Tactical voting

[ellal]

One poll this week from YouGov put the Greens on eight percent of the vote. At the last general election, they achieved less than three percent.

In a democratic country that would get the greens eight percent of the seats in Parliament, namely 52...

Instead they will be lucky to get just two, Brighton and Bristol...

Sadly the 'big two' (nasty party and tory light) have no intention of turning the UK into a democratic country!

 

[noseall]

Blame the loophole, not the person.

They are still parasites, regardless.

 

[ellal]

They are still parasites, regardless.

And you know what they say about parasites...

They love boasting about it

 

[ajohn]

The Greens have finally broadened their remit to include a host of policies in their manifesto that include wealth taxes, ditching university fees, renationalizing utility companies, and defending the National Health Service against “creeping privatization”. All of which were a part of Corbyn's pitch in 2019, but dropped by Keir Starmer, who's adopted a more acceptable tone to appease floating Tories.

All rather popularist in some ways and includes raising a tax. A take that isn't much below what Reform reckon they can get for free. Both are way way higher than any of the other parties.

I always find it hard to understand why people do not realise what Corbyn's pitch was. Some of it goes back to a comment Brown made near the end of his term. Need to spend money on infrastructure. A pretty common view now. Corbyn looked at interest rates and said why not borrow to fix all problems? Interest rates were low. That was his pitch. This now isn't remotely feasible so Labour have dropped the policies. So oh they have done this to attract Tory voters, A very low brow comment. Corbyn. Screams of Marxism when a lot do not realise what that word means or what it is

Renationalisation has a similar problem. The companies started with zero debt. They do have debt now and if bought that has to be taken on. Shares need to be bought. Interesting aspect in a free market. Choice best left to experts who consider all factors. Rail is split. Services and the network. Interesting factor about Network Rail

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/04402220/persons-with-significant-control.

BT look after a country wide network to. Good luck sorting out who controls that. Financial people reckon their debt level is too high.

Water companies improve things via debt.

Another aspect. One of the midland counties. Bus services privately run along with contract concerning what they offer. They are not making a profit. A real private company would just increase prices or go bust. Subsidise them ? The bus arrival rate at a bus stop by me is 15 to 20min depending on which one it is. That has to be paid for irrespective of passenger levels.

I do have direct experience of using both a council bus service and a privately run one. It came about due to an expansion of B'ham beyond it's boundaries with no green space etc between the areas. The council service was subsidised. The private one wasn't. Bus arrival times much further apart and if full tough luck. Priced as needed.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I’m an average tax payer. I’ve used loopholes, haven’t you? Go and pay an accountant - he'll show you some, it’s their job.

Different league.

But if you think it's all the same.

 

[Mottie]

Different league.

But if you think it's all the same.

Same thing though. The bigger the amounts, the bigger the loopholes. Some people just don’t like others with more money though. It upsets their communist principles.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Same thing though. The bigger the amounts, the bigger the loopholes. Some people just don’t like others with more money though. It upsets their communist principles.

Some just don't understand the different types of loopholes.

Doff your cap because you managed a little avoidance. They keep smiling at you and saying thank you.

 

[ellal]

Same thing though. The bigger the amounts, the bigger the loopholes. Some people just don’t like others with more money though. It upsets their communist principles.

So you think that people who believe in a fairer distribution of wealth are all 'communists'?

 

[Mottie]

So you think that people who believe in a fairer distribution of wealth are all 'communists'?

Describe how this distribution of wealth would work. Woukd you, for example, be willing to give up some of that £950k of investments, savings and currency you claim to have to someone who has nothing?

 

[ajohn]

Sadly the 'big two' (nasty party and tory light) have no intention of turning the UK into a democratic country!

I used to favour proportional voting. The LIbs fixed me and also certain happening in countries that use it. Germany is an example. The greens there have caused some unfortunate actions. Coalitions can be bad news.
The other factor is the party who wins is the only one that has any power however it's done. Noises from others just likely to confuse things rather than do any good. Also your 2nd vote might finish up in power. How realistic are they?

I n 1965 gov public expenditure was £14b. In 2020 it's £888b. Inflation over that time. A factor of ~15, 14x15=210. Population in 1965, 54m. 2020 67m. A factor of 1.2.

2020

UK Central Government and Local Authority Public Spending 2020 - Pie Charts Tables

www.ukpublicspending.co.uk

1965

UK Central Government and Local Authority Public Spending 1965 - Pie Charts Tables

www.ukpublicspending.co.uk

I picked 1965 as at that time if some one wanted to buy something they would have little problem with obtaining made in Gt Britain. LOL I was curious about changes since then.

Spend related to GDP 14/37=~38% 1965. 2020 884/2,240=~39%

Looks like lots of gov costs have increased due to factors that don't relate to inflation and GDP relationship hasn't changed.

 

[ajohn]

I n 1965 gov public expenditure was £14b. In 2020 it's £888b. Inflation over that time. A factor of ~15, 14x15=210. Population in 1965, 54m. 2020 67m. A factor of 1.2.

That;s a BofE calculation based on CPI. Another view
£100 in 1965 is equivalent in purchasing power to about £2,426.60 today, an increase of £2,326.60 over 59 years. The pound had an average inflation rate of 5.55% per year between 1965 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 2,326.60%.
A factor of 24. Value of the £ based

Value of 1965 British pounds today | UK Inflation Calculator

This inflation calculator uses the official UK consumer price index. An inflation rate of 5.55% per year means £100 in 1965 is worth £2,426.60 in 2024.

www.in2013dollars.com

LOL Against a currency that is varying as well while means of measuring have varied in all cases anyway. I tried gold based but nothing around.

 

[ellal]

Describe how this distribution of wealth would work. Woukd you, for example, be willing to give up some of that £950k of investments, savings and currency you claim to have to someone who has nothing?

Answer to that is yes, if it didn't mean it went into the pockets of the chums of the politicians either nationally or locally.

The reason why there is no money to fund decent services in the UK is that there are too many middle men (private companies) who all take a bit out of the public purse...

Add that to the obscene shareholder take of the so called public services that are falling apart but continue to charge more, and it's fairly obvious what needs to be done...

And of course the fraud/so-called loopholes that have cost billions...

From that sleaze bag Mone down to the people who pocketed the furlough money for work not intended to be done, the system is wrong!

 

[JohnD]

In-depth polling from YouGov earlier this month put the Greens second behind Labour in around 10 seats. “That will then mean if things get bad for Labour … they could be in a position when you get by-elections, where you could see Greens picking up seats in the same way you saw UKIP and the Reform Party nipping at the heels of the Conservative Party. I think that's when they come into their own,” @Politico.com

What difference would ten seats make in the next Parliament?

 

[ellal]

I used to favour proportional voting. The LIbs fixed me and also certain happening in countries that use it. Germany is an example. The greens there have caused some unfortunate actions. Coalitions can be bad news.
The other factor is the party who wins is the only one that has any power however it's done. Noises from others just likely to confuse things rather than do any good. Also your 2nd vote might finish up in power. How realistic are they?

Remember, the Literal dingbats got a sniff of power and it went to their heads...

And they got their chance through FPTP, not PR...

I think it unfair that garbage's lot got a fair chunk of the vote, but didn't get a fair representation for that vote...

1 seat for 12% of the vote is not democracy!

And look at the pile of s hit that we have now under brexshit because camoron thought he needed to claw back enough of that vote to stay in power...

But the main thing is that if people think their vote counts, then they will be more likely to vote for who they believe in, not just who they hate the least...

Otherwise nothing will change and the spiral of the UK downwards will continue unabated!

Now in this general election, the party whose policies I happen to agree with most are the SNP...

I can't vote for them...

But if there was PR, then just maybe there would be more choice because some political parties might decide to put forward their actual views rather than say what might gain them the most seats...

Just my thoughts

 

[transam]

Blimey we have all the sales pitches from all the political parties

Propaganda through the letter box

Even had letters from the House of Commons (6)

Not convinced by any of it