Yes or no to the AV?

18 Apr 2011

Quote by fem_4_taboo
i suspect a large amount of people dont know all that stuff before placing a vote, and to be fair how many people have voted for a party and the party then change its plans?
too many people benefit from the outcomes of the votes but fail to take part, and too many moan but failed to vote in the first place.
maybe if it was made compulsory the schools would ensure pupils took politics seriousely and people would start to feel a part of this county rather than a consequence of it.
so many people i know feel when they are scamming the benefit system etc thats they are screwing those at the top, they dont reaslise its probally their best mate who has worked his/her arse off to pay the taxes so those at the top can pay out that benefit check.
thats just one thing, basically lots of people do not care because they didnt have to.
i also think there should be a option to re elect if they change a policy, you cant buy a hoover and not expect it to work, i dont expect my vote to be watsted on a person who doesnt do what it says either.
x fem x

I agree, most people don't know anything about the political and economic philosophies of the parties for whom they vote and that is one of the reasons political parties don't tell the whole truth when they canvass for votes. Let me give you an example. Whilst the political philosophers on whom Left parties base their views believe that the lower classes (I,m sorry, but I won't use that ridiculous, hypocritical British euphemism 'working classes-we all work for a living) are lower class because of their NURTURE, ie the economic and social conditions into which they were born, the political philosophers on whom Right parties base their views believe that the lower classes are lower class because of NATURE ie that they are unintelligent and so incapable of rising.
In the past, Right parties did not need to keep their views on this quiet because the lower classes were not allowed to vote. But as a result of the introduction of universal suffrage, the lower classes can vote now, and as they form the biggest section of society, any political party wishing to take power needs to get the support of a substantial section of this class. But they are unlikely to get it if they proclaim that these people are lower class because they are naturally unintelligent and incapable of rising. Some lower class people with a propensity for doffing their caps and tugging their forelocks might accept this, but most would probably feel insulted.
I agree that education is the key and Left parties believe very much in education and were responsible for the introduction of free education for all in every society where it exists. Right parties on the other hand do not attach so much importance to education except for the higher classes. They would rather the lower classes didn't learn too much-particularly about subjects such as political philosophy and history. That way, they won't get any ideas into their heads........
With regard to your comments on 'benefit cheats', firstly, if there wasn't such a huge gap between rich and poor, property and rents weren't so high, and a lot of peoples' wages weren't so low, people wouldn't need to cheat benefits. Secondly, as any economist knows, the 'black economy' in the UK is an integral part of the Friedmanite economy we have, and thirdly, the benefits system is the source of a huge number of peoples' incomes from the civil servants who staff it, to he companies which provide the computers, stationery, furnishings, coffee machines, security guards etc etc etc. Also picking on the few people who cheat the benefit system , whilst far easier than picking on the real cheats in our society is total their cheating amounts to a few million which, to a country like the UK is real cheats, such as the big companies and the royal parasites on the other hand cheat the country of billions and billions of pounds.

18 Apr 2011

Quote by fem_4_taboo
i suspect a large amount of people dont know all that stuff before placing a vote, and to be fair how many people have voted for a party and the party then change its plans?
too many people benefit from the outcomes of the votes but fail to take part, and too many moan but failed to vote in the first place.
maybe if it was made compulsory the schools would ensure pupils took politics seriousely and people would start to feel a part of this county rather than a consequence of it.

:thumbup:
if only there were more sensible peeple on here like fem

18 Apr 2011

Quote by HnS
Some confusion here re AV and Proportional Representation ?
Yes we currently have 1st Past the Post elections, the result being on several occasions we'd actually had 'minority' Governments, i.e. a government for which less than half of those people who voted actually voted for.
One long running debate has been Proportial Representation based elections, of which Alternative Vote (AV) and Single Transferable Vote (STV) are just 2 ways of doing it, so as to try and ensure that a government is form for which the majority of voters actually voted for.
(You also have Party Proportionality, Party List and Loser Delegation to name some more)
Sadly what we are being asked to consider in May is a system, or rather version (AV), only used for Parliamentary elections in 3 other countries elsewhere in the world, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Australia (with Fiji planning to scrap it).
It's interesting to note that the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, Green Party of Scotland, English Democrats, and Communist Party (to name but a few) all say that AV is not their prefered way of Voting Reform, most preferring STV.
So basically we are being asked to chose between 1st Past the Post and a version of Proportional Representation that most other countries do not use and which isn't the preference for many political groups in the UK anyway
:doh:
I'm off for a beer :cheers: (perhaps alcohol will help)

The parties in the UK who are voting against AV are the Conservative Party (with the exception of those members aligned to the Conservative Action for Electoral Reform). the NI Democratic Unionists,the BNP, Respect, the Ulster Unionists and the Communist party.
Those voting for are Labour (with the exception of a small grouping), the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, Plaid Cymru,the Northern Alliance Party, the SDLP, Sinn Feinn, the Greens, UKIP,the Scottish Greens,and the English Democrats. So actually most political groups in the UK do prefer AV to the present system, though like myself, some of them would rather have proper proportional AV is a step in the right direction, at least.

18 Apr 2011

Quote by sexyslut79
I agree, most people don't know anything about the political and economic philosophies of the parties for whom they vote and that is one of the reasons political parties don't tell the whole truth when they canvass for votes. Let me give you an example. Whilst the political philosophers on whom Left parties base their views believe that the lower classes (I,m sorry, but I won't use that ridiculous, hypocritical British euphemism 'working classes-we all work for a living) are lower class because of their NURTURE, ie the economic and social conditions into which they were born, the political philosophers on whom Right parties base their views believe that the lower classes are lower class because of NATURE ie that they are unintelligent and so incapable of rising.
In the past, Right parties did not need to keep their views on this quiet because the lower classes were not allowed to vote. But as a result of the introduction of universal suffrage, the lower classes can vote now, and as they form the biggest section of society, any political party wishing to take power needs to get the support of a substantial section of this class. But they are unlikely to get it if they proclaim that these people are lower class because they are naturally unintelligent and incapable of rising. Some lower class people with a propensity for doffing their caps and tugging their forelocks might accept this, but most would probably feel insulted.
I agree that education is the key and Left parties believe very much in education and were responsible for the introduction of free education for all in every society where it exists. Right parties on the other hand do not attach so much importance to education except for the higher classes. They would rather the lower classes didn't learn too much-particularly about subjects such as political philosophy and history. That way, they won't get any ideas into their heads........
With regard to your comments on 'benefit cheats', firstly, if there wasn't such a huge gap between rich and poor, property and rents weren't so high, and a lot of peoples' wages weren't so low, people wouldn't need to cheat benefits. Secondly, as any economist knows, the 'black economy' in the UK is an integral part of the Friedmanite economy we have, and thirdly, the benefits system is the source of a huge number of peoples' incomes from the civil servants who staff it, to he companies which provide the computers, stationery, furnishings, coffee machines, security guards etc etc etc. Also picking on the few people who cheat the benefit system , whilst far easier than picking on the real cheats in our society is total their cheating amounts to a few million which, to a country like the UK is real cheats, such as the big companies and the royal parasites on the other hand cheat the country of billions and billions of pounds.

The cost of the Royal "parasites" in 2009/10 was £38million, benefit fraud and overpayment was some £3.3 billion. Your version of these statistics is as biased as everything else in your post.

18 Apr 2011

Quote by Max777
The cost of the Royal "parasites" in 2009/10 was £38million, benefit fraud and overpayment was some £3.3 billion. Your version of these statistics is as biased as everything else in your post.

I am always surprised that some people on housing benefits are treated with so much more respect than others....I mean 38 million to just a handful of already ultra-rich dole scroungers ...it's nothing is it...only 38 million
how many hospital beds is that ??

18 Apr 2011

AV btw .....no just more half arsed compromised bollocks from a half arsed compromised government

18 Apr 2011

Quote by sexyslut79
With regard to your comments on 'benefit cheats', firstly, if there wasn't such a huge gap between rich and poor, property and rents weren't so high, and a lot of peoples' wages weren't so low, people wouldn't need to cheat benefits.

is that an excuse then for peeple to steel money?
sorry never heard so much the parasite comment well how horrid

18 Apr 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

The cost of the Royal "parasites" in 2009/10 was £38million, benefit fraud and overpayment was some £3.3 billion. Your version of these statistics is as biased as everything else in your post.

I am always surprised that some people on housing benefits are treated with so much more respect than others....I mean 38 million to just a handful of already ultra-rich dole scroungers ...it's nothing is it...only 38 million
how many hospital beds is that ??
No doubt the history lecturer can supply a history lesson on the civil list and how the Crown Estates generates a sizeable surplus for the treasury.

18 Apr 2011

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh headline figures ya gotta love them.
Have a look at the breakdown of the billions of "fraud" then report back to me on how much is "stolen" and how much is written off because of incomptence or time delays. And I dont want bloody links to a shitty tabloid newspaper.
I would do it for you but if you choose to quote a figure I think you should justify it eh?

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh headline figures ya gotta love them.
Have a look at the breakdown of the billions of "fraud" then report back to me on how much is "stolen" and how much is written off because of incomptence or time delays. And I dont want bloody links to a shitty tabloid newspaper.
I would do it for you but if you choose to quote a figure I think you should justify it eh?

:laughabove::laughabove::laughabove:
oh the irony
now with added cut n paste for future reference :twisted:

19 Apr 2011

Bringing this back on subject...
I watched Sam Delaney do the Newspaper review on SkyNews this morning. As usual, he was very entertaining.
He helpfully compared the FPtP system to the voting system for X-Factor - simple, clean, understandable to the majority of the voting population and then the AV system to Deal or No Deal where you don't really know if you've won even if you take the money before the last box is opened and even then you might have lost, or won as the case may be.
I think that comparison was brilliant; it should be used by the "NO" campaigners as nearly everyone can see the logic in that argument.

19 Apr 2011

I think until a better idea than what we have arises ,
Then the voting system should stay as it is

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

The cost of the Royal "parasites" in 2009/10 was £38million, benefit fraud and overpayment was some £3.3 billion. Your version of these statistics is as biased as everything else in your post.

I am always surprised that some people on housing benefits are treated with so much more respect than others....I mean 38 million to just a handful of already ultra-rich dole scroungers ...it's nothing is it...only 38 million
how many hospital beds is that ??
Hold on is the young royal not marrying into a coal mining family ??? (redistribution if wealth and all that )
Tuts!!!geeezzz you just can`t please some rolleyes

19 Apr 2011

Quote by sexyslut79
I agree, most people don't know anything about the political and economic philosophies of the parties for whom they vote and that is one of the reasons political parties don't tell the whole truth when they canvass for votes. Let me give you an example. Whilst the political philosophers on whom Left parties base their views believe that the lower classes (I,m sorry, but I won't use that ridiculous, hypocritical British euphemism 'working classes-we all work for a living) are lower class because of their NURTURE, ie the economic and social conditions into which they were born, the political philosophers on whom Right parties base their views believe that the lower classes are lower class because of NATURE ie that they are unintelligent and so incapable of rising.
In the past, Right parties did not need to keep their views on this quiet because the lower classes were not allowed to vote. But as a result of the introduction of universal suffrage, the lower classes can vote now, and as they form the biggest section of society, any political party wishing to take power needs to get the support of a substantial section of this class. But they are unlikely to get it if they proclaim that these people are lower class because they are naturally unintelligent and incapable of rising. Some lower class people with a propensity for doffing their caps and tugging their forelocks might accept this, but most would probably feel insulted.
I agree that education is the key and Left parties believe very much in education and were responsible for the introduction of free education for all in every society where it exists. Right parties on the other hand do not attach so much importance to education except for the higher classes. They would rather the lower classes didn't learn too much-particularly about subjects such as political philosophy and history. That way, they won't get any ideas into their heads........
With regard to your comments on 'benefit cheats', firstly, if there wasn't such a huge gap between rich and poor, property and rents weren't so high, and a lot of peoples' wages weren't so low, people wouldn't need to cheat benefits. Secondly, as any economist knows, the 'black economy' in the UK is an integral part of the Friedmanite economy we have, and thirdly, the benefits system is the source of a huge number of peoples' incomes from the civil servants who staff it, to he companies which provide the computers, stationery, furnishings, coffee machines, security guards etc etc etc. Also picking on the few people who cheat the benefit system , whilst far easier than picking on the real cheats in our society is total their cheating amounts to a few million which, to a country like the UK is real cheats, such as the big companies and the royal parasites on the other hand cheat the country of billions and billions of pounds.

So i take it your x was wasted at the last election as not enough agreed with your views
And am i to take it you think the last government did a spiffing job loon

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh headline figures ya gotta love them.
Have a look at the breakdown of the billions of "fraud" then report back to me on how much is "stolen" and how much is written off because of incomptence or time delays. And I dont want bloody links to a shitty tabloid newspaper.
I would do it for you but if you choose to quote a figure I think you should justify it eh?

There you go Ben

If you had bothered to read my post properly, you would have seen that I did say the £3.3 billion consisted of fraud and overpayments, and if you check back on all my 1085 posts you will see that I don't do links to "shitty" tabloid newspapers.
Now, in the interests of balance ( that is what you are trying to establish, is it not?), ask the same question from Sexyslut who made the original clamis to which I responded.
Oh, and for further reference, this is a link to the Queens expenditure...not a shitty tabloid link either.

19 Apr 2011

<<< expects a short time lapse whilst Transport House is asked to provide red top links to the next phase...
:smoke:

19 Apr 2011

Thanks Max.
So we can all agree that true benefit fraud is indeed a drop in the ocean and a red herring, which sadly conveys the wrong impression that we are over run with thieves.
I am glad we have sorted that one out. I suppose we can move on now.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Thanks Max.
So we can all agree that true benefit fraud is indeed a drop in the ocean and a red herring, which sadly conveys the wrong impression that we are over run with thieves.
I am glad we have sorted that one out. I suppose we can move on now.

I didn't raise the subject Ben, I merely responded to a post that claimed benefit fraud cost millions whilst royal parasites cost billions and billions. Take the matter up with Sexyslut as I have already advised, although something tells me that you won't

19 Apr 2011

I don't recall sending you a PM about this. I do recall posting a thread on a forum asking posters for clarification. You really must work on this "I am the centre of the universe" issue.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Thanks Max.
So we can all agree that true benefit fraud is indeed a drop in the ocean and a red herring, which sadly conveys the wrong impression that we are over run with thieves.
I am glad we have sorted that one out. I suppose we can move on now.

Ooo, not so fast Ben.
The figures produced in the 2011 report for the period to April 2010 show a significant level of fraud and that it is only the tip of the iceberg as there are many, to which you allude yourself earlier in the thread, who have not yet been "discovered" or measured.

19 Apr 2011

" A significant level fo fraud". Nope they don't. Its a a tiny level of fraud that makes a big number simply cos thats how big numbers work.
For whatever reason ( I suspect benefit cuts as a popular and lucrative money saver) , its in somebodies interest to portray us as a nation of thieves.
I dont think we are and I dont think the beliefs stand up when the facts are considered.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
I don't recall sending you a PM about this. I do recall posting a thread on a forum asking posters for clarification. You really must work on this "I am the centre of the universe" issue.

is this directed at me? If so where have I made any claims regarding you sending me a PM? I think it's you that needs to work on the centre of the universe issue and maybe you should start living up to your signature!!

19 Apr 2011

You took my posts personally, I have no idea why.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
You took my posts personally, I have no idea why.

probably because they were meant to be personal although they made no bloody sense and still don't

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
" A significant level fo fraud". Nope they don't. Its a a tiny level of fraud that makes a big number simply cos thats how big numbers work.
For whatever reason ( I suspect benefit cuts as a popular and lucrative money saver) , its in somebodies interest to portray us as a nation of thieves.
I dont think we are and I dont think the beliefs stand up when the facts are considered.

Any level of fraud - no matter how insignificant it might seem to those who wish to play with the numbers to make up some sort of social justification for claiming something they are not entitled to - is theft, plain and simple.
Why not try, in mitigation, to a Crown Court Judge that as you (not you personally, of course wink

) only stole £1,500 of incorrectly claimed benefit and the total benefit bill runs into £billions that it's only a tiny level of fraud and not worth pursuing in the public interest!
I somehow doubt it will wash.
There are significant numbers of people defrauding the State, their fellow citizens and local enterprises of money or goods to which they are not entitled.
How about shoplifting? Prices go up to cover the cost. Throwing a sickie? Employers costs escalate as they either lose trade or have to pay someone else to do the job. Claiming a disability benefit you know you are not entitled to? Less money to distribute between those with undoubted need. The list goes on.
The label "a nation of thieves" works very well for me in this context.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by sexyslut79
In total their cheating amounts to a few million which, to a country like the UK is peanuts.

And if we punished those that stole from the system that was set up to help them, if we stopped giving benefits to people who can actually go to work, but choose to completely manipulate and abuse the system (as opposed to those who genuinely can't afford to work), if we reduce the mindset that falling pregnant is a career move, having children knowing the state will pay rather than accepting the responsibilities of having children, if we reduce the lure of the benefit system to foreign nationals that want to milk this soft touch state, if the decision makers actually looked at and improved the bloated system we have, then we would have many more of these millions of peanuts you speak of.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by Bluefish2009
I wondered what peoples thoughts here were on this little matter?
My thoughts, at this stage, is I shall be voting No.....

Thought this was an AV discussion thread :small-print: Obviously missed the memo that changed this :doh:
lol

19 Apr 2011

Quote by HnS
I wondered what peoples thoughts here were on this little matter?
My thoughts, at this stage, is I shall be voting No.....

Thought this was an AV discussion thread :small-print: Obviously missed the memo that changed this :doh:
lol

I would like to take this moment to apologise for commenting on a change in a forum topic, which forum topics are prone to do.
I will not be amending my post, but obviously it is wrong, the members can judge me accordingly.

19 Apr 2011

Quote by essex34m
I wondered what peoples thoughts here were on this little matter?
My thoughts, at this stage, is I shall be voting No.....

Thought this was an AV discussion thread :small-print: Obviously missed the memo that changed this :doh:
lol

I would like to take this moment to apologise for commenting on a change in a forum topic, which forum topics are prone to do.
I will not be amending my post, but obviously it is wrong, the members can judge me accordingly.
Guilty as charged....

Isn't that Rayleigh Castle in the background?

19 Apr 2011

Quote by essex34m

In total their cheating amounts to a few million which, to a country like the UK is peanuts.

And if we punished those that stole from the system that was set up to help them, if we stopped giving benefits to people who can actually go to work, but choose to completely manipulate and abuse the system (as opposed to those who genuinely can't afford to work), if we reduce the mindset that falling pregnant is a career move, having children knowing the state will pay rather than accepting the responsibilities of having children, if we reduce the lure of the benefit system to foreign nationals that want to milk this soft touch state, if the decision makers actually looked at and improved the bloated system we have, then we would have many more of these millions of peanuts you speak of.
Spot the Protestant work ethic.... There is nothing virtuous about making money for one's self whatever the inhabitants of Protestant countries have come to believe. And if the inhabitants of countries such as the UK spent less time making money for themselves and more time with their children then we might not have so many emotionally and mentally scarred children about-never mind delinquents. And if they spent less time making money for themselves and more time learning about the world they inhabit we might have fewer political, social, economic and enviromental problems. And if they spent less time making money for themselves and more time relaxing or exercising, the NHS would be spared the huge sums of money it spends on people suffering from stress and medical problems such as heart disease.
How do you know that foreign nationals are attracted to the UK by the lure of benefits? Are you privy to the statistics? I am not, so I reserve judgement.
I agree with you on pregnancy though, and on improving the system. As is so often the case I personally believe the Scandinavian countries and Germany have the right ideas.

Yes or no to the alternative vote?