Election thread

Do you have difficulty sustaining your election?

Re: Election thread

Post by WalMitty @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:53 am

The £1mil family home IHT free idea is a masterstroke.
How many people have parents with a house that is worth more than the current IHT allowance? Lots.
How many people parents will actually die in the next 4 years? Not many.
Ergo, actual cost per vote gained of this tax cut must be pretty tiny. It's even cleverer when you consider it is mostly only going to apply to seats they actually have a hope in.
WalMitty
 
Posts: 2968
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:23 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Tokyo Sexwale @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:57 am

WalMitty wrote:The £1mil family home IHT free idea is a masterstroke.
How many people have parents with a house that is worth more than the current IHT allowance? Lots.
How many people parents will actually die in the next 4 years? Not many.
Ergo, actual cost per vote gained of this tax cut must be pretty tiny. It's even cleverer when you consider it is mostly only going to apply to seats they actually have a hope in.


It's win-win - a political good move and one which actually benefits (some of) the electorate.
User avatar
Tokyo Sexwale
 
Posts: 50100
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:14 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Barbarianna @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 10:25 am

Based purely on passability as a person who might appear OK as an actual person to talk to, Cameron has it over the others.

But his party, like all the others, is full of
- people who are totally bananas or scandalous or twisted or look odd
OR
- a few who look OK and sound OK but are probably aware that they can't do anything really effective when stuck in the crippled system(s) of government(s) that exist in all 21st century ageing democracies.

Why? Dunno fully (am not really intrigued by politics) but here's a stab.
When any political system matures, even if it is a not too bad one like democracy:
- there are too many well learned workarounds for any opposition to use to scupper efffective plans. Filibusters, multiple media planes, personal dirt,
- developed and successful economies (ie where people are mostly housed, jobbed, clothed) ensure that not enough people are on the breadline to truly care who is in power


I am led to wonder, like ypauly, why a politiian doesnt just say 'I dont know, its very hard and complex" when answering hard and complex questions.
My guessed answer is that the electorate does not include too many people who acknowledge the value of such a person.
Who votes? Old people (cynically bigoted and seeking clear answers). Idealistic amnd sometimes bigoted people (will vote on overly simple principles like immioogration).
People who are affected by local issues (employment, poverty). Paranoid people (vote on defence, or fear othe other parties they dont know)
Barbarianna
 
Posts: 4383
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by tanglerat @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 10:29 am

Käsemeister wrote:
Turntable wrote:Recently I have talked to a few labour voters out of curiosity and have been amazed at a consistent trait/opinion they all have.
The ones who I have spoken to are 100% indifferent that labour repeatedly fcuk up our economy and spend way more than they earn.
I cant believe how a healthy economy is not the main priority for every single person no matter what their leanings.


I have no original thoughts or whatever the idiom is.


I am too dumb to hold an opinion
User avatar
tanglerat
Ruler of the Queen's Navee
 
Posts: 7625
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:49 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 10:47 am

Norman D. Cheese wrote:I am led to wonder, like ypauly, why a politiian doesnt just say 'I dont know, its very hard and complex" when answering hard and complex questions.
My guessed answer is that the electorate does not include too many people who acknowledge the value of such a person.
Who votes? Old people (cynically bigoted and seeking clear answers). Idealistic amnd sometimes bigoted people (will vote on overly simple principles like immioogration).
People who are affected by local issues (employment, poverty). Paranoid people (vote on defence, or fear othe other parties they dont know)


Good point.
THe thing I hate about politics is how each party treats every issue as black and white, and claims it to be fact that their ideas will definitely be the best and that the oppositions idea has no merit whatsoever.
It is fcuking pathetic, and makes me exasperated as to why there is no common sense third party who says things like "Labour has a bit of a point about increasing spending, it may help, conservatives also have a point about austerity, but the truth is that nobody knows what's correct so we will take it step by step rather than declare something will last for 4 years regardless of whether it doesn't work"
TO me it seems obvious, but perhaps as alluded to, there are just too many thick people who have not got on iota of whats going on and need to feel that the Government knows exactly what to do.
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:12 am

How relevant are the up to date polls?
Obviously, even if they are accurate, they only show percentages and not seats. Is there any reliable predictor of seat victories?
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Pigeon @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:32 am

jimbob wrote:I used to have to work 12-14hrs a day 7 days a week sometimes for up to three months without a day off doing a job I wasnt exactly a fan of but it was the best I could do and paid the bills. I did not run around blaming politicians or anyone else for my lot in life.


You should have done, because it's their fault. They are the ones with the power to change things to not be shit and they don't. It may be something that you can't affect by who you vote for, because all parties are the same about it with the only exception apparently being the Greens and they'll never get in anyway, but that doesn't mean it isn't something that politicians shouldn't be moaned at for.

Turntable wrote:Recently I have talked to a few labour voters out of curiosity and have been amazed at a consistent trait/opinion they all have.
The ones who I have spoken to are 100% indifferent that labour repeatedly fcuk up our economy and spend way more than they earn.
I cant believe how a healthy economy is not the main priority for every single person no matter what their leanings.


I think it's entirely understandable. Labour "fcuking up our economy" manifests itself as posh cnuts on telly saying stuff which boils down to "I am rich but I think I should be richer and I blame Labour for it". Tories "fixing our economy" manifests itself as things which were OK being made shit, and things which were shit being made more shit, while Tory politicians say it has to be done when clearly it doesn't because the last lot didn't do it. "Things" especially including the NHS which pretty well everyone agrees is a good thing and should not be made shit. So "the economy" ends up as being a shorthand for "the self-interest of rich cnuts who can pay for private medical care and don't care if I get ill" to which "fcuk them" is a natural reaction.
User avatar
Pigeon
CTF Technical Expert
CTF Technical Expert
 
Posts: 24204
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: All alone in the crazy city

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:53 am

Pigeon wrote:[Tories "fixing our economy" manifests itself as things which were OK being made shit, and things which were shit being made more shit, while Tory politicians say it has to be done when clearly it doesn't because the last lot didn't do it.


And we spiralled into colossal debt. To give a household analogy, if you were to earn £25k per year and spend £50k per year at some stage that has to stop or you get made bankrupt. That's exactly what Labour were doing, and Conservatives, rightly, had to put a stop to it. Just because in Labour's tenure we didn't actually run out of money, it doesn't mean that we never would. Eventually you DO run out of other people's money which labour and their voters can't seem to comprehend.

Pigeon wrote: "Things" especially including the NHS which pretty well everyone agrees is a good thing and should not be made shit. So "the economy" ends up as being a shorthand for "the self-interest of rich cnuts who can pay for private medical care and don't care if I get ill" to which "fcuk them" is a natural reaction.


I forgot to add this bit to my rant. All Labour voters appear to imply that Conservatives continually fcuk over the NHS whilst Labour doesn't. The NHS has deteriorated consistently (or so we are told) regardless of who has been in power. Other than this austerity which has been across all sections, COnservatives have spent as much as labour on it and are pledging to spend more this next term.
Where do you get this statement from?
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Pigeon @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 12:02 pm

I'm talking about perceptions.
User avatar
Pigeon
CTF Technical Expert
CTF Technical Expert
 
Posts: 24204
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: All alone in the crazy city

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 12:22 pm

Pigeon wrote:I'm talking about perceptions.


Oh I see.
You did such a good job of emulating the conversations I have had lately it felt like I had inadvertently fallen into another one.
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Strawman @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 12:51 pm

Turntable wrote:It is fcuking pathetic, and makes me exasperated as to why there is no common sense third party who says things like "Labour has a bit of a point about increasing spending, it may help, conservatives also have a point about austerity, but the truth is that nobody knows what's correct so we will take it step by step rather than declare something will last for 4 years regardless of whether it doesn't work"


I heard a slightly amusing thing, Manifesto from the words: manifest- a document listing plans of action, and O - as in Oh we didn't manage to do that after all.
User avatar
Strawman
 
Posts: 40304
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:50 pm
Location: insignificant next to the power of the force

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:14 pm

Strawman wrote:I heard a slightly amusing thing, Manifesto from the words: manifest- a document listing plans of action, and O - as in Oh we didn't manage to do that after all.


And then did the funny thing happen afterwards?
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Strawman @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:17 pm

Yeah but I can't be bothered typing it. The bookmakers reckon Nigel Farrage will be my next MP which is a bit embarassing even though I'll vote for whoever is second favourite on the day.

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... ning-party
Last edited by Strawman on Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Strawman
 
Posts: 40304
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:50 pm
Location: insignificant next to the power of the force

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:03 pm

Turntable wrote:How relevant are the up to date polls?
Obviously, even if they are accurate, they only show percentages and not seats. Is there any reliable predictor of seat victories?

This is the best site I am aware of

http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/

As the May2015 site's prediction itself is based on Ashcroft's polls in the marginals, and generic national polls everywhere else, I suspect that is most accurate (unfortunately).

But they are all subject to such errors that the outcome could easily be different.

I do hope the Tories have a few good surprises up their sleeve

A big poster with the "there's no money left" note might be a start
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31403
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by thekungfury @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:27 pm

Turntable wrote:Recently I have talked to a few labour voters out of curiosity and have been amazed at a consistent trait/opinion they all have.
The ones who I have spoken to are 100% indifferent that labour repeatedly fcuk up our economy and spend way more than they earn.
I cant believe how a healthy economy is not the main priority for every single person no matter what their leanings.

Why would people care if the economy is healthy as long as they're OK? Being really flippant about it surely ending global child hunger and poverty should be your main priority?

People often don't really care about the things beyond their direct line of sight and we're all guilty of it to some degree or another.

What annoys me most about the average Labour voter is the opinion that someone else should pay for it. Specifically the ones they deem better off than them. Balls was on the radio this morning saying he'd get £Xbn from going after tax evasion and tax avoidance. Not "aggressive tax avoidance", the sort of dodgy loans like Jimmy Carr did, just tax avoidance.

There are plenty of perfectly legit tax avoidance things we already do. Pensions, ISA, childcare vouchers etc. I don't trust Labour not to nibble away at these once they need to throw more money into social welfare.
User avatar
thekungfury
 
Posts: 36525
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:27 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: Election thread

Post by Deuteronomy @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:32 pm

TKF wrote:
Turntable wrote:Recently I have talked to a few labour voters out of curiosity and have been amazed at a consistent trait/opinion they all have.
The ones who I have spoken to are 100% indifferent that labour repeatedly fcuk up our economy and spend way more than they earn.
I cant believe how a healthy economy is not the main priority for every single person no matter what their leanings.

Why would people care if the economy is healthy as long as they're OK? Being really flippant about it surely ending global child hunger and poverty should be your main priority?

People often don't really care about the things beyond their direct line of sight and we're all guilty of it to some degree or another.

What annoys me most about the average Labour voter is the opinion that someone else should pay for it. Specifically the ones they deem better off than them. Balls was on the radio this morning saying he'd get £Xbn from going after tax evasion and tax avoidance. Not "aggressive tax avoidance", the sort of dodgy loans like Jimmy Carr did, just tax avoidance.

There are plenty of perfectly legit tax avoidance things we already do. Pensions, ISA, childcare vouchers etc. I don't trust Labour not to nibble away at these once they need to throw more money into social welfare.


I agree - they can never explain where the money comes from.
User avatar
Deuteronomy
 
Posts: 17581
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:57 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by jimbob @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:46 pm

Pigeon the only person who's fault it was is my own. I cannot expect the government to provide me with the Job I would LIKE to do and the hours I would LIKE to do etc.

The only person who could change my circumstances was me and at the time I had no real options due to education,, experience etc. I could have got a job working elsewhere with less hours or I could even have just worked less hours but I would have earned less and then could not have kept up with my financial responsibilities.

I could have tried to do a government sponsored apprenticeship but then would not have been earning enough to keep up with my financial responsibilities.

It was a classic catch 22 but it was for me to sort out not the government.

It is for that reason I get annoyed with people who complain that they have to commute long distance to work etc and try blame the government for their situation. I bet the husband of the woman I quoted above has not bothered to look for a job in the area where she has to work as they don't want to live in Scotland. It is such a common theme.

It really does not matter whether you WANT to live in Scotland. If that is where your work life balance would be best then that is what you have to do. Compromise.
Last edited by jimbob on Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jimbob
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:38 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:58 pm

TKF wrote:Why would people care if the economy is healthy as long as they're OK? Being really flippant about it surely ending global child hunger and poverty should be your main priority?
.


You're right and I can see where the thought process comes from, but to me it is so obvious that whatever your ideals are, and whatever you want to do with [I]the money[I/], you are going to have far more of it if the economy is strong.
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by jimbob @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:20 pm

Quite and todays headlines are Milliband stating the economy will be safe in his hands yet he hasn't even got into office and the economy is being negativeley affected by his statements reference bringing back the 50% tax rate the non dom rules and his anti business attitude. Apparently the housing market £2million plus is slowing dramatically as people are worried about mansion tax.

As I understand it the higher end housing market drags the lower end market up. Granted not always a good thing as it puts new/young buyers further away from owning their own home but it is a bit of a requirement.
Last edited by jimbob on Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jimbob
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:38 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by thekungfury @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:43 pm

Turntable wrote:
TKF wrote:Why would people care if the economy is healthy as long as they're OK? Being really flippant about it surely ending global child hunger and poverty should be your main priority?
.


You're right and I can see where the thought process comes from, but to me it is so obvious that whatever your ideals are, and whatever you want to do with the money[I/], you are going to have far more of it if the economy is strong.

Yeah but all [i]they (the thor) see is the rich getting richer when the economy does well. There is an element of truth to it and wealth inequality is as big as ever. I'm not saying they're right, far from it, as I believe wealth does eventually trickle down and it matters not to me whether the richest people have £1Bn or £100Bn.

However I would not be surprised if they didn't consider themselves as part of "the economy". That's the stuff that other people do. They can afford it.
User avatar
thekungfury
 
Posts: 36525
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:27 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:49 pm

TKF wrote:However I would not be surprised if they didn't consider themselves as part of "the economy". That's the stuff that other people do. They can afford it.


Makes sense. Sounds to me that their jobs are a little more secure than they deserve!
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31943
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by jimbob @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 4:35 pm

Someone suggested somewhere that they should make it law that if a political party does not keep to its manifesto promises they are fired.

I found it moderately amusing. That's kind of the point of an election albeit with reg the EU referendum I wish that such a law existed so that Cam and co would be fired when they don't keep their promise to hold a referendum in 2017 (assuming they get anything near a majority)

Though I suppose it would make bugger all difference as they would be lined up for their cushy EU jobs/pensions for life anyway.
Last edited by jimbob on Mon Apr 13, 2015 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jimbob
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:38 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:24 pm

Turntable wrote:
Pigeon wrote:[Tories "fixing our economy" manifests itself as things which were OK being made shit, and things which were shit being made more shit, while Tory politicians say it has to be done when clearly it doesn't because the last lot didn't do it.


And we spiralled into colossal debt. To give a household analogy, if you were to earn £25k per year and spend £50k per year at some stage that has to stop or you get made bankrupt. That's exactly what Labour were doing, and Conservatives, rightly, had to put a stop to it. Just because in Labour's tenure we didn't actually run out of money, it doesn't mean that we never would. Eventually you DO run out of other people's money which labour and their voters can't seem to comprehend.

Pigeon wrote: "Things" especially including the NHS which pretty well everyone agrees is a good thing and should not be made shit. So "the economy" ends up as being a shorthand for "the self-interest of rich cnuts who can pay for private medical care and don't care if I get ill" to which "fcuk them" is a natural reaction.


I forgot to add this bit to my rant. All Labour voters appear to imply that Conservatives continually fcuk over the NHS whilst Labour doesn't. The NHS has deteriorated consistently (or so we are told) regardless of who has been in power. Other than this austerity which has been across all sections, COnservatives have spent as much as labour on it and are pledging to spend more this next term.
Where do you get this statement from?


Quite right. The amount of bollocks talked by all sides about the NHS is unbelievable. I'd include doctors in that, they come up with all sorts of shite.

The bottom line is all parties realise it's unsustainable. It will not be able to provide everything without external funding from the private sector. Also hospitals have been run appallingly and debts written off. That has to be stopped as the waste is monumental. Labour privatised the NHS more than any party in the past or current, with Pfi contracts and paying foreign companies do waiting list initiatives.

The any willing provider does not mean we will have to pay more, rather infrastructure and costs are paid by the private sector. The backlash has been both hysterical and ridiculous.

My own view is that the NHS needs to be run independent of the govt. it needs to be accountable to a cross party committee but not a minister, because they change all the time and no long term strategy can happen. Labour will never allow this as its an issue they like to politicise, and that is the most selfish, cnuty thing any politician could do. The Tories would be more likely to do it, but would face hysterical opposition.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6794
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by jimbob @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:35 pm

My only concern with the conservatives doing it is that I work within public sector privately and have seen the effect of the conservatives. They have all the right ideas but absolutely no clue how to properly implement things.

The constant change of politicians is another issue that has always bugged me. How can someone who was minister for Health be moved to a job as Minister for roads and transport for example and be able to carry out the job properly. Especially since often it is a very quick change with no time for changing hands.

You sure as hell could not run a business the same way.
jimbob
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:38 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Barbarianna @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 8:11 pm

968 wrote:Quite right. The amount of bollocks talked by all sides about the NHS is unbelievable. I'd include doctors in that, they come up with all sorts of shite.

The bottom line is all parties realise it's unsustainable. It will not be able to provide everything without external funding from the private sector. Also hospitals have been run appallingly and debts written off. That has to be stopped as the waste is monumental. Labour privatised the NHS more than any party in the past or current, with Pfi contracts and paying foreign companies do waiting list initiatives.

The any willing provider does not mean we will have to pay more, rather infrastructure and costs are paid by the private sector. The backlash has been both hysterical and ridiculous.

My own view is that the NHS needs to be run independent of the govt. it needs to be accountable to a cross party committee but not a minister, because they change all the time and no long term strategy can happen. Labour will never allow this as its an issue they like to politicise, and that is the most selfish, cnuty thing any politician could do. The Tories would be more likely to do it, but would face hysterical opposition.


Good post.
Barbarianna
 
Posts: 4383
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Käsemeister @ Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:35 pm

Very.
User avatar
Käsemeister
 
Posts: 37375
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:24 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation.

Re: Election thread

Post by peterpeter @ Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:12 am

for a cnut
User avatar
peterpeter
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:17 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by peterpeter @ Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:13 am

968 wrote:Amazingly there's no thread yet, so here it is. Depressingly it looks like Labour will win and Ed Miliband will be the next PM. Am I wrong? I hope so.


stop shitting your pants will you.
User avatar
peterpeter
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:17 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Deuteronomy @ Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:57 am

peterpeter wrote:
968 wrote:Amazingly there's no thread yet, so here it is. Depressingly it looks like Labour will win and Ed Miliband will be the next PM. Am I wrong? I hope so.


stop shitting your pants will you.


Laugh
User avatar
Deuteronomy
 
Posts: 17581
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:57 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Jorge Orwell @ Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:32 pm

jimbob wrote: They have all the right ideas but absolutely no clue how to properly implement things.


I think it's fair to say, that no government in the past couple of decades at least, has had a clue how to implement change / new ideas properly.

in 2007 I was asked by a public sector client, to look at the proposal for a solution, that the then government wanted to implement to track every time a public sector service interacted with people under the age of 18 . . . . the proposal contained no details on how it would work and essentially asked the client to put a bid in to achieve something they were refusing to define, the project surprisingly didn't go ahead
User avatar
Jorge Orwell
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Out of my very tiny mind

PreviousNext

Return to Political Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

yt
  Enable youtube titles
cron