Who Wants to Be Second Best?
As democracy* was not an issue for the next Prime Minister, all of the focus is now on the Deputy race. From this rag tag bunch of awful human beings one will gain quite a lot of power and a platform to do something.
Being very bored (and filled with hate) I shall now give my run down on those who would rape their own mother to start a rumour that they might win the race. 1) Hilary Benn I am quite disappointed with him. Being the son of tony Benn I was hoping for more. He is pro-trident, pro-Iraq War and I'm not keen on what he had to say regarding progressive taxation. 2) Hazel Blears What a ****ing bitch. Really sohrt as well. Keeps playing the 'I have a vagina' card. Reminds me of Reese Withespoon in Election, but without the redeeming features (i.e. being a 16 year od school girl). She knows she's done well and is smug as ****, will willinging do anything the PM asks. Literally, anything. She knows how to get ahead. I think she will win. 3) Jon Cuddas No previous experiance. It shows but he has done respectibly. He won't win at all but it's nice to have someone to be indifferent about. 4) Peter Hain MP for Neath, make of that what you will. He has a decent history on social issues (South Africa, something against Nazis). Aginst progressive taxation, pro-trident. Will be able to make a strong campaign as he has the history to win back a lot of the disaffected Left-wing Labour voters. 5) Harriot Harman Nothing really to say about her. Seems rather bland. No idea what her policies are on anything. Last but one, finishing ahead of the newbie. 6) Alan Johnson Another one who only really seems there to make up the numbers. Doesn't really impress at all and has no charisma. Not sure of his policies either. So in summary Hazel Blears to win, with Peter Hain finishing a close second, Hilary Benn at third, Alan johnson fourth and Harriet Harman fifth, with Jon Cuddas finishing sixth thus being declared the least shit person in the race. Personally, I would like to see them all being put in the new Big Brother house** and being voted out with the last person in there becoming the new Deputy PM. At least the people would have a say. *or whatever you would like to call it **tk, get ready for that thread |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
there is no progressive tax in the uk?
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Oh sorry, that's my mistake. they are against the very rich paying more taxes than they already do.
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
She's close to Brown so they'd probably work quite well together, and since she does nothing at present she may as well have the Deputy Leader's job which doesn't really do much either. Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
who wants to be second best? a lot of planetarion alliances by the looks of it.
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
To look at another way, people on £11k (crap wage) - 15% of total salary goes to deductions (ish) £16k (still crap wage) - 20% of total £26k (below median wage I think) - 25% of total £40k (start of higher rate) - 28% of total £60k - 31% of total £100k - 35% of total £300k - 39% of total So as you can see, the % of total salary rises quite quickly at the lower end but the acceleration slows - 5% at the bottom is only £5k where 5% at the top is £40k or more. Of course, if you analyse household income then you get different results because if you were on 11k in the real world there's a good chance your family income would be supplemented by benefits, especially if you had children. Obviously this is all PAYE stuff, there's probably not that many people earning over £300k who aren't either self-employed or have slightly more complex finances which allow them to (at the very least) be flexible when they pay the taxman. That's the direct taxation bit, which is obviously the most progressive part of the tax system. Indirect taxes for a variety of reasons are probably regressive in their effect, although it depends on your lifestyle. If you drive, smoke or drink you obviously pay quite a bit. There are other effects of the tax system like the effect on owner occupation versus private renting (overall) but as the UK's had high rates of owner occupation generally, this probably isn't as noticable as it could be. As rates of owner occupation drop it might have more of an impact. edit : They're all shite, but Alan Johnson drove past me the other day and didn't smile, Harriet Harman didn't reply to my letter so they're immediately discounted. Peter Hain probably get's my notional support, but only just. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
http://www.pru.co.uk/home/calculator/income_tax/ |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
(although admittedly I was using 06/07's calculator elsewhere, not 07/08, but meh) |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
I think we've reached the point where anyone who votes Labour in the next election can genuinelly be considered either evil or ignorant beyond words, so I cant imagine what frame of mind youd have to be in to care about who the deputy was going to be.
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Never underestimate the powerful block vote of the masochists.
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Last night I'm sure she managed to use the same phrase to push her case forward whilst degrading Harriet Harman. 'I would vote for' Jon for his determination, Peter for his policies and Harriet because she's a woman.' What a ****ing bitch. Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Alan Johnson uses Twitter. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
He seems to have been doing so for quite a while, so someone on his team seems to be fairly on-the-ball with regards to the wonderful socially-networked future. http://twitter.com/johnson4deputy |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
I have an anti-preference. A negative preference if you will. It is that woman I am talking about, of course. You know her; a smug dwarf, possibly from a pantomime or something darker. She is a cow and a shit and I hope she is raped to death. I am entirely serious here. I don't throw these sorts of things around lightly, but I hope she is actually penetrated until she expires, preferably anally. And, yes, I shall say go so far as to say that I have a prefernce for it happening on the floor of the House of Commons. I hope she is set on, with teeth and hair and all the rubbing and stuff, and mounted by George Galloway in an act of desperate Celtic frenzy purely out of the Middle Ages.
She is what a lot of Labour women are about - an arse-licker extraorindaire, completely empty of all original ideas or even of anything resembling proper thought. But, as I have already stated, she is a shit. This is primarily her occupation. A rounded one, mainly focused on being actively bad. Her arrogance and smugness actually now seep from my television, in some fat, disgustingly lardy stream whenever she is featured, as if out of some nasty film. In the end I called the Ghostbusters and they eventually said it was nothing paranormal, they couldn't do a damn thing with it and that I would have to buy a new one, and whilst still charging me a £30 callout fee as they robbed me blind with a smile from Egon and a nod from Venkman. (Weekend rate.) But let's just set that aside for the moment. I hope she bleeds howwibly on the inside when she dies and that nobody helps her. This is my most solemn and sacred wish, and it is all I can do each night but pray to God I shall see it come to pass in my own lifetime. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Its not even a case of political ideology; theres pretty much nowhere on the political spectrum you can be where Bush/Blair havent been complete disasters for their respective countries. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Quote:
To take my own area a Tory government wouldn't mean that much - they might extend the right-to-buy a bit but that's about it. Since Brown's rhetoric on becoming leader was about improving people's route to home ownership. So what's the big difference? |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Quote:
It really goes beyond the traditional mundane centre-left vs centre-right conspiracy to maintain the status quo - stuff like this comes from the mind of a zealous lunatic and is terrifying to read. Theres no possible justification for voting for a party which has managed to produce and a support a leader who would make a statement like this. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
I see no reason to assume if Cameron got in that he'd be free of this collecitve insanity and the Labour Party don't have the intellectual honesty/independence/capacity to criticise hypothetical Tory horrors from any other perspective but "We could be managing this so much more efficiently!" |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Coming from a family which all vote Labour it feels as though I will be betraying them somewhat. That's just a small part of it though. With the voting system being first past the post, it effectively is a two horse race. I view the Liberal Democrats (whilst a viable alternative to Labour for me) to be a wasted vote. Sure people will go if everyone thought like you they will never get into power. Well that's the problem. Everyone does think like me. Or at least a fair majority. What do the conservatives offer us that Labour doesn't? The only thing that I can see happening is the conservatives getting into power shaking things up. However will it be good if they get in? I would rather a Labour government than a Conservative government, especially because what the tories did in the 80s. Going back to Labour. They haven't done that bad a job. Take away Iraq, look at the positives (ignoring the fact they have moved into the centre etc). Northern Ireland has been a roaring sucess. I remember as I am sure many of you do the bombings the IRA used to do, the bomb warnings and in general the whole ****ed up situation in Northern Ireland. I went to NI in the mid 90s and it was a hostile place. Belfast is a changed city now (sure it has issues, but what city doesn't). The people of Northern Ireland are voting in their government and for the first time power sharing is occuring between the two parties (ie Catholics and Protestants coming together to work for one goal, although we will see if this works). As well as that there is devolution. It has given the Scottish people (and to a certain extent the Welsh and the people of London) more of a say in how they run the country/area. It has allowed them to be more part of politics and bring it back to a local scale. I think devolution is a fantastic idea, and if the idea wasn't rejected by the North East I could see it being pushed out across the rest of the country. I am certainly jealous of the Greater London Authority, as I believe they do a good job. Love him or Loath him, Ken Livingston fights for Londons cause. The West Midlands needs someone like him, the West Midlands needs more control over its money, better integration of transport etc. It is my belief that politics works best when people who are running it are doing so on a local level. If I was elected say to the West Midlands Authority, and thus as a collective we had more control over a budget than say Whitehall/Westminster, then we as local people are going to give a toss about how we spend it and in turn do the best we can with it. It's a tough cookie, but I believe Devolution is fantastic and allows people to work best at a local level, whilst still giving them a voice nationally. Lets face it the current local council system can be fairly ineffective (partly down to the restrictions put in place by National Government, ring fenced grants etc) but ironically devolution gives that power back to the localities. I know this is a bizarre point, and statistics lie, but in general more people are working, less people are unemployed and the country has been enjoying a period of boom for the last ten years. Downside is we are all knee high in debt, and how well the country is doing is down to interpretation. If we look at Africa, whilst it is not a perfect solution, Blair did a decent job in Sierra Leone and I feel as though the British Government has been fairly proactive and shown interest. The environment is something that is also encouraging. The UK hasn't been scared to sign agreements and it is moving in the right direction with Europe. The main problem with the Labour government has been the USA. For me the relationship with the USA has been one which has prevented us from becoming more integrated with Europe and has led us down a bad path towards Iraq. Iraq was a mistake. BUT. At the end of the day an evil dictator who killed thousands a year was ousted. Now I am not saying that justifies the killing of Iraqis etc to get to that point, but there is a slight silver lining. Not only that some say the Iraq war has been a disaster, I say the price of petrol has gone down. You do the math. In general I have been pleased to vote for Labour in 2005 and I will vote for them again in 3 years time. Like T&F says, this whole idea it is undemocratic is bizarre. The Labour MPs were elected. They chose their Leader. First Tony Blair, now Gordon Brown. Also he is right, how many of us choose our boss. We voted in the MPs they are representatives of us. I believe under Labour we will see a few more decent years. For the future what I would like to see is more of a challenge by the Lib Dems to the point that they can challenge to become the second party. But ultimately I believe the voting system should change. At the moment it doesn't allow true democracy. We should perhaps have a system like Proportional Representation or another system. Many a review has said that we need to change our electoral system, but of course I doubt it will happen as the government who are elected on the old one are hardly going to hinder their chances of reelection by bringing in a new form of elections. In the future it would be brilliant if there were more than three parties (I still believe there is only two at the moment, with the Lib Dems being weak) and a vote will really represent the general public. This in turn will hopefully allow more people to vote, as they will feel their vote counts. It would be great in my opinion to have coalitions of say the Green Party, Labour Party etc. You probably haven't read all of the above, if you have well done. I know there are a lot of flaws in what I have written but it is how I feel on the current state of British Politics. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
I guess this is a problem with GD.
When someone writes something long, people don't take the time to read it or form a reply. Then what could potentially run into a decent thread with argument and debate dies on its arse. Of course you could place the blame on the person who writes the long post that discourages people from replying. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
I disagree with that, as I am sure many others do. I also can't see the 90 day rule getting through the Lords and the Commons. With 28 days we already have the longest detention in the west, so I doubt 90 days will come into place. Personally I think its a terrible idea, but the average joe may think along the lines of "I'm not a terrorist, it doesn't affect me." etc. Also he is putting in place safeguards. If you read this, it gives you the gist of them. Such as Judicial review every 7 days. Obviously this is a terrible idea. But my main point still stands. Please try and ignore the fact that Labour is slightly anal about Iraq and Terrorism, I guess you get that way after your allies were attacked and you were attacked. But instead look at what Labour has done, and will continue to do. Terrorism, Foreign Policy etc aside, Labour in my opinion will do a better job than the Tories. Don't forget what happened under the Tories, it's easy to do. But certainly not a good idea. Not sure why there is so much anti Labour blood around here and such a "I Vote Green, I Vote Blue" and a "I vote a party that won't ever get into power" mentality. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Like what? |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
i think a more accurate assertion would be never to underestimate the block vote of the former mining communities... |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Labour have made a sharp move to the right and the policies which they discuss are pretty much the same, many of which seem to be pushing for privitisation. You also have to keep in mind that New Labour would not exist without thatcher and the partial adoption by New Labour of that ideology. Most of what thatcher did was not reversed under this government, not even the anti-union measures. there has been a methodical effort made to isolate the left-wing of the party, and to a rather large extent it has worked. this is the same issue Cameron is currently facing with the Conservative right-wing. the Age of Extreme Politics is over and all we are left with is a great steaming pile of mediocrity. Quote:
Personally, I don't see why it's any worse than 'I vote for a shit Party which has betrayed it's original intent, supressed human rights and adopted thatcherite policies, because my family does.' I have only voted once (and that was a debacle) and I doubt I will ever vote again, unless we are faced with a particularly shit candidate. Even saying that, I am in the Valleys which is a Labour strong-hold so it doesn't really matter. the entire system is a shambles, both politically and economically and I'm not sure you can have proper reform of the one without the other. Other countries have proportional repesentation and they are hardly bastions of equality and fe dom so it's not really going to make any difference. Parties will move to the centre to get votes and seats, others will stay ideologically true and recieve neither. this will cotinue the status quo until there is some kind of economic collapse and people start voting for whichever nutjob can shout the loudest about immigrants/Muslims/Jews etc and gain some votes. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
I always think it would be nice if in discussions about the Labour party the achievements were played up a little more, such as to avoid unneccessary voting for the Tories. I hate to resort to stereotype here, but it's entirely thanks to the Blair government that Britain has probably the most relaxed and progressive gay rights legislation anywhere in the world, whereas it's entirely thanks to the Tories that Section 28 existed or that equalisation of consent took as long as it did. I'm not happy with Labour's suddent shunt to the right nor their increasingly anti-liberty stance, but it's not pattern behaviour.
I vote Green, by the way. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
But it's the British Political system (first past the post, that isn't for you Dante, for others reading this) that means that we have to choose the lesser of two evils. Until the voting system is changed it will be the way for a long time. The only way the 3rd party lib dems can force its way into the big two is by becoming like Labour and Conservative. Even now I doubt the lib dems actually offer a decent alternative. To All Systems Go. I am aware it damages our liberties and freedoms etc hence this little snippet: Quote:
Quote:
Tomkat was saying in #forums a few days ago that you shouldn't really trust sites reviewing bars/clubs as people who have had a good time aren't exactly going to take a moment out of there life to tell the internet they had a good time. They will simply go back and have another good time. Conversely if you had a bad time in a Club, say the bouncers kicked you out. You are more likely to kick and scream and tell the whole world what a shit club it is, the bouncers are heavy handed and the sound system is shit. Simply because you are bitter. Oh Phang, you are completely right on the gay rights, it is fantastic that we are so relaxed in this country towards gay rights. I am fairly positive you wouldn't see a tory government being that liberal. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
What the tories did? Free market reform? The type of reform that leaves the country better able to respond to Globalisation (unlike the countries of Italy and Germany who are quite ****ed at the moment) leading to better standard of living for those in the country. Quote:
Wait a second i'm pretty sure this is the result of the work the tories did in the 80's that you just lambasted them for. Quote:
You're correct, Northern Ireland was all down to Labour! Alternatively it took some brave work by the tories to open discussion (some background info for you). In short Pig please stop being so ****ing ignorant. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Hey guys labour are rumoured to be supporting 24 hour drinking laws so theyve got my vote! |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
that's exactly what voters need, more emotional responses and less rational thought!
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
What voters need is more choice.
They probably also need a more responsive democracy in terms of votes cast and seats given. Until then emotional responses will tend to overide rational thought when the two major parties are so similar to each other and not really representing a stance. Both being essentially middle ground albeit to the right or left of that middle ground. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
We could argue that if turnout was low and people say voted with their feet, i.e. not turn up then a political party would emerge that would engage the masses and challenge the big two. In effect people believe the Liberal Democrats will do this. Yet when Labour and Conservative were weak, the Liberal Democrats hardly made a dent in the overall percentage of seats in the commons. Liberal Democrats are the third way (not anthony giddons third way, I mean offering another choice.) But unforunately they don't seem to have the vision or leadership to offer this path. Even if they did offer it, which some people believe they do (I think Yahwe triumphs the Liberals) they stand little chance of making a signifcant impact. Which is why if I had to choose between getting shot or getting stabbed. Well **** me both would hurt, but stab me any day. I see it like this. If I don't vote, or rather if I voted for say the Liberals (or the Green party, the party I would like to vote for) and then the Conservatives got in. By me not voting for Labour I have just put myself in a worse position for making some kind of ideological gesture that no one other than myself can see. Instead I would prefer to ensure that primarilly I protect my immediate interests. It's a weird flip side. I am very much in belief that every vote counts. Yet I am unwiling for a number of reasons to vote for another party, for the fear that the Tories will come into power. Quote:
I always thought this forum to be somewhat liberal and leftist. But I am probably in agreement with you when you say that posters on GD now aren't particularly left wing. It probably has something to do with not actually experiencing any real hardship or issues to motivate you to go to the left (I don't think that made sense, but I hope you understand) and also moving from being students to becoming a worker , albeit well paid graduate workers who don't like to see their money pissed up the wall because of high taxes and a war. It is my belief taxes are to low though so I shall be quiet. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
I don't have time to discuss the rest of your points but i'll make an exception for your above point. YOU'RE A ****ING IDIOT! Too low? Do you have any idea what tax burden we're under at the moment. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD TRY AND ENLIGHTEN YOURSELF! |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Point 1 - The NHS is getting BILLIONS wasted on it (see £11 billion for a wasted IT project that still isn't up and running long after it was supposed to). Point 2 - I wasn't talking about the tax burden of those exceptional folk who earn over £100k. I was talking about "Ordinary Joes". Do you know what your tax burden is? Say you're earning £30k a year you're paying AT LEAST 60% of your earnings in tax (at an absolute minimum). I think it's more (i.e. 70%) but i dont have figures to hand. Point 3 - More funding? Say no to trident. I cant be arsed arguing about how Labour have ****ed up on Education. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Quote:
Of course, you can start factoring in the cost of the food they eat and what % of that is the tax on the fuel that it required to transport, but that's a bit dodgy. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
I'll say this though, it does offer more potential for different political viewpoints and representation. I suppose that can't be a bad thing. The Dutch managed to elect two members of the Party for the Animals into their Parliament. There is a limit to how far I would advocate for political representation, and when you find your country is starting to elect single issue interest groups to Parliament, I'd start to worry a bit. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
It really depends how you want to slice things up though, and theres probably no objective way of doing it or calculating the monetary effects that policies have. Should the criminalisation of marijuana be counted as an indirect subsidy of the alcohol industry for instance? How much does that cost the average person each year? |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
Remember, next time you go grocery shopping, that the VAT you pay for your food is very regressive at large. (And in a VAT system in general, the store will push the taxes on you, making you pay double tax for the same "income" whereas you're basically paying large transaction costs for first exchanging your work to money and then exchanging your money to consumerables). Quote:
Being an ignorant moron I'm struggling to avoid a moan on the median voter system, so I'll first ask someone to briefly explain or link me to something that describes how this election of yours works. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
But looking at national figures isn't terribly meaningful when talking about an individual person who earns £30k anyway. It's not as likely to be as high for someone on £30k than someone on £100k, and the 41-46% range includes things like taxes on North Sea Oil, surpluses from public corporations, etc. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
|
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Roger that.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/4/37504406.pdf Oddly enough, OECD shows rather low figures. Some ECB statistics will show higher, and the Statistics Finland will at least give higher numbers (on Finland's case). I guess it'll give some hint, though. edit. Quote:
edit. Makes me tempted to find statistics on consumption. Argh. Yes, it seems in UK "most groceries" are exempt. In Finland, there's a 17% VAT on majority of them. Quite a bit of a difference between the two, then. UK seems to be the exception here, though, most other EU countries (Belgium, Germany, France, Netherlands, so on) do have VATs for groceries too. |
Re: Who Wants to Be Second Best?
Quote:
I think calling inflation a form of tax is a bit of a push. Wages tend to minimally rise with inflation, especially if we're considering this ficticious £30k a year person who is more likely to be eligible for bonuses, more likely to own his own home and the like. This almost factors-out the transport-system question as well, although obviously the cost of running a car is probably pretty inefficient in duty/tax terms. I agree entirely though that there are a never-ending multitude of minor costs that will add-up, but this 70% number that was pulled from the air seems excessive without some kind of plausible explanation. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:21. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018