

Tory meltdown incoming...

Or maybe not, as Asda announce they will drop the Smart Price range...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/asda-axes-smart-price-range-23525479.amp

Ok let’s use Tesco as an example[emoji6]

Although your just getting excited by headlines, it’s worth reading the whole story [emoji6]

“The supermarket firm, which was bought by the Issa brothers and backers TDR Capital last year, said it will axe its Smart Price range and replace it with new Just Essentials by Asda products. It said the new budget range will comprise 300 products, a 50% increase on the current Smart Price range.@

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

France isnt PR, its convoluted FPTP. get 50% or have a run off, where FPTP applies. expect many others are not PR when look at them more closely.

Apologies.

I was told by another poster that only the UK and Belarus used the antequated FPTP system.

I, personally, don't care what they do, as long as it isn't invade the UK.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

That is fair comment.

Yes, most countries in Europe may have PR. They are also richer, cleaner and fairer than the UK. People work shorter hours, have more bank holidays, better health care, better education systems, even better weather.

We, on the other hand, have a feckless, overworked, underpaid population with bad teeth. We have small shitty roads, horrible post-war brutalist architecture, haphazard education, second rate (albeit free at the point of use) healthcare, and a cockamamie government.

But that's the way we like it. British. Distinct. A bit shit. And a bit plucky.

We couldn't cope with PR. We wouldn't understand it. Voter turnout would plummet. Political parties wouldn't know how to game it. We'd end up with some oaf like Farrage as PM.

I love living in England. We are a bit peculiar, and FPTP suits us.

In any case, nothing to debate here. It isn't ever going to change because turkeys (Labour and Tory turkeys) don't vote for Christmas, and the naked self-interest of the parties who favour PR is laughably palpable.

We’ve had at least five coalition governments in the last 200 years, and not just in wartime.

 

[Baldseagull]

Indeed.

I have no idea if I'm right, by the way. Just exploring an idea....alas it will never be tested so we shall never know if it may work.

Lib Dems had single rate of tax in a manifesto not so many years ago.

 

[mikeyjh]

My left wing brother thinks that (for example) if one person earns £10,000 and pays £1,000 in tax then it is fair that if another person earns £100,000 they should pay £20,000 in tax, and if a third person earns £1,000,000 they should pay £400,000 in tax. He calls that 'progressive'. I call it an abuse of the laws of mathematics and reason.

I'm not sure if I'm being whooshed but that's the very definition of progressive tax, your brothers definition is, literally, correct!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Wouldn't you rather have a government formed by parties that 60% of the electorate voted for, working together for the common good, rather than one party representing 40% of the electorate working to line their own pockets?

Yes.

Unfortunately a majority of the electorate would not support it. And there's an irony.

The gerrymandering constituency boundary arrangements are of course a separate matter, and there is much to be said about fiddling with this.

That said, if you look at voter intentions per square mile, the UK is overwhelmingly conservative. An argument could be made that giving proportional reputation to the massed throng of lefties in the major cities is not fair to those living in more sparsely populated regions. This, indeed, is why the rural states are disproportionately represented in the US presidential electoral college.

No, for me, Labour needs to get its vote out. After the Corbyn interlude, there remains a deal of time and effort required, still. Any talk of formal coalitions before the GE will be suicidal, and people will start grizzling that 'we don't know what we're voting for', and the tories will crow that 'you don't know what you're voting for'.

 

[Hugo Rune]

France isnt PR, its convoluted FPTP. get 50% or have a run off, where FPTP applies. expect many others are not PR when look at them more closely.

France is NOT FPTP. It’s PV.

Take a read:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting

This system makes sure the most ‘preferred’ candidate always wins and would wipe out the Tories in a lot of cases, it’s really nothing like FPTP where you can, in theory, win with 20% of the vote or even less I’d there is enough candidates.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I'm not sure if I'm being whooshed but that's the very definition of progressive tax, your brothers definition is, literally, correct!

No, you're not. Yes, that is 'progressive' tax. As someone who love a bit of progress, I see it as retrogressive, soaking the rich.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

We’ve had at least five coalition governments in the last 200 years, and not just in wartime.

Indeed. And nobody voted for them. They were arrangements of convenience. And they all (as far as I recall) ended in tears.

 

[zefarelly]

And another one. Not just green but also trying to distance the local from the central conservatives. It's like they're almost ashamed.

[tweet]1521806308118343680[/tweet]

Shameful.

Not that they give a ****, anything to keep the butter and the bread

 

[Pavilionaire]

Yes.

Unfortunately a majority of the electorate would not support it. And there's an irony.

The gerrymandering constituency boundary arrangements are of course a separate matter, and there is much to be said about fiddling with this.

That said, if you look at voter intentions per square mile, the UK is overwhelmingly conservative. An argument could be made that giving proportional reputation to the massed throng of lefties in the major cities is not fair to those living in more sparsely populated regions. This, indeed, is why the rural states are disproportionately represented in the US presidential electoral college.

No, for me, Labour needs to get its vote out. After the Corbyn interlude, there remains a deal of time and effort required, still. Any talk of formal coalitions before the GE will be suicidal, and people will start grizzling that 'we don't know what we're voting for', and the tories will crow that 'you don't know what you're voting for'.

Haven't we just got to the point that ANY government is better that this shit shower? And to be honest, do you see much clear blue water between Labour and Lib Dems on policy, while everybody's Green now, right?

And who knows what they're voting for anyway? No tax rises. £350 million a week to the NHS. Getting immigration down to the tens of thousands. Control of our borders. Strong on crime, strong on the causes of crime. Strong and Stable - all total bollocks.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

In honesty? My suspicion is never. As others have pointed out, a lot of people have picked a tribe.

Democracy only works well when the electorate bother to read manifestos, and (to an extent) take looking back at past iterations of a party, and its current personalities out of the equation.

It’s not X-Factor, it’s the policies you’re really voting for. Some seemingly unlikable people are actually quite good at their jobs, although the current crop seem to combine charmlessness with incompetence, in a “worst of both worlds” manner.

You will have seen on this very thread a number of comments along the lines of “I’ll never vote x” which is a ludicrous position to take.

Politics shouldn’t be treated like football, it isn’t pick a side and support your team whatever happens. America is broken precisely because both sides have managed to weaponise their support in exactly this manner, and terrifyingly it works.

https://ed.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/party_over_policy_0.pdf

The research linked to above is wordy and not going to be for everyone, but (paraphrasing) what it showed was:

Students at Yale (who earlier in the term had self-identified as partisan and claimed welfare was something they felt strongly about) were all given (fake) newspaper details of a welfare bill, where the details had been changed in the following ways:

1. Some copies of the article detailed an extremely harsh welfare regime, while others detailed an extremely generous welfare regime.

2. Some copies of each of the above types of article had quotes from prominent Republicans supporting the deal, while other copies (of both types) had quotes from prominent Democrats supporting the deal.

3. Participants were then asked to rate their favourability toward the proposed scheme, and the results showed that it didn’t matter whether the scheme was harsh or generous, all that mattered was whether the scheme was endorsed by their tribe or the “other” tribe. The students paid no attention to the scheme itself, only who endorsed it.

These test subjects were students at one of America’s top universities, who had stated that they had a strong interest in the subject, and yet neither side picked out the scheme which technically fitted their politics.

There can be no improvement in our public life until we find a way to shake off the idea that our politics is integral to our identity, and instead treat our politics as something we select at each election. Sorry for the length of the post.

Sadly very true, I wonder how many inherit their voting choice for life as well

 

[WATFORD zero]

Yes.

Unfortunately a majority of the electorate would not support it. And there's an irony.

The gerrymandering constituency boundary arrangements are of course a separate matter, and there is much to be said about fiddling with this.

That said, if you look at voter intentions per square mile, the UK is overwhelmingly conservative. An argument could be made that giving proportional reputation to the massed throng of lefties in the major cities is not fair to those living in more sparsely populated regions. This, indeed, is why the rural states are disproportionately represented in the US presidential electoral college.

No, for me, Labour needs to get its vote out. After the Corbyn interlude, there remains a deal of time and effort required, still. Any talk of formal coalitions before the GE will be suicidal, and people will start grizzling that 'we don't know what we're voting for', and the tories will crow that 'you don't know what you're voting for'.

You do realise that the reason Corbyn took over YOUR Labour party is because there's at least a couple of 'Labour parties' in there ?

And what do you think Rory Stewart felt about Johnson taking over HIS Tory party?

We need politicians to nail their colours and stand by what they believe in. And that is not going to happen all he time we pretend there are only two parties