South Lorne Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 AV was no kind of shake up, he just wanted to replace a voting system which favours the two biggest parties with a voting system which favours the three biggest parties. I wonder if there was any connection with him being the head of the third biggest party? ...soon be doubtful if Libdems remain 3rd biggest...more so if he stays.....bring back Charlie boy....!.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 ..what about the queues in NYC....security is of no concern to airlines who pursue nothing but the bottom line ...until there is an incident.... ...exactly, non EU citizens should be made aware in busy times of a possible hour or so wait, coffee and seating should be provided or a film show/entertainment if all else fails....or they should make their way to a not so crowded airport and catch a train or better still make it a two centre holiday, there is much more to see and some better places to go in the UK than just London. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Bear Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 ...exactly, non EU citizens should be made aware in busy times of a possible hour or so wait, coffee and seating should be provided or a film show/entertainment if all else fails....or they should make their way to a not so crowded airport and catch a train or better still make it a two centre holiday, there is much more to see and some better places to go in the UK than just London. Heathrow is a major international hub and a lot of people are not on holiday. They are on business and can do without hanging around immigration for an hour or more after what is often a long and tiring flight. And even if they are on holiday they shouldn't have to expect two-hour queues. Other countries with large international airports manage to get people through immigration quickly - it's just a question of enough staff and efficient organisation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Heathrow is a major international hub and a lot of people are not on holiday. They are on business and can do without hanging around immigration for an hour or more after what is often a long and tiring flight. And even if they are on holiday they shouldn't have to expect two-hour queues. Other countries with large international airports manage to get people through immigration quickly - it's just a question of enough staff and efficient organisation. BAA seem to be stoking up problems because they think it furthers the case for expansion and a third runway, or can be used to blackmail the government. Heathrow is currently plastered with BAA scaremongering billboards saying that without a third runway the UK economy will be toast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkwell Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 AV was no kind of shake up, he just wanted to replace a voting system which favours the two biggest parties with a voting system which favours the three biggest parties. I wonder if there was any connection with him being the head of the third biggest party? Regardless of his motives AV is either a better system or not. I don't think there's any evidence it would only favour the three biggest parties. You'd likely find a lot of Greens, UKIP and Others gain plenty of votes around the country. After a few votes there's a good chance it would shake up the political spectrum. Guess we'll never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmf Posted May 4, 2012 Author Share Posted May 4, 2012 BBC celebrating big time about the local election gains for Labour. They are thinking "just another 2 years until the money taps are back on" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) Non-financial private debt fell throughout the pre-Blair parliament. With regard to household debt the flatline from 1990-1995 is almost certainly largely down to lower new mortgage borrowings due to the early 1990s HPC. It is in the nature of the beast that property bubbles require more debt to exist and property slumps do not. Edited May 4, 2012 by stormymonday_2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) you might as well ask what was unsustainable about Pre 2007, what was unsustainable was the malinvested debt investment in technology although no doubt all the IT types on here were worth it, the UK has been running a private debt boom run on consumption since the early 80s as the trade figures show, in the 90s there was a redistribution from mortgage debt to corporate debt due to tinternet which as far as i recall had fck all to do with the tories or democrats, as soon as that fell off a cliff in 2000 they moved back to tried and tested mortgage debt, when that fell off a cliff they moved into govt debt and continue on that path, The UKs structural trade deficit began in the 80s and continues at the same pace, just because everyone got wealthier* before 2007 doesnt mean the country wasnt creating a bomb in the previous 30 years The only difference between Labour and the Tories has been public spending, for private debt and malinvested private debt they are and have been interchangeable for 30 years and continue to be, you might as well say the rot didnt set in until 2008 or 2013 or 2015 or 2020 or whenever the next stage of this multigenerational debt crisis hits *hat tip the Snows What makes Britain Rich 2006-7 Malinvestment is the b*stard child of all credit booms be it useless IT systems (and I have worked on more than a few of those in my time) , housing bubbles or dare I say it Chinese factories producing low grade manufactured goods that no one really wants.. The question is whether you pop the bubbles early by imposing suitable credit controls and regulation as Minsky suggests or whether you simply let the market take its course and allow economic Armageddon destroy the debt in a catastrophic bust as the Austrians propose. The problem is that politicians on the left have lost the balls to impose the former. At the same time the politicians on the right really only believe in free market discipline for the workers and other little people . When it looks likely that the same Austrian discipline will be applied to themselves and the assets of their wealthy chums they come over all interventionist and no bail out is too crazy to consider, even if it pauperises the rest of society. Edited May 4, 2012 by stormymonday_2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 You need to get more intelligent friends. What, on facebook? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyTomes Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Like many others have said, i wish labour would have won the last election. Naaah 2015 is the big one. 5 years of coalition austerity lies with continued, endless ZIRP and QE - markets somehow believe the bullsh*t 'cause all they ever see on the BBC24 is endless drivel about cuts 'destroying the British way of life'. Come 2015 however they'll wake up to a boggle-eyed rubber fetish doll ranting about borrowing for 'growth' - surrounded by crowds of cheering ponzi zombies desperate to get their hands on more and more money from the ever-shrinking productive sector of the economy. Given that we'll have flat or 'negative' growth (have to love that one from old Gord) from now until then - despite printing 5-10% of GDP per year - the UK should finally be ready for a pretty final crash. Who better than Labour to take us down? Sadly I won't be here to see it as have moved the entire proceeds of mine and my partners last 11 years of work (excluding what we spent on food, fuel, consumables and one year's rent after selling shithole fl*t) out of the UK. Will be following mid July (finally). It's the only way you can ever affect the system - take your productivity and any past/future wealth out of it. Labour can't steal what they can't reach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Bad election results for the Tories but an absolute horror story for the Liberal Democrats in the local elections in my area. They came plumb last in all but one of the 14 wards contested on the Council with their candidate polling less not only the Tory and Labour but also coming in behind UKIP and Green candidates as well. In 10 of the wards the standing Lib Dem candidate could not even achieve 100 votes. This is a simply dreadful performance by a party that dominated the local District Council for much of the 1980s and nearly all the 1990s. The only way the Lib Dems can save themselves from total oblivion is to leave the government now ditching Clegg along the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmf Posted May 4, 2012 Author Share Posted May 4, 2012 Naaah 2015 is the big one. 5 years of coalition austerity lies with continued, endless ZIRP and QE - markets somehow believe the bullsh*t 'cause all they ever see on the BBC24 is endless drivel about cuts 'destroying the British way of life'. Come 2015 however they'll wake up to a boggle-eyed rubber fetish doll ranting about borrowing for 'growth' - surrounded by crowds of cheering ponzi zombies desperate to get their hands on more and more money from the ever-shrinking productive sector of the economy. Given that we'll have flat or 'negative' growth (have to love that one from old Gord) from now until then - despite printing 5-10% of GDP per year - the UK should finally be ready for a pretty final crash. Who better than Labour to take us down? Sadly I won't be here to see it as have moved the entire proceeds of mine and my partners last 11 years of work (excluding what we spent on food, fuel, consumables and one year's rent after selling shithole fl*t) out of the UK. Will be following mid July (finally). It's the only way you can ever affect the system - take your productivity and any past/future wealth out of it. Labour can't steal what they can't reach. Good for you. Where are you going? I totally agree BTW - if you can't change the system change the system you are in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Naaah 2015 is the big one. 5 years of coalition austerity lies with continued, endless ZIRP and QE - markets somehow believe the bullsh*t 'cause all they ever see on the BBC24 is endless drivel about cuts 'destroying the British way of life'. Come 2015 however they'll wake up to a boggle-eyed rubber fetish doll ranting about borrowing for 'growth' - surrounded by crowds of cheering ponzi zombies desperate to get their hands on more and more money from the ever-shrinking productive sector of the economy. Given that we'll have flat or 'negative' growth (have to love that one from old Gord) from now until then - despite printing 5-10% of GDP per year - the UK should finally be ready for a pretty final crash. Who better than Labour to take us down? Sadly I won't be here to see it as have moved the entire proceeds of mine and my partners last 11 years of work (excluding what we spent on food, fuel, consumables and one year's rent after selling shithole fl*t) out of the UK. Will be following mid July (finally). It's the only way you can ever affect the system - take your productivity and any past/future wealth out of it. Labour can't steal what they can't reach. Better go far, friend. And good luck. When the soup truly hits the air-stirrer I think you'll find TPTB got a reach all around the world... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ska_mna Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 The question is whether you pop the bubbles early by imposing suitable credit controls and regulation as Minsky suggests or whether you simply let the market take its course and allow economic Armageddon destroy the debt in a catastrophic bust as the Austrians propose. The problem is that politicians on the left have lost the balls to impose the former. At the same time the politicians on the right really only believe in free market discipline for the workers and other little people . When it looks likely that the same Austrian discipline will be applied to themselves and the assets of their wealthy chums they come over all interventionist and no bail out is too crazy to consider, even if it pauperises the rest of society. Succinct. I like it. Good post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aa3 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Are you f'ing nuts?! They're still uncovering mass graves for crying out loud! Say what you will about Nick Clegg at least he attempted to shake up the voting system by pushing through Alternative Voting (which then got shot down by the hysterical No to AV campaign funded by the Conservative Party seeking to keep the same stagnan status quo everybody here seems to be bitching about). And have there been cuts in public spending adversely affecting people who are voting against the Tories? And the Tories also provoked a fuel truck driver strike recently. Thats what this old guy felt as an idealistic young man too. Now if it takes killing a few thousand radicals so that everyone else can live in peace and have actual real jobs.. people would gladly take it. In days past when times were good, people could worry about things like abstract ideas. Alternative voting is sort of the last great hope of the democratic movement. Anyone with a brain knows that the experiment has failed, so the big idea is lets try the same idea, but harder. The problem is there are already European nations which have proportional representation schemes.. and they are worse off than the UK. Italy comes to mind. The problem is democracy itself. If the Tories came in and did austerity hard, they would be voted out the very next election. Everyone supports austerity on the understanding that other people are going to get cut back. Imagine if the Tories ever so slightly reduced pensions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(Blizzard) Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 (edited) My ideal voting system for general elections would be a single list for the entire country which anybody could put themselves on for free. There would be no official constituencies. Every voter would have one vote to give to the candidate who they feel best represents their views. It would be the responsibility of voters to do their own research and figure out who this is. Candidates would upload manifestos to the list so that voters could see what they stand for. Candidates would be free to claim to represent a certain geographical area, ethnicity, religion, political party, age group, profession, economic philosophy, or anything they want. At the end of the election the 500 candidates with the most votes would form the next Parliament. In parliamentary votes, each MP would cast a number of votes equal to the number of votes they received in the general election. Everyone gets 1000 votes every year. Votes can be transferred, (anonymously to avoid vote buying), to anyone during an election period. People with the most votes get to actually sit in parliament (propose bills, choose the PM, that sort of thing) but anyone can vote on a bill, by spending as many of their votes as they see fit. This system combines direct and indirect democracy, and allows people to express intensity of preference. The voting power of representatives actually reflects their popularity - very popular MPs get more votes to spend than unpopular MPs - like a proportional representation system. Hate Europe? Spend all your votes on leaving the EU. Of course, that means you can't spend votes on the budget vote, so you might actually prefer to spend 500 on the EU and 500 on the budget. Edited May 5, 2012 by (Blizzard) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Self Employed Youth Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 No put it up to 25, make sure that all those without a job don't have a voice. If us young uns are staffing the polling stations we should at least have right to vote! I was glad to see so many young voters in my ward! But it was a very poor turnout. We had a couple of characters Sadly it remained labour with a large swing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Self Employed Youth Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Not until the bankers and their government gophers start swinging from lamp posts. The majority didn't vote, and if you speak to the common man and suggest hanging the ******s, you soon make a friend! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrappycocco Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 just goes to show the education system in this country is not working very well......... massive conflict of interest between the labour party and the public sector anyway, they shouldn't even be allowed to run...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherSTR Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 BBC celebrating big time about the local election gains for Labour. They are thinking "just another 2 years until the money taps are back on" Agreed, the BBC pursue a relentless 'cuts agenda' from the comfort of their £3bn per year funding. So to all those who criticise how little the coalition has cut spending, consider what the BBC has done to educate anyone. All the time we hear of cuts and no explanation that all that has been done so far is to cut back on the rate of increase of borrowing. Given that the BBC control 70% of the news output in the UK it's not surprising that we've been subjected to those nasty Tory cuts when in actual fact nothing has been done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Heathrow is a major international hub and a lot of people are not on holiday. They are on business and can do without hanging around immigration for an hour or more after what is often a long and tiring flight. And even if they are on holiday they shouldn't have to expect two-hour queues. Other countries with large international airports manage to get people through immigration quickly - it's just a question of enough staff and efficient organisation. ...I know this hardly relates to the title of this thread but to reply to your point......yes, many passengers will be business passengers who could do without the hassle of waiting for long periods of time to pass through customs, so people are either time or cash rich, the cash rich can pay for their time and the wages of the extra staff by the opposite of easy boarding, easy exit....they pay a small premium and have dedicated staff to see to their needs or anyone else who requires the service.....people love to stroll pass people to the front of the queue it makes them feel special....win, win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aa3 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 In Japan government workers are not allowed to organize. If I were to design a democratic system I would put in safeguards like no one who is an employee or the government, working for a contractor to the government or married to someone working for the government is allowed to vote. In Britain today the majority of people work for the government and they show up for every election. And they have voted themselves all of the nation's wealth to the point where we are borrowing money from foreigners.. and have sold off our industrial capital. We can blame it on 'the boomers', but the reality is the behaviour of millions of human beings is perfectly predictable. Once they had essentially controlling interest with their vote, the fact that they voted themselves teh nation's wealth is hardly surprising. It would be shocking if they did -not- do that. The same thing has played out across the democratic western world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Here in France, a win for the left is expected tomorrow. The poor people will then celebrate because everyone will soon be poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederico Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Here in France, a win for the left is expected tomorrow. The poor people will then celebrate because everyone will soon be poor. I don't think anything will change who ever gets elected. The rich get richer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 It's the voters that are still at school and influenced by our left leaning education system that tend to vote labour for idealogical reasons. When they leave school and get into the real world they start to realise that socialism doesn't work. 'Twas always thus. Thats utter garbage. The young as a block by a very large margin are the least likely to vote among all the population. The boomer generation voted out labour and they just voted out the conservatives. They vote themselves whoever will give them the most of other peoples money. This election result was a consequence of the governments small cuts to the boomer demographic, with the boomers voting their fury at that decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.