zugzwang Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 10 hours ago, Gurgle said: Do you mean the Rwandan initiative or did I miss something? Ah, yes. Patel is the Ugandan. Rwanda is her performative sideshow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 2 hours ago, Gurgle said: Yes, but not checked that against any proof that the person is who they say they are. Easy bring with you your voting card, they should have names against a household on the electoral register, maybe match with a bank/credit card most people have or utility bill........the issue is to get as many as possible that are entitled to vote, registered to vote in the place where they live, hence many student votes are lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 Postal votes I would think are the weakest link...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 10 hours ago, Gurgle said: Why is requiring someone to present ID when they vote classed as “unfair”? You want more of a "papers please!" society? No, we need less, rather than more pressure for ID. Being able to be IDed should not be a part of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 10 minutes ago, winkie said: Postal votes I would think are the weakest link...... I'm definitely of the opinion that postal votes should be reserved for people who can't get to a polling station, rather than ones who can't be arsed to spend fifteen minutes once every few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgle Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, msi said: You want new laws for 6 cases? Still think thats bigger than C*vid Fraud? The 'I'm no Fan of BoJo, but...' line is just another Tory Playbook WTF ? Edited June 28, 2022 by Gurgle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgle Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 20 hours ago, Riedquat said: I'm definitely of the opinion that postal votes should be reserved for people who can't get to a polling station, rather than ones who can't be arsed to spend fifteen minutes once every few years. or make voting mandatory in general and postal votes requiring a clear verifiable excuse like a disability Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 Just now, Gurgle said: or make voting mandatory in general and postal votes requiring a clear verifiable excuse like a disability No way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnylattej Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 14 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said: No way! I'm intrigued. What is your argument against mandatory voting? Rousseau claimed that a free individual was one who lived under laws that he had taken part in drafting, and that being politically engaged was as essential part of civic life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 10 minutes ago, skinnylattej said: I'm intrigued. What is your argument against mandatory voting? Rousseau claimed that a free individual was one who lived under laws that he had taken part in drafting, and that being politically engaged was as essential part of civic life. I am against all forms of compulsion unless absolutely necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnylattej Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 1 minute ago, Bruce Banner said: I am against all forms of compulsion unless absolutely necessary. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrink Proof Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 1 hour ago, Gurgle said: or make voting mandatory in general and postal votes requiring a clear verifiable excuse like a disability The only remotely acceptable version of this would be for every ballot paper to include a "None of the Above" option. Which LibLabConKIP would never support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgle Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 52 minutes ago, Shrink Proof said: The only remotely acceptable version of this would be for every ballot paper to include a "None of the Above" option. Which LibLabConKIP would never support. let's just say we wouldn't be the first country to introduce it. I think there are arguments for or against. The biggest argument I can see is that turnouts are very low in the UK so the election results are very unrepresentative of the electorate as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 3 minutes ago, Gurgle said: let's just say we wouldn't be the first country to introduce it. I think there are arguments for or against. The biggest argument I can see is that turnouts are very low in the UK so the election results are very unrepresentative of the electorate as a whole. Like Australia, for instance, where it's illegal to ride a pushbike without wearing an approved crash helmet. Enough said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffsknot Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 6 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said: Like Australia, for instance, where it's illegal to ride a pushbike without wearing an approved crash helmet. Enough said. Come on Bruce this is no different to motorbikes requiring a crash helmet - its for the good of rider and health service. I don't think this is the hill to die on even though I know you are a man of principles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erat_forte Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 12 minutes ago, Staffsknot said: Come on Bruce this is no different to motorbikes requiring a crash helmet - its for the good of rider and health service. I don't think this is the hill to die on even though I know you are a man of principles Its also no different from driving a car requiring a crash helmet, or walking on the pavement requiring a crash helmet. Its a very good hill to die on, much better than compulsory voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgle Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 18 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said: Like Australia, for instance, where it's illegal to ride a pushbike without wearing an approved crash helmet. Enough said. I think if you want lack of regulations in general or "liberty" then either move to a second or third world country or move to the USA. All of them have problems just like the UK. Just different problems. Bringing it back to housing though, what I can guarantee is there are many people in this country who squeal about mortgage rates and how painful it is that interest rates going up and want a bail out etc. I am VERY confident that less than half of those people didn't vote for this government, either because they voted elsewhere, or not at all. If everyone had to vote then it would be much better for a party with a majority mandate because it would be harder for people to whinge and whine that only a few folks voted for these people and they didn't ask for this. It might also force political parties to be a lot broader in their thinking because currently they can be strategic about the groups they're targeting, knowing that less than half of the adult population actually bother to vote. Frankly a general election vote is NOT representative of the people of the UK at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Staffsknot said: Come on Bruce this is no different to motorbikes requiring a crash helmet - its for the good of rider and health service. I don't think this is the hill to die on even though I know you are a man of principles I'm absolutely against compulsory wearing of helmets on motorbikes too. And any other laws designed to protect people from themselves. As for "health service" there could easily be an opt out with denial of free treatment for those who have signed the necessary document. The next argument put forward, in favour of compulsion, is the mental health of the emergency services who have to scrape brains off the road... We have walked this path on many occasions over the years. Edited June 29, 2022 by Bruce Banner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 17 minutes ago, erat_forte said: Its also no different from driving a car requiring a crash helmet, or walking on the pavement requiring a crash helmet. Its a very good hill to die on, much better than compulsory voting. The logical conclusion being the mandatory wearing of full body armour at all times and the banning of all "dangerous" activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 36 minutes ago, Staffsknot said: Come on Bruce this is no different to motorbikes requiring a crash helmet - its for the good of rider and health service. I don't think this is the hill to die on even though I know you are a man of principles You mean examples of things that shouldn't be compulsory? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffsknot Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 14 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said: I'm absolutely against compulsory wearing of helmets on motorbikes too. And any other laws designed to protect people from themselves. As for "health service" there could easily be an opt out with denial of free treatment for those who have signed the necessary document. The next argument put forward, in favour of compulsion, is the mental health of the emergency services who have to scrape brains off the road... We have walked this path on many occasions over the years. Bruce I'm sorry but we have to massively disagree on this. The 'opt out' system doesn't work for a start as the paramedic turning up to the unconscious kid on the scooter doesn't have time to check the paperwork, nor does presence of a helmet say opt out - I have attended two RTAs where unwitting good samaritans removed the lids. So now you into a world of complexity that doesn't need to exist if people do a simple thing. Don't want to then guess what don't get a motorbike. Its a bargain with society unless you think the relatives should be made to collect them where they lie as well? But this is severely off topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrink Proof Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said: I'm absolutely against compulsory wearing of helmets on motorbikes too. And any other laws designed to protect people from themselves. As for "health service" there could easily be a denial of free treatment for those who have signed the necessary document. Yes, all it would need is a database for this. With annual audits to see if people had died, changed their minds, etc. And a checking system to confirm their status on arrival at A&E. And a billing and payment system for those who need to pay. Plus a system for chasing up those who can't/won't pay. Plus extra systems to cover minors and those without the capacity to give valid consent. And extra systems for NHS Trusts to deal practically and legally with those folk claiming that either treatment was denied incorrectly or complications arose from being untreated (that they were never warned of when they signed) or that their consent record was lost in the system, etc., necessitating extra record keeping and paperwork by NHS staff. All seamlessly compliant across 4 health services (health care is devolved) run by 4 administrations with different political priorities. Sounds simple enough... Edited June 29, 2022 by Shrink Proof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 2 hours ago, Gurgle said: or make voting mandatory in general and postal votes requiring a clear verifiable excuse like a disability I'm with Bruce on this one too (on the mandatory part). Mandatory voting is an absolute no-no for me, ordering people around like that is a line that shouldn't be gone anywhere near, let alone crossed. On just what the criteria for postal voting should be is a bit harder to pin down; poking around in to peoples' affairs in order to demonstrate it seems a bit much. Perhaps a simple claim that you need one (rather than just want one) is enough, maybe with a fine if it's proved (rather than you having to prove) that you were lying about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffsknot Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 26 minutes ago, erat_forte said: Its also no different from driving a car requiring a crash helmet, or walking on the pavement requiring a crash helmet. Its a very good hill to die on, much better than compulsory voting. No those are daft examples of someone trying to go to extremes to make a point. If you go the extreme other way there should be no A&E as people should be free to die of their stupidity too. Its a similar level of stupid extreme Pushing daft extremes does your argument no credit at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Shrink Proof said: Yes, all it would need is a database for this. With annual audits to see if people had died, changed their minds, etc. And a checking system to confirm their status on arrival at A&E. And a billing and payment system for those who need to pay. Plus a system for chasing up those who can't/won't pay. Plus extra systems to cover minors and those unablewithout the capacity to give valid consent. And extra systems for NHS Trusts to deal practically and legally with those folk claiming that either treatment was denied incorrectly or complications arose from being untreated (that they were never warned of when they signed) or that their consent record was lost in the system, etc., necessitating extra record keeping and paperwork by NHS staff. All seamlessly compliant across 4 health services (health care is devolved) run by 4 administrations with different political priorities. Sounds simple enough... You make some good points . The alternative would be the ability to opt out of the NHS completely, something that I would have done years ago (private health insurance) had the option been available. Edited June 29, 2022 by Bruce Banner 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.