Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Indeed when people spend thousands on Chinese electronics is that any different?

I save roughly half my wages each month and don't plan to spend any of it on UK manufactured goods or services. Does that make me a bad person?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

JO SWINSON'S office has reportedly been cordoned off by police after a suspect package was left outside.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...uspect-package

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Of course it doesn't make you a bad person, as Mr K says, it's your money to do with however it takes your fancy.

It may make you seem hypocritical though, if you start going on about economies and global warming ;) :p:

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...past-2020.html

So, even if we leave with a deal, it’ll probably end up as a no-deal Brexit.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I think he was highlighting Hypocrisy full stop.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You’re out of step with much of the world, where simple majority is the rule in the vast majority of cases. Where that is qualified, it is usually done so via a quorum or in federal systems by requiring a yes vote in a majority of states also.

https://researchbriefings.files.parl...09/SN02809.pdf

Yet the Lib Dems declared it a baby step in the right direction and campaigned for Yes.

I am sceptical that most of the British electorate saw the question in so technical terms as the reform campaigner cited at Wikiwand and am content that as an exercise in determining appetite for change, the referendum adequately showed that the British electorate are sufficiently happy with the present system to leave it as is.

In the 2017 election, despite the plurality of parties available, well over 80% of all votes went to either Labour or Conservative.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

So the penny has eventually dropped. As nomadking, myself and other leave supporters have been trying to tell you. The WA is not a deal, never has been, never will be.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Well, that's if you believe "Downing Street says..." :D

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Given that the Tories need to find a way to neutralise Farage, a couple of dog-whistle briefings in the right ears (e.g. the politics desk at the Daily Mail) suggesting there is still the opportunity to walk away from the EU without any ongoing relationship at all, might make sense from a Tory strategist’s point of view.

---------- Post added at 16:41 ---------- Previous post was at 16:38 ----------

Also, Nigel’s policy isn’t going down entirely well with everyone in the Brexit party, where at least one or two people think he may have taken leave of his senses.

https://order-order.com/2019/11/04/s...disagreements/

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I see your pedantry has not gone away, jfman. Of course I understand the difference between the deficit and the national debt. 'Paid off' may not be the appropriate turn of phrase, but I'm sure that most people on here knew what I meant.

The deficit has now come down to manageable levels, which means we can start to actually reduce the debt rather than continue to increase it.

I don't know where you get the idea that I want to eliminate the role of the state. I have never said that. I believe in a mixed economy. However, the role of the state should be kept under control and should not be allowed to proliferate. There are things the state does well and there are things the privatised sector does better. We should use whichever method is more efficient.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The penny never left the floor, so didn't need to drop - that's why there was a period after the exit to make a deal.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I’m not being pedantic for the sake of it, however if people don’t understand macroeconomic concepts it’s a reasonable stance to take that they don’t understand macroeconomics.

It’s much easier, and obviously accurate, to use the phrase “reduced the deficit” than introduce “paying off” as inaccurate terminology.

We aren’t reducing debt either. The national debt is the highest it has ever been.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Not so. The use of the Supermajority is common across the world for important, high impact decisions - see https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Supermaj...ound_the_world

The major lesson learnt here is that the approach the UK took to this referendum was deeply flawed.

You last point is self evident: in a FPTP system, of course the two main parties would get the majority of the votes. That is the natural evolution of such an electoral system.

---------- Post added at 17:39 ---------- Previous post was at 17:38 ----------

and that many, including members on this forum, are content with.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Yes, yes, you've made a point about terminology, but you have assumed too much and you have taken this much too far. You need to calm yourself.

The Conservatives have in fact indicated that they are now in a position to bring down the national debt, which is what I was referring to. I've already explained why the national debt is so high.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You are factually incorrect. The UK's approach was perfectly standard, evidence based and well supported by research.

There is some relevant discussion here, from the Scottish Parliament, where such things are obviously of ongoing interest:

The strength of the system is that it forces major political parties to become broad coalitions. Arguments over policy take place within these parties prior to an election, and a manifesto is produced which the winning party can then be judged against.

Proportional systems encourage fragmentation of politics into narrow interest groups which then fight for influence after an election. The policy programme of the resulting coalition government is the result of closed-doors negotiations that take place after the election. It becomes increasingly difficult to hold any of the participants to account; it also becomes more difficult for the electorate to choose a radically different direction at the following election because many of the same small parties will still be courted for their support, in return for implementing aspects of their own agendas, even though those agendas received minimal electoral support.

Mass participation in a two party system is, I believe, better than the endless rainbow coalitions of PR.