Brexit, for once some facts.

guerney

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2021
11,511
3,267
Sometimes I wonder if democracy would work better if every party was single issue only, and if voters simply were presented with a lengthy questionnaire at the ballot box.
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
It's only because they infect adults - children by and large hardly are affected at all. Apart from "Covid Toes". Actually, some are affected very badly.... but it is very rare. Basically, the government are desparate.
Two points .. First delighted to welcome a new face or logo into this space... . Although I kind of suspect its old wine in new bottles.
The second point is the suggestion that children hardly affected is wholly unproven , and is at best a forlorn hope. We have no possible idea what will happen to infected kids in five years time. The only thing we can say with any certainly, is that in the short term they don't tend to die at the rate of their elders , but that they are still vectors
 

guerney

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2021
11,511
3,267
Two points .. First delighted to welcome a new face or logo into this space... . Although I kind of suspect its old wine in new bottles.
Thank you - I'm certainly old wine. Not all improve with age! I corked some time ago.
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Sometimes I wonder if democracy would work better if every party was single issue only, and if voters simply were presented with a lengthy questionnaire at the ballot box.
The other alternative is to have large multseat constituencies and single transferrable vote. . That would force the successful candidates to work together in coalitions. It would also ensure that the full mixture in Parliament represented more closely the will of the people ,with none of the winner takes all. Many would say it makes for weak Government ..which is true , but is that a bad thing?. Another feature is that one would concentrate more on the character of the individual representative than how they will vote on a specific issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: guerney

guerney

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2021
11,511
3,267
The other alternative is to have large multseat constituencies and single transferrable vote. . That would force the successful candidates to work together in coalitions. It would also ensure that the full mixture in Parliament represented more closely the will of the people ,with none of the winner takes all. Many would say it makes for weak Government ..which is true , but is that a bad thing?. Another feature is that one would concentrate more on the character of the individual representative than how they will vote on a specific issue.
I don't think that would convince the many people who are dissillusioned with politics, who generally don't vote unless they're moved by a small set of issues they feel strongly about. I'd like to see a technological feedback mechanism via continuous input from voters - it'd probably be as wasteful of resources, and as short term and weak, as the coalitions that you describe... but voters would get more of what they vote for?
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,255
30,644
Sometimes I wonder if democracy would work better if every party was single issue only,
Democracy works better if there is only one party of the people and those people are voted for to implement its policies. As in China which runs very efficiently.
.
 

guerney

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2021
11,511
3,267
Democracy works better if there is only one party of the people and those people are voted for to implement its policies. As in China which runs very efficiently.
.
For rather a lot of people, Democracy is "Not working". It's very much top down in China, just as a continuous direct feedback mechanism, controlled at intervals (or at pivotal moments) as interventions by the populace could be, with a technological solution - remove personality, remove any set ideology; if everyone has a hand in everything that happens, they have nobody in government to blame. And there are a lot of unhappy people in China...
 

guerney

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 7, 2021
11,511
3,267
I've got to get some Salsify into the ground, and may pick this up later. Apologies.
 

jonathan.agnew

Esteemed Pedelecer
Dec 27, 2018
2,400
3,381
For rather a lot of people, Democracy is "Not working". It's very much top down in China, just as a continuous direct feedback mechanism, controlled at intervals (or at pivotal moments) as interventions by the populace could be, with a technological solution - remove personality, remove any set ideology; if everyone has a hand in everything that happens, they have nobody in government to blame. And there are a lot of unhappy people in China...
If I have a choice I'd rather live in a democracy as defined by its institutions - rule of law, freedom of speech, universal equal access to education, protection of minority rights, effective impartial policing, health care - than one defined by the right to vote. The snag with this is that it looks more like sweden or Norway- a country with high taxes administered by specialists who occasionally consider public opinion - than a trump rally (a mob whose sentiment of the moment make them want to suspend democracy by overthrowing an election result).
 
  • Like
Reactions: guerney

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,255
30,644
For rather a lot of people, Democracy is "Not working". It's very much top down in China, just as a continuous direct feedback mechanism, controlled at intervals (or at pivotal moments) as interventions by the populace could be, with a technological solution - remove personality, remove any set ideology; if everyone has a hand in everything that happens, they have nobody in government to blame. And there are a lot of unhappy people in China...
The Chinese people overall are better off and happier that at any time in their long history, because their government now works so well.

And as for "top down", President Xi Jinping as a teenager was living with his poor family in a cave. That demonstrably is a democracy that really works, not like our one that favours those born with a silver spoon in their mouth, such as Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer.

There are some unhappy people in China, such as the Uyghurs who are Muslims who have refused to democratically co-operate and often rebelled. If they want to live under a different society, the answer is simple since China allows anyone to emigrate.

Russia in the 18th and 19th centuries faced a similar problem with the Muslim Tartars, so the Tartars solve the problem by emigrating to Islamic countries.

In truly democratic countries minorities have to concede to the majority, or get out.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike killay

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
The need to move them from current deployments to, for example, ambulances, fuel and medicines distributions, if it comes to it, is already making them falter.

Time to say "Bring back National Service". It is a tradition to do so whenever things don't look as if they are working. :)
They might do better by calling up the Home Guard
 
  • :D
Reactions: oyster

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,428
16,906
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
I think the Tories are stuffed, or they would be if the opposition wasn't so hapless, inept and lacking in direction and purpose.
that was JC, RLB and John McDonnell's Labour party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,255
30,644
And you blame me for negativity!

Replace tea bag by, umm, let's think about this for a minute, coffee bag? Or plunger of cafetière.
I use instant, cant be bothered by all the pretensions surrounding coffee drinking.
.
 
  • :D
Reactions: Woosh

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,255
30,644
that was JC, RLB and John McDonnell's Labour party.
The genuine article.

Unelectable of course, but that's the first past the post western democratic model. If some are going to be unhappy, might as well make it almost everyone.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woosh

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,428
16,906
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
I believe Labour may have turned the corner from this conference.
Kier does not make himself more electable but by giving Rachel Reeves the finance job, he's made Labour more attractive to industries. Reeves believes in QE but not nationalisation.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
I believe Labour may have turned the corner from this conference.
Kier does not make himself more electable but by giving Rachel Reeves the finance job, he's made Labour more attractive to industries. Reeves believes in QE but not nationalisation.
I, d agree with you were it not for the "scum" comments from their deputy.Reckon each word she uttered despatched a million voters. Folk don't want this. She, s playing into Tory hands. Don't forget insulting Boris is insulting the folk that put him there. Even if she really thought it... She should keep her mouth closed. The line should be... Well they are Tories what policies did you expect, we are far better, more tolerant and caring... This smacks of the opposite and desperation.
Tories have nothing to worry about. They are here for years and years.
Are Labour any more electable than 10 years ago,,,? Really??
Let's face it... We, ve got empty shelves, no fuel at garages, can't see a doctor, longest NHS waiting lists in history, shortages of labour, little or no gdp growth, a recent drop in life expectancy, highest mental health problems ever and travel in complete and utter disarray... Yet Tories still ahead.. Sometimes can't figure it... But then again listen to Labour and it all becomes clear.
Oh, and by the way.. Had my flu jab last Saturday... And next heart op in 5 weeks.. Eyes sorted. Heart next.. Knee already done... I, m almost bionic.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,255
30,644
I believe Labour may have turned the corner from this conference.
Kier does not make himself more electable but by giving Rachel Reeves the finance job, he's made Labour more attractive to industries. Reeves believes in QE but not nationalisation.
I fear Labour front bencher Andy McDonald resigning with a letter savagely critical of Starmer has rather blown this conference for him. Rachel is a page 2 subject now.
.
 

Advertisers