Brilliant. Sums up the current state of affairs perfectly. I've had many a row with friends over the years who've declared that they wouldn't vote. It's been 30 odd years since I qualified to vote and I finally have sympathy with their point of view.Off Topic The General Election Countdown and Aftermath
- Thread starter Ron
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Brilliant. Sums up the current state of affairs perfectly. I've had many a row with friends over the years who've declared that they wouldn't vote. It's been 30 odd years since I qualified to vote and I finally have sympathy with their point of view.
Being less than enthused by any of the party leaders, I've decided to base my vote on the respective merits of my local candidate.
Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem incumbent of the constituency of Hornsey and Wood Green, is at least well known locally. She puts herself about a bit, as they say, and can boast a vast portfolio of photos of herself standing outside Libraries and Bus Stops (bus stops feature heavily in her campaign literature). She seems pretty good at pretending to be interested in the views of the random wierdos who got dragged in front of the camera with her. Its not her fault that her party leader is a human jellyfish who, on his first day in coalition with the nasty party, performed a policy U turn so spectacular that it was visible from space.
The Labour Candidate is someone called Catherine West. She is having her official campaign launch this morning, and wants to know if I would care to join her outside Hornsey Town Hall at 10.00am. I don't think it'd just be me and her though, which is good because frankly I'd rather have root canal work done on my teeth without aneasthetic than go on a date with a politician of any description. Anyway, she appears to have had a real job, which is good, though as far as I can tell this seems to have been with Haringey Social Services and may have involved helping Romanians claim benefits. She also speaks 5 languages, but I'm not sure if she's speaking mine. Its not her fault her party leader looks like the sort of bouncy school swot who makes you want to punch him and steal his dinner money.
The Conservatives haven't updated their website for a year, so I can only assume they are not overly optimistic about their chances of success in this particular corner of North London. They are proud to announce (or they were last October, I assume nothing's changed since then) that they have selected Suhail Rahuja to fight the seat. I don't think he's planning to fight all that hard, as on the website he says "the Conservatives are the natural opposition to Labour in Hornsey and Wood Green". Going by his photograph he looks like the sort of scholarly Indian doctor who delights in using expressions like "prolapsed rectum", butthat's misleading as he apparently "works in finance", which might make him one of the bastards who ****ed the global economy; or it might mean he sells insurance. anyway, it's not his fault his party leader looks like he fell in a vat of baby oil and can't stop compulsively preening himself while speaking with a mouthful of marbles.
so which is it to be? The baroness of the bus stop, the multilingual social worker, or the insurance selling proctologist? I'll let you know.
Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem incumbent of the constituency of Hornsey and Wood Green, is at least well known locally. She puts herself about a bit, as they say, and can boast a vast portfolio of photos of herself standing outside Libraries and Bus Stops (bus stops feature heavily in her campaign literature). She seems pretty good at pretending to be interested in the views of the random wierdos who got dragged in front of the camera with her. Its not her fault that her party leader is a human jellyfish who, on his first day in coalition with the nasty party, performed a policy U turn so spectacular that it was visible from space.
The Labour Candidate is someone called Catherine West. She is having her official campaign launch this morning, and wants to know if I would care to join her outside Hornsey Town Hall at 10.00am. I don't think it'd just be me and her though, which is good because frankly I'd rather have root canal work done on my teeth without aneasthetic than go on a date with a politician of any description. Anyway, she appears to have had a real job, which is good, though as far as I can tell this seems to have been with Haringey Social Services and may have involved helping Romanians claim benefits. She also speaks 5 languages, but I'm not sure if she's speaking mine. Its not her fault her party leader looks like the sort of bouncy school swot who makes you want to punch him and steal his dinner money.
The Conservatives haven't updated their website for a year, so I can only assume they are not overly optimistic about their chances of success in this particular corner of North London. They are proud to announce (or they were last October, I assume nothing's changed since then) that they have selected Suhail Rahuja to fight the seat. I don't think he's planning to fight all that hard, as on the website he says "the Conservatives are the natural opposition to Labour in Hornsey and Wood Green". Going by his photograph he looks like the sort of scholarly Indian doctor who delights in using expressions like "prolapsed rectum", butthat's misleading as he apparently "works in finance", which might make him one of the bastards who ****ed the global economy; or it might mean he sells insurance. anyway, it's not his fault his party leader looks like he fell in a vat of baby oil and can't stop compulsively preening himself while speaking with a mouthful of marbles.
so which is it to be? The baroness of the bus stop, the multilingual social worker, or the insurance selling proctologist? I'll let you know.
The trouble is, people will vote for who they like best in their constituency. You couldn't run a company like that. We should be voting for the person who is best able to run the country. That person should pick his team, being the best collection of people to make his policies come to fruition..
Unless you have proportional voting .that's not possible Ron-besides you're voting for a party or as it seems -against another -leaders can and do change--I'm a socialist, so don't have a political home!
Visiting the soon to be unemployed Labour Jocks, Miliband shocks everyone with the proclamation that the SNP want fiscal autonomy. The clue is in the name, Ed: they want total autonomy.
Cameron says the Tories are going to spend an extra £8bn on the NHS. Ed Balls has been admitted to A&E with a suspected heart attack because he has committed Labour to spending £2.5bn more than the Tories.
Miliband says that Labour are going to make sure that there is a midwife for every expectant mother. When Rachel Reeves goes into labour, the midwife will slap the father and say “another ****ing Labour voter, you idiot.”
Cameron says the Tories are going to spend an extra £8bn on the NHS. Ed Balls has been admitted to A&E with a suspected heart attack because he has committed Labour to spending £2.5bn more than the Tories.
Miliband says that Labour are going to make sure that there is a midwife for every expectant mother. When Rachel Reeves goes into labour, the midwife will slap the father and say “another ****ing Labour voter, you idiot.”
You can probably get that root canal work without anaesthetic on the NHS on 8th May, depending on which candidate wins. There won’t be any anaesthetic left as they will have used it all on the masses the day before.
I would date some of our female politicians, irrespective of their party, as we would not run out of conversation points; plus I suspect that some of them do actually want to leave their job in the office and be just like any other woman with a normal life. I need to contact the people that make Ch4’s “First Dates” and see if they can fix me up with Charlotte Leslie.
I am pleased we did not go to the same Comprehensive School as although I was not “bouncy” you would have had no trouble stealing my dinner money as I was a weedy, nerdy, school swot.
Companies are not run by any sort of democratic process; except where they have shareholders who can change the management. If you run a company, you want to hire whoever you see as best at the job.
The fundamental problem with the electoral system is the parties. We have a First Past The Post (FPTP) that previously pretty much insured that the party with the most seats ran the country. That is not perfect but is the least unworkable format. In the last parliament, one of the minority parties – the LibDems – got to force a referendum on changing to Proportional Representation (PR) and the notion was defeated. When I look around the world at the various countries with PR, I see too many coalitions that incorporate small fringe parties that, therefore, yield more power than their electoral support mandates.
I like the fact that at least one resident of the Hornsey and Wood Green constituency is going to be voting for whichever candidate they deem to be best to do the job of representing them. I did not vote for my local MP but he does still represent me and when I contacted him about a constituency matter, I got a full and complete response. I just hope he is still an opposition MP on 8th May!
The rest of Europe seem to do well enough with pr -Germany has coped well with it -consensus I think it's called -an alien concept to many in British politics -our divergence of wealth has created a disengaged electorate and a low wage, low skill workforce -but as long as the square mile is raking it in its all rosy in Cameron's garden!
The twat was saying the economy is strong -yet the hard evidence is the opposite......
The twat was saying the economy is strong -yet the hard evidence is the opposite......
PR as an electoral system might look okay in much of Europe but it is not doing most of them any good because of poor governance. I just took a look at the last election in Italy and the coalition currently running their failing economy includes the South Tyrolean People’s Party, whose 0.43 per cent of the vote got them five seats in their Chamber of Deputies and the Democratic Centre Party, whose 0.49 per cent of the vote got them six seats. Ironically, two parties got a bigger percentage of the vote than either of those and have no seats (Civil Revolution 2.25 per cent, Act to Stop the Decline 1.12 per cent). It does have to be said that their version of democracy includes some sort of bonus structure for the biggest party. What is very clear is that the centre-left “Italy Common Good” coalition/alliance holds 345 of the 630 seats on just 29.5 per cent of the popular vote. Electoral turnout was just over 75 per cent.
When the Square Mile is raking it in, they are paying taxes on that which do pay for public services. Obviously it is always popular to attack fat cats in the City and something does need to be done to make sure that they pay proper taxes on their salaries and bonuses – and that they justify them.
I think we should look at how an efficient, cost effective, well managed company with long term sustainable profitability is run and see what can be learned about creating such an environment for the country. No company run the way the country is could possibly achieve this.
How many councils are there?
How much do they cost?
What do they do?
What is the breakdown of their costs?
How many computer systems (and computers) are there and how much do they cost to maintain?
I dread to think what the costs are in France. We left out a piece of information on a form and someone came round with the form, helped us fill it in, had a cup of tea and went on his way. He had already been round to see how we could keep our costs down. Very friendly but seems a bit costly.
How many councils are there?
How much do they cost?
What do they do?
What is the breakdown of their costs?
How many computer systems (and computers) are there and how much do they cost to maintain?
I dread to think what the costs are in France. We left out a piece of information on a form and someone came round with the form, helped us fill it in, had a cup of tea and went on his way. He had already been round to see how we could keep our costs down. Very friendly but seems a bit costly.
It all helps to pad out the job growth numbers for governments. Most can be doing sweet bugger all, but gee the stats look great. 
If everything in life could be measured in terms of cost and value then it might make sense to run a country the way you might run a business. But human values do not always equate to economic values, thank god
That is a very unfair interpretation of my comments AR. I would suggest that by cutting out a lot of waste, more time and effort could be better put to use, caring for the genuinely needy for example
And as sections of society take a rather large leap to the right, maybe the savings can be redirected toward shoring up the racist vote. UKIP have sniffed the wind, found a little fear, and fired up the scaremongering train. Let's use the surplice to keep the countries' values free from the influence of those damn immigrants. Pull up the drawbridge and salute the world with a single finger flourish.
No doubt. But we'd still have to have a debate about what is meant by 'genuinely needy'. That's democracy for you; as messy and contentious as humanity itself.
Businesses have different priorities to governments, that was my point. One stands or falls by its ability to balance the books. The other has much wider and often contradictory ambitions. Didn't mean to be dismissive of your argument.
No problem AR. I just have a problem with the prospect of changing leaderships leading to short termism and the fact that probably a very high % of people voting are voting for what is best for them, rather than for the country as a whole.
And crap computer systems, often caused by companies not having a clue and hiring consultants who more times than not give bad advice and/or act as spokespeople for incompetent management.
And crap computer systems, often caused by companies not having a clue and hiring consultants who more times than not give bad advice and/or act as spokespeople for incompetent management.
Areas like the NHS would be in a much better state if they cut out waste and started to get best value for their budget.
A colleague of mine was sent for an x-ray for nerve damage which was totally useless as x-rays don't show up nerve damage (a health worker friend of hers confirmed this). She then had to be referred by her doctor to a consultant. The consultant would not see her until she had a scan. If she had been sent for a scan in the first place she would not have had to spend over 5 months waiting to see the consultant and getting the right treatment. Actually if the nurse had done her job properly in the first place the nerve damage would not have happened - instead compensation will probably have to be paid in addition to all the wasted time and resources.
By the 8th of May this could well outstrip the “Discuss Anything” thread for length...
In the UK, Labour government employment policy historically has always been stuff as many of the unemployed into non-jobs in the public sector as they can. The public sector being the last bastion of the trade unions that run (own) the Labour party. That is why, apparently, no Labour government has ever left power having reduced unemployment – I wish I could find online statistics to prove this so I could point you at them.
Local government in this country is the biggest waste of money that we have. Three-to-a-job unionised slackers that are impossible to get rid of because the unions will go out on strike. Ron might know something about this as France is a country that is run by the unions, which is why they are always on strike and have the worst performing major economy in Europe. France is heading for bankruptcy because the unions will not allow anybody to adjust retirement ages to cater for the fact that everybody is living longer. The state subsidises the young to breed like rabbits even though there is no work (except in the Nanny State) because their demographic timebomb is worse than Scotland!
I cannot believe that I am defending UKIP here, but the E.S.S.R. (aka E.U.) project is a total failure and it is not racist to say that we do not want all of our “low wage low skill” work done by Eastern Europeans who are free to come here and put the indigenous low skill workers on the scrap heap (i.e. claiming benefits).
We do need immigrants here (always have) but currently we have no control over how many come from Europe. Historically we have had vast numbers of immigrants from, primarily, the Commonwealth; and that has not been a problem as we controlled it.
Cameron is telling a bare-faced lie when he says that he will renegotiate the E.U. “open borders” terms, so the only vote available for those who want border control is UKIP. I have to say that it is going to be a wasted protest vote as nobody will form an alliance with UKIP. If Cameron would take a step to the right he could have a majority easily.
The current government has been trying to cut down on waste. Unfortunately, the NHS has been “weaponised” in the political debate and all that is on offer is “throw more money at it”. If your concern is the NHS, your vote is wasted on 7th May, as nobody is offering the necessary reform (except the None Of The Above Party!).
It is particularly annoying that there has been so much emphasis on “privatisation”. Under the last Labour government, the private sector supplied 4.5 per cent of services – at no cost to the end user – whilst this now stands at about 6 per cent under the Coalition. I would have 99 per cent of the services provided by the private sector if it was still free at the point of use to the patient for the same cost. Is there any NHS patient out there who can honestly say that they have not received treatment for their ailment/injury and been charged in the last twenty years? The NHS is a political football and everybody playing the game has two left feet.
In the UK, Labour government employment policy historically has always been stuff as many of the unemployed into non-jobs in the public sector as they can. The public sector being the last bastion of the trade unions that run (own) the Labour party. That is why, apparently, no Labour government has ever left power having reduced unemployment – I wish I could find online statistics to prove this so I could point you at them.
Local government in this country is the biggest waste of money that we have. Three-to-a-job unionised slackers that are impossible to get rid of because the unions will go out on strike. Ron might know something about this as France is a country that is run by the unions, which is why they are always on strike and have the worst performing major economy in Europe. France is heading for bankruptcy because the unions will not allow anybody to adjust retirement ages to cater for the fact that everybody is living longer. The state subsidises the young to breed like rabbits even though there is no work (except in the Nanny State) because their demographic timebomb is worse than Scotland!
I cannot believe that I am defending UKIP here, but the E.S.S.R. (aka E.U.) project is a total failure and it is not racist to say that we do not want all of our “low wage low skill” work done by Eastern Europeans who are free to come here and put the indigenous low skill workers on the scrap heap (i.e. claiming benefits).
We do need immigrants here (always have) but currently we have no control over how many come from Europe. Historically we have had vast numbers of immigrants from, primarily, the Commonwealth; and that has not been a problem as we controlled it.
Cameron is telling a bare-faced lie when he says that he will renegotiate the E.U. “open borders” terms, so the only vote available for those who want border control is UKIP. I have to say that it is going to be a wasted protest vote as nobody will form an alliance with UKIP. If Cameron would take a step to the right he could have a majority easily.
The current government has been trying to cut down on waste. Unfortunately, the NHS has been “weaponised” in the political debate and all that is on offer is “throw more money at it”. If your concern is the NHS, your vote is wasted on 7th May, as nobody is offering the necessary reform (except the None Of The Above Party!).
It is particularly annoying that there has been so much emphasis on “privatisation”. Under the last Labour government, the private sector supplied 4.5 per cent of services – at no cost to the end user – whilst this now stands at about 6 per cent under the Coalition. I would have 99 per cent of the services provided by the private sector if it was still free at the point of use to the patient for the same cost. Is there any NHS patient out there who can honestly say that they have not received treatment for their ailment/injury and been charged in the last twenty years? The NHS is a political football and everybody playing the game has two left feet.
The NHS is the proverbial white elephant that no party will talk about honestly.
Basically it is a fantastic idea in which the govt picks up the tab for health care so that every citizen need not worry if they are taken ill. It should mean that no one goes without medical care and attention, be that treatment or at the very least pain relief. What would work best however is if we could encourage private care for all that can afford it so as to take the strain out of the work load for the NHS. It should serve the poor rather than everyone as it simply cannot cope with serving everyone. The amount of treatable issues, the drugs and surgeries available coupled with a far bigger population than when established means it is simply overrun.
I would do two things firstly make it compulsory for companies of a certain size to include medical insurance as some already do and as is often automatically included in the US. I would also offer some tax advantage for other individuals taking out private insurance, perhaps being able to claim 50% back from your tax bill. I would then streamline the NHS with a new understanding which realigned peoples expectation. This would state that you will never be turned away if you do not have insurance, you will be treated to the best of our ability, we are here to provide basic care however not high end, if you need a drug that costs thousands it will not be available, we do not do gastric bands or boob jobs, and we expect you to show some concern for your own health as well, in short this is offered freely so be grateful for what it is.
This would regulate it along the lines of most other things which is if you can pay you will get a higher standard of treatment but still maintain a compassionate society in that everyone can get health care free of charge. At present there is not enough incentive to push people towards private care and the expectation of most people is that whatever is wrong with them will be treated with whatever drugs are globally available and in a quick period of time, and if it's not they complain as if it is a right. To put it in a way that all politicians are afraid of, with our current population and the speed of global medical advancement and the money available it simply is impossible. I recall reading something in which some woman was complaining because the NHS would not fund a new drug which would not cure her illness but may have provided another year of life, the drug cost about 600k for the year and they said no, she was furious. It was another example of unrealistic expectations of an imagined limitless money pot. What would be money really well spent is allowing our relationship with death to be brought more into the open and make it more acceptable, it's ludicrous that the only certainty in life is totally unacceptable to so many people.
Basically it is a fantastic idea in which the govt picks up the tab for health care so that every citizen need not worry if they are taken ill. It should mean that no one goes without medical care and attention, be that treatment or at the very least pain relief. What would work best however is if we could encourage private care for all that can afford it so as to take the strain out of the work load for the NHS. It should serve the poor rather than everyone as it simply cannot cope with serving everyone. The amount of treatable issues, the drugs and surgeries available coupled with a far bigger population than when established means it is simply overrun.
I would do two things firstly make it compulsory for companies of a certain size to include medical insurance as some already do and as is often automatically included in the US. I would also offer some tax advantage for other individuals taking out private insurance, perhaps being able to claim 50% back from your tax bill. I would then streamline the NHS with a new understanding which realigned peoples expectation. This would state that you will never be turned away if you do not have insurance, you will be treated to the best of our ability, we are here to provide basic care however not high end, if you need a drug that costs thousands it will not be available, we do not do gastric bands or boob jobs, and we expect you to show some concern for your own health as well, in short this is offered freely so be grateful for what it is.
This would regulate it along the lines of most other things which is if you can pay you will get a higher standard of treatment but still maintain a compassionate society in that everyone can get health care free of charge. At present there is not enough incentive to push people towards private care and the expectation of most people is that whatever is wrong with them will be treated with whatever drugs are globally available and in a quick period of time, and if it's not they complain as if it is a right. To put it in a way that all politicians are afraid of, with our current population and the speed of global medical advancement and the money available it simply is impossible. I recall reading something in which some woman was complaining because the NHS would not fund a new drug which would not cure her illness but may have provided another year of life, the drug cost about 600k for the year and they said no, she was furious. It was another example of unrealistic expectations of an imagined limitless money pot. What would be money really well spent is allowing our relationship with death to be brought more into the open and make it more acceptable, it's ludicrous that the only certainty in life is totally unacceptable to so many people.