Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
No, because all the constituencies would be redrawn (exactly how depends on the system), which would help eliminate the current innate labour bias even if no electoral reform took place.
that's one of the reasons Labour prefer AV, you can use the same constituencies and they can maintain their illegitimate advantage due to mismatched constituencies.
oh blah blah blah.
thank god you cleared that up
you could get ajob curing insomniacs
If you didn't get things wrong so often, you wouldn't be corrected so often.
How did the constituencies get messed up, I thought the electoral commission sorted all that out .... oh wait...
if you weren't such a troll I might care.
Because the electoral commision work on a 10 year delay when adjusting boundaries. For example, the boundary changes this year were based on information from 2000...
This process favours labour due to the natural migration of people from inner cities to better areas, leading to them constantly having smaller population sizes. There is also the issue of county and town boundaries that are taken into account.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Grow up. You're wrong, just accept it instead of behaving like a 2 year old.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Interesting.
If we ever were to be given a referendum on electoral reform, how would you see that working? Would it be a straight question of adopting PR, or would we be given a choice between retaining the current system, PR, AV or AV+?
still don't get it, sorry, oh now I do...
so based on population then, wouldn't pr fix that?
would all the people that moved be tory supporters?
If so wouldn't the place they moved to be more likely to be tory?
sounds a crap theory to me.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
Source: Mckinsey Institute. Link to the full report below (in PDF). The chart in question is on page 10.
http://www.mckinsey....full_report.pdf
copied from another forum of doomongers
Your link doesn't work, but I found the graph anyway.
It's not really accurate though, so here's my estimates using figures from 2009 estimates (CIA world factbook because I'm cool and wanted to use one source).
UK public debt: 68.5%
Japan public debt: 192.1%
UK GDP: $2,198,000,000,000
Japan GDP: $5,049,000,000,000
Therefore, UK public debt: $1,505,630,000,000
Japan public debt: $9,699,129,000,000
UK private debt: $9,088,000,000,000
Japan private debt: $2,132,000,000,000
UK total: $10,593,630,000,000
Japan total: $11,831,129,000,000
It's a bit misleading though because the majority of the debts are in different places for each country. Our massive private debt is much more manageable as private debt than it would be as public debt, where as if the situation were reversed we probably would be in a similar situation as Greece (although for different reasons).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
That would be a disaster as people are ignorant (uneducated on the options) or ignorant (lacking any knowledge). Any education campaign would be full of bias as all parties have their own interests. It would be a disaster.
This is why we don't vote on every decision and have MPs to do it for us. For instance, the public won't vote for unpopular things, increasing tax, for instance, that might be very necessary.
Jumping ahead 4 years and things won't look good for the Tories if they get in. Huge cuts would brand them the "evil toffs" again and the benefit scroungers will be seething and desperate to get Labour back in (unless some of them actually find they like working for a living).
I'm not sure, the problem is that many of these things are very complex issues, and the voting populace (as a whole) are not very complex people.
For it to be meaningful, it would (IMO) either have to be a straight choice between two systems, or some form of AV system on the actual ballot.
Whether it would actually get voted in or not, I'm also not sure.
I think that the most laughable thing that the left claim is that all Tories are greedy and in their self-interest.
I's say with the upmost certainty that most of the people voting Labour are dependent on either Labours benefits or public jobs. And are scared ****less about losing them. So voting Labour for them just as greedy and self-interest as anything, the argument is a moot point and baseless.
This is what Labour have been deliberately working towards since 2001. Building a base vote based on this dependency. Immigrants are included in this (just look at the political map of London for an example) because it was so easy to come into this country on lax laws and made a cash-grab of the benefits, the Tories wouldn't make that so easy.
It's just as unfair as the present boundary system; Labour has it so heavily stacked in their favour that it's almost criminal!
People also complaining about his forum being so right, but that doesn't explain why nearly all the forums have similar polls (Cons 1st, LD 2nd, Labour distant 3rd) It's clear that this country is actually right and/or liberal leaning but again the leftist with their loud megaphone voices and post spamming make it seem the other way round.
I's say with the upmost certainty that most of the people voting Labour are dependent on either Labours benefits or public jobs. And are scared ****less about losing them. So voting Labour for them just as greedy and self-interest as anything, the argument is a moot point and baseless.
This is what Labour have been deliberately working towards since 2001. Building a base vote based on this dependency. Immigrants are included in this (just look at the political map of London for an example) because it was so easy to come into this country on lax laws and made a cash-grab of the benefits, the Tories wouldn't make that so easy.
It's just as unfair as the present boundary system; Labour has it so heavily stacked in their favour that it's almost criminal!
People also complaining about his forum being so right, but that doesn't explain why nearly all the forums have similar polls (Cons 1st, LD 2nd, Labour distant 3rd) It's clear that this country is actually right and/or liberal leaning but again the leftist with their loud megaphone voices and post spamming make it seem the other way round.
Last edited:
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
I accept some of what you say, but what's the answer then? If whoever wins power won't just implement PR then I would like to have a referendum. It SHOULD be up to us, we are the voters after all. The current system really isn't representative of the will of the populace.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Plus ça change. It is expected. Scotland still brand Tory's as Nazis because of Poll Tax. Or at least that's the sole reason I can see for them hating them. Well, that and a love for Labour that feed them.
Alan Johnson, who I really hope becomes the next leader of the Labour party is said to favour the AV+ system.
Well you may think that but ... I would say most of our private debt is tied up in property which about to crash big time.
Leading to reposessions and defaults, which will lead to more banking problems. Unless we bail them all out again and print more money.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
I was merely saying an ballot paper: FPTP/AV/AV+/STV/MMV/BBQ/WTF/OMG/LOLZ would confuse people. Think of your grandparents and 18yr olds.
I would have liked a referendum on loads of things - but they just aren't feasible all the time.
The only party that wanted (proper) reform got the third smallest vote, so.. I don't quite see how it's in the national interest *right now*. Saving our failing economy *is*.
If you've followed my posts, I'm still unsure on an appropriate system - they all have faults. All I can say right now is it most likely isn't STV, but even that isn't concrete.