Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[aaronjb]

The "Why?" is easy:

Are you (or anyone else in this country) willing to work for the same wages as a guy living in a shack in India or China?

[tunnie]

not bothered, all parties (big 3) are just as bad as each other

[aaronjb]

Though this reminds me.. Mr Conservative (no idea what his real name is) came around the other day - local elections and all that - to ask if I'd be voting for him..

It took all my restraint to resist telling him I really couldn't care less and that I think all politicians are as bent as a nine bob note 

[Dishevelled Den]

Though this reminds me.. Mr Conservative (no idea what his real name is) came around the other day - local elections and all that - to ask if I'd be voting for him..

It took all my restraint to resist telling him I really couldn't care less and that I think all politicians are as bent as a nine bob note 

bent as a nine bob note 

As was Peter North - according to the Bear.

[aaronjb]

Though this reminds me.. Mr Conservative (no idea what his real name is) came around the other day - local elections and all that - to ask if I'd be voting for him..

It took all my restraint to resist telling him I really couldn't care less and that I think all politicians are as bent as a nine bob note 

bent as a nine bob note 

As was Peter North - according to the Bear.

[albitz]

I agree with Entwood and Den. AV Would result in coalition govt at every election, with minor parties holding the balance of power. The tail would be wagging the dog. We would lose forever, the possibility of having a strong govt. with a healthy majority who take the country in a certain direction, and if we dont agree with that direction we get the chance to kick them out and replace them with something entirely different after 5 years. I know this system has been badly corrupted in recent times, but there is still a chance it can be put right. With AV that chance would be gone forever.
I say this as a someone who votes for a minority party. My own self/ short term interest would say vote AV, but I thinks its wrong, and would be very bad for the country in the long term.
Im wondering what odds I could get at the bookies, as I reckon it aint going to happen. The English dont like big sudden changes.
The only chance it has of getting voted in, is if there is enormous apathy, and the Notting Hill Luvvy types who support it mobilise themselves in a big way.

[Amigo]

The "Why?" is easy:

Are you (or anyone else in this country) willing to work for the same wages as a guy living in a shack in India or China?

No of course i would'nt why should i? That's not the point, what a silly question.

[andyc]

With you on this one Nig. I always  vote then if i don't like whats happening i can shout about it, if you don't vote you can't complain when the S,.t hits the fan

There is a little saying K.I.S.S

[Nickbat]

To be honest, it's a bloody hard one to decide. The FPTP system we have practically ensures we are stuck with the three main parties, for whom I have litte respect. The reason being that people who are swayed by the arguments of the minor parties believe that, since there is no chance of them winning, there is no point in voting for them. AV would give these minor parties more of a chance to break the ConLabLib mould. Yes, it would result in more horse trading and produce less stable governments but, as a UKIP supporter, I would love to see the idea of the 'Big Three' torn asunder.

Difficult one, in any event. Might abstain.  :-/   

[Martin_1962]

I didn't realise steel was profitable before nationalisation - I thought they only nationalised basket case companies.

[CaptainZok]

I didn't realise steel was profitable before nationalisation - I thought they only nationalised basket case companies.

You mean like the railways?

[Vamps]

To be honest, it's a bloody hard one to decide. The FPTP system we have practically ensures we are stuck with the three main parties, for whom I have litte respect. The reason being that people who are swayed by the arguments of the minor parties believe that, since there is no chance of them winning, there is no point in voting for them. AV would give these minor parties more of a chance to break the ConLabLib mould. Yes, it would result in more horse trading and produce less stable governments but, as a UKIP supporter, I would love to see the idea of the 'Big Three' torn asunder.

Difficult one, in any event. Might abstain.  :-/   

[/highlight]

I was interested in your post, but abstaining looses all respect.....

[Nickbat]

To be honest, it's a bloody hard one to decide. The FPTP system we have practically ensures we are stuck with the three main parties, for whom I have litte respect. The reason being that people who are swayed by the arguments of the minor parties believe that, since there is no chance of them winning, there is no point in voting for them. AV would give these minor parties more of a chance to break the ConLabLib mould. Yes, it would result in more horse trading and produce less stable governments but, as a UKIP supporter, I would love to see the idea of the 'Big Three' torn asunder.

Difficult one, in any event. Might abstain.  :-/   

[/highlight]

I was interested in your post, but abstaining looses all respect.....

I take your point, but I simply cannot decide which way to vote. There are merits, and demerits, to both sides of the argument. I have always thought that active abstention (as happens in board meetings) or "none of the above" can actually be a logical stance. Why should you be forced to choose between two alternatives, if neither fits the bill?  :-/

[albitz]

I agree Nick. Abstention is a legitimate stance. None participation due to apathy isnt.
I also think that the biggest winners (in the short to medium term) from a yes vote would quite possibly be the Greens, and the damage they have already caused with their very limited poll success has been scary.

[Nickbat]

I agree Nick. Abstention is a legitimate stance. None participation due to apathy isnt.
I also think that the biggest winners (in the short to medium term) from a yes vote would quite possibly be the Greens, and the damage they have already caused with their very limited poll success has been scary.

Yep, very valid points Albs. I've always been of the opinion that, in all elections there should be a box for "None of the above". That would ensure that those who are willing to make the effort to vote are given the opportunity to show their displeasure at the lack of options available.