Alternative Vote

[rexclark]

We should make voting compulsory and have a 'No Vote' box on the ballot.

[eFestivals]

France uses a run off election to elect its president, not a million miles away from AV.

it's exactly the same as AV, but done in multiple processes rather than in one go.

There's a huge number of countries that use this format, which makes the 'no' campaign's claims of "AV only being used in 3 countries in the world" as laughable.

But really, few electoral systems are exactly the same anyway. They should be tailored to what each country needs to properly elect their politicians. FPTP did this in Britain a few decades ago but not now.

FPTP has never properly elected our politicians. It exists as it does only because it was as far as 'the establishment' would go with political reform at the times we've had minor political reforms (and we've only ever had minor reforms!), because it ensured that those who traditionally have their hands on the levers of power kept their hands on the levers of power.

Exactly the same thing has gone on here with this AV referendum. There's little call by the public for AV, what people who want change really want is PR; we are having a vote on AV only because that's as far as the tories - the establishment - are prepared to go with reform, because it doesn't marginalise them.

The clearest indicator that this opportunity of 'reform' is really political gerrymandering comes from this: Dave Moron wants to reduce the number of MPs by 50, saying there's too many MPs. Yet before that reduction of 50 has even taken place, he's appointed 117 new "lords" to the unelected House of Lords, to ensure that whatever the democratically-elected chamber might do will be undermined by his stooges in the Lords.

I've been quite amused when watching senior tories on TV talking about the AV vote recently. For example, Hague said the other day that a better case can be made for PR than it can for AV ... so why the f**k hasn't he and his cronies allowed a vote on PR? Much

the same was said last night by the tory they had on Newsnight. About the only other 'sensible' argument they're able to make against AV is that it might cost more, as tho reaching the best implementation of democracy should be decided on cost and not on reaching the best implementation of democracy.

And so it turns out that the tories who are so very kindly allowing us this referendum on our electoral system - which should be the electorate's right to decide and not for politicians to dictate to us - are only able to sustain an argument for FPTP by saying "it's not PR, but we wouldn't let you vote on that, we'll only let you vote on a shit idea", and that all ideas of democracy should be deferred to the costs of a system.

The tories are a f**king bad joke. They're still the same anti-democratic tory scum as they've always been.

[Purple Monkey]

We should make voting compulsory and have a 'No Vote' box on the ballot.

[llcoolphil]

People who don't vote shouldn't complain afterwards about the results of elections. Given what so many people in so many countries have gone through, and are still going through, to get the right to vote I find the level of complacency about elections in this country saddening.

[eFestivals]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism. Who do you suggest i vote for? I find it amusing the level of importance people attach to voting when the only things you're voting on are very minor differences to the same failed system. Voting because other countries cant? Thats some complacent thinking that

I want to see the collapse of capitalism too (mine is not a recent conversion). But at the same time I recognise I've no right to insist on it above the views of others.

And along with the collapse of capitalism, I also want to see the collapse of self-interest, where the needy lose out to the wants of those self-interested - in fact, it's a pre-requisite for the collapse of capitalism outside of dictatorship.

[llcoolphil]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism too (mine is not a recent conversion). But at the same time I recognise I've no right to insist on it above the views of others.

And along with the collapse of capitalism, I also want to see the collapse of self-interest, where the needy lose out to the wants of those self-interested - in fact, it's a pre-requisite for the collapse of capitalism outside of dictatorship.

Edited April 27, 2011 by llcoolphil

[eFestivals]

Im not sure your recommendation to vote lib dem did much to assist your not recent conversion nor any post i can find since. I can find plenty that advocate minor tinkering with the existing system but not much under collapse of capitalism.

it's precisely because the available options were only tinkering that I suggested people vote LibDem - if people had done in the required numbers at least we'd have proper representative govt and not the corruption of it that FPTP gives.

As for anything I've said that you've interpreted as tinkering, you've failed to appreciate that I've been talking within where we are and not pointlessly advocating an ideal that has no hope of being achieved at the current time.

I'll file your latest claim next to your soon to sky rocket interest rates claim (12 months and not even a hint)

Are the BoE adhering to the remit, or are they doing different to their remit?

It's because they're doing different to their remit - and so proving themselves as not an independent committee but as an operational arm of govt the same as they were pre-97 - that rates haven't changed. The reason why slimy Gideon has asked them to do what they're doing is because the govt is trying to inflate the country's way out of debt - which is rather amusing, given how often the tories have slagged Labour off over decades for doing just that.

All the same, the tide is turning towards higher interest rates - and a part of what I've said will hold true, that they'll be at around 8% by 2015.

and that Browne report that only you ever read and google has never heard of. Oh and that other website you still cant find a link to.

but far better than your claims of no institutional bias, given that the top performing Cambridge Uni (Emmanuel) is the one with the highest intake of state school pupils.

If those top-Uni academics are as smart as you've claimed, you have to now wonder why they give preference to public school kids when they drag down the results of those unis.

Eta

After seeing your definition elsewhere, are you sure you should be bandying that wingnut thing about quite so much?

as that wing-nut would say himself over what you're raising if I'd have raised it - "sementics".

While the game of football they might refer to their rules as 'laws', they are not literally 'laws', but they are literally rules.

[harderfaster]

I'll file your latest claim next to your soon to sky rocket interest rates claim (12 months and not even a hint) and that Browne report that only you ever read and google has never heard of.

[worm]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism too (mine is not a recent conversion). But at the same time I recognise I've no right to insist on it above the views of others.

And along with the collapse of capitalism, I also want to see the collapse of self-interest, where the needy lose out to the wants of those self-interested - in fact, it's a pre-requisite for the collapse of capitalism outside of dictatorship.

Edited April 27, 2011 by worm

[worm]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism. Who do you suggest i vote for? I find it amusing the level of importance people attach to voting when the only things you're voting on are very minor differences to the same failed system. Voting because other countries cant? Thats some complacent thinking that

[worm]

as that wing-nut would say himself over what you're raising if I'd have raised it - "sementics".

[eFestivals]

How touching.

A bit odd that you cite someone you disrespect though.

even a moron can be right sometimes. Shame that's something you've yet to grasp from your own perspective.

[eFestivals]

Which is, of course, a projection of your self-interest.

I can't remember who said it now, but whoever it was got it right in that 'it is the social duty of every individual to experess their self-interest for without it society cannot function'.

Yeah, it's in my self interest to put the interests of others before my own.

We should be empowering people's individuality, not repressing it.

and here lies the reason why this country is so f**ked up. Some of us have experienced a very different country to the only one that you know.

[llcoolphil]

What Browne report is this?

[diddly-dee]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism. Who do you suggest i vote for? I find it amusing the level of importance people attach to voting when the only things you're voting on are very minor differences to the same failed system.

[sifi]

I want to see the collapse of capitalism. Who do you suggest i vote for?

[eFestivals]

The one neil cited as supporting a point he was making until several people who had actually read it pointed out it did no such tbing. It turned out neil was referring to a report only he had read, didnt have a link to and no amount of searching on google (inc. Scholar) could find - but it definitely backed his point up!

I clearly read far more on such subjects than you do, hence my confusion over where it had come from, and my knowledge that the best performing Cambridge college is the one with the highest proportion of state school educated students .... which funnily enough, backs up the point I was making.

[lost]

Labour came close last time round. I reckon they'll get it right next go-round.

[grumpyhack]

Self interest is almost genetic - like the survival instinct. So we have to almost start by recognising that many people act (or vote) from a point of view of self-interest.

If you can bring about enlightened self interest by widening people's perspectives then you're getting somewhere.

An example would be the continuation of the Glastonbury Festival. If numbers on site had continued to spiral with fence jumping or pollution continued with pissing in hedges then the licence would have been revoked. By erecting The Fence and introducing the Green Police GFL made a start. But if we can get people to realise that by paying for tickets and using the toilets they are continuing to ensure the future of the festival then hopefully they will act out of enlightened self-interest.

If you want to bring about wider social change you have to get people to understand the benefits of the change so that again they will act out of enlightened self interest.

An example might be Nestle now introducing a range of FairTrade coffee. I don't believe for one moment that Nestle were concerned about the conditions of workers on coffee plantations. But they realised that their sales might actually benefit from having a FairTrade range. So they acted from a point of view of enlightened self-interest.

Edited April 27, 2011 by grumpyhack

[eFestivals]

interestingly the first bank bailout was effectively in 1998

I think you need to read up on financial history. Just about every bank that's ever failed in the last 60-ish years - and there's been loads just within the UK - has been bailed out in some manner. Nick Leeson's doings with Barings is one example.

[lost]

I think you need to read up on financial history. Just about every bank that's ever failed in the last 60-ish years - and there's been loads just within the UK - has been bailed out in some manner. Nick Leeson's doings with Barings is one example.

[Kyelo]

"Compulsory voting" is an oxymoron.

[eFestivals]

incorrect Barings wasn't bailed out by the state it was bought by ING for £1 who took on all their liabilities

You didn't say you were talking specifically about state bailouts.

But anyway, 'private' bailouts such as happened with Barings - and, more recently, with HBOS - are ones where the govt gets the banking sector by the short and curlies and tells them "one or more of you WILL save this bank, else we're going to screw around with the lot of you and cost you far more than the cost of saving this bank".

Whether a bailout is done by the state or in that 'private' manner, the result is the same - the rich get to keep their money, and the losses they've clocked up get put upon the rest of us.

[lost]

You didn't say you were talking specifically about state bailouts.

But anyway, 'private' bailouts such as happened with Barings - and, more recently, with HBOS - are ones where the govt gets the banking sector by the short and curlies and tells them "one or more of you WILL save this bank, else we're going to screw around with the lot of you and cost you far more than the cost of saving this bank".

Whether a bailout is done by the state or in that 'private' manner, the result is the same - the rich get to keep their money, and the losses they've clocked up get put upon the rest of us.

Edited April 27, 2011 by lost

[worm]

If you can bring about enlightened self interest by widening people's perspectives then you're getting somewhere.

Edited April 27, 2011 by worm