Blast from the past - Brexit - Page 312
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 312 of 325 FirstFirst ... 212262302310311312313314322 ... LastLast
Results 6,221 to 6,240 of 6500
  1. #6221
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Country
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    2,278
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    10
    Likes (Received)
    696

    Default

    We have so called preferential voting here...the system is so susceptable to rorting that we usually have some 20 unelected members of parliament,and in the recent past have had one elected member who recieved zero votes,of the first ,second or lesser preference.The fiddle was concocted by a computer nerd ,who saw the possibility ,and sold his services to those in need (of a cushy $500,000 a year job)....then back on the dole when those in power quickly moved to stop this happening again....the preferential system as it stands is highly complex,and is designed to be so,the reason being its easily manipulated by those in power to produce a desired result.....One vote/one voter is not easily manipulated ,as everyone can understand it.

  2. #6222
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,797
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    746
    Likes (Received)
    2356

    Default

    I saw this in the news regarding the UK

    quote

    Is there really anything surprising about wanting to control one's own destiny? Hard-working, law-abiding, tax-paying individuals don’t like being told what to do or how they should live.

    end quote.

  3. #6223
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Australia (Hobart)
    Posts
    3,580
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    569
    Likes (Received)
    2715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rand View Post
    The 45.6% I quoted wasn't the proportion of the electorate or the population. It was the proportion of those that actually voted. That means that fewer people voted in favour of brexit supporting parties than voted against them. As I said, a lousy mandate.
    So why is it that Boris Johnson is PM with a 60-odd seat majority, then?

    Methinks you are applying very dubious counting logic.

    Did Johnson go to the election promising to implement Brexit come what may, or didn't he?

    Was he re-elected, or wasn't he?

    Is Corbyn saying that the reason they lost was Brexit, or not?

    Mark, your preferred outcome was DECISIVELY voted down.

    Play all the games with percentages that you like, the fact is, Boris said he'd implement Brexit if elected, he started with a minority of the House of Commons and is now going to have a substantial majority.

    What you're doing is denying the election outcome because you don't like it. It's very unedifying. Have the decency to acknowledge that your preferred outcome lost.

    As for those who didn't bother to vote, tough shit. They opted out of making a decision and allowed others to make it for them. You can't read anything at all into that except possibly that they didn't care about Brexit or no Brexit. Otherwise they'd have voted.

    PDW

  4. Likes andrewmawson liked this post
  5. #6224
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Australia (Hobart)
    Posts
    3,580
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    569
    Likes (Received)
    2715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Limy Sami View Post
    The point is that is bollox,(as was 99.99% of his election campaign) he will only be implementing the leaving agreement, which is little more than the preface to the total deal.
    Come the 1st Feb 2020 even if that bill has passed the commons,(& IMO that's not a given - the fight's far from over) ……..we will still be in Europe as much as we are now (if not more so) because we will be in deep negotiation.

    Plus the leave side will continue to fight every millimetre, tooth and claw, legal challenges - the works!

    Boris Johnson had one major problem - nobody (including many on his own side) trusts him any further than they could throw him.
    Well, sure, no argument from me.

    What I take exception to is people like Mark who promptly discard the outcome of the election when it doesn't go their way and claim Boris hasn't a mandate.

    Going from a minority to 60+ majority after a campaign where the main topic was Brexit and then claiming he doesn't have a mandate to implement it is just utter rubbish. There's rarely been a clearer choice and it was made.

    What Mark is actually saying is that he has no intention of accepting a democratic decision he doesn't like. But he's couching that in terms that try to disguise his true position. It's bullshit. If you want to go down that path then get ready for other people to do the same and there goes democratic/semi-consensus decision making.

    Now, whether Boris et al actually *implement* a Brexit in a form other than token - that is an entirely different question and one on which I have no opinion. Except that politicians lie so generally I'd doubt anything they said.

    So we'll see. As I said, my care factor is pretty close to zero.

    PDW

  6. Likes Mark Rand liked this post
  7. #6225
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    4,854
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2605
    Likes (Received)
    2362

    Default

    No, what I'm saying is that our first past the post voting system often produces a large majority for parties that got a minority of the votes. It works passably well when there are only two parties and all the constituencies are the same size. It doesn't work quite so well when there are four or more parties and the population of constituencies varies by a factor of two. When there is a need for across the board cooperation, it falls flat on it's face because our MPs don't seem to understand that they represent all their constituents, not just their parties

    Yes, I am pissed off that a majority of the people who voted, voted against the result that is going to be implemented.

    It'd be nice to think that we don't screw up the leaving the way we pissed off all the rest of the Commonwealth by the joining in the first place.


  8. Likes Limy Sami, camscan liked this post
  9. #6226
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Norfolk England
    Posts
    2,285
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2631
    Likes (Received)
    1695

    Default

    Look on the bright side people,the poisoned dwarf wants out the UK.

  10. #6227
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    I saw this in the news regarding the UK

    quote

    Is there really anything surprising about wanting to control one's own destiny? Hard-working, law-abiding, tax-paying individuals don’t like being told what to do or how they should live.

    end quote.
    " Daily Mail " or " Daily Torygraph " ? It can't be the " The Sun " because there's too many big words in it.

    Regards Tyrone.

  11. #6228
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    I don't know how it works in the USA or Australia for that matter. Over here the country is so small geographically that we have national newspapers that you can buy in any newsagents in the land. 60% of these newspapers are now owned by two people who chose to live in tax exile abroad. They own all but one of the so called "popular" press and two of the three more serious newspapers.

    The " popular "newspapers I refer to, with the one exception of " The Daily Mirror ", are vehemently anti Labour regardless of their policies or leadership. If Jesus Christ was Labour leader they'd want him crucified. I call in my newsagents to pick up my paper in person every morning as I think the walk does me good. I usually scan the front page headlines in the other papers. In this election campaign the Labour Party and Corbyn were thoroughly trashed every morning in all of them.

    When Johnson was caught out in an interview and refused to look at a photo on a mobile phone a reporter was showing him and actually pocketed the phone there was no mention of it on the front pages of any of these papers. Corbyn would have been slaughtered in similar circumstances.

    The situation is basically anti democratic and the UK will never move forward until things change in this respect.
    The Tories are now threatening the BBC because it wasn't following the Tory Party line as closely as they would have liked. Ruling by lying to the electorate will always end badly. You can con your own electorate but it's a lot harder to con the rest of the world.

    Regards Tyrone.

  12. #6229
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by camscan View Post
    Look on the bright side people,the poisoned dwarf wants out the UK.
    My wife is half Scots, she grew up near Edinburgh. She suggested to me the other day that if Scotland does leave we should move there. We used to stay in Edinburgh every year for the Festival Fringe and I like the place a lot. The East Nook of Fife is especially lovely. It would be tempting. I've never been in favour of breaking up the union but I can't honestly blame them if they want to leave. Scotland is anti-Tory and pro EU by large majorities yet they are being led out of the EU by the Tories.

    Whatever you may think about Nicola Sturgeon she is a very effective and popular campaigning politician.

    Regards Tyrone

  13. Likes Mark Rand, Limy Sami liked this post
  14. #6230
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Vienna Austria
    Posts
    274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    97
    Likes (Received)
    86

    Default

    The sad thing is if Scotland leaves the UK, it wont easily get back into the EU. As Slovenia, Croatia and the other Balkan states found, when you break out of a larger government, you have to start from scratch creating required governmental bodies. As one specific example, Scotland has no civil aviation authority. There will be dozens of other government functions which would have to be created from scratch. To join the EU you have to demonstrate that all these functions of government are established and actually working well (they get audited as part of the accession process). On top of that, Spain, Belgium etc are not going to make it easy for splinter countries to get back in out of concern for their own national unity.

    This will affect the UK in the other direction. In accordance with international treaties, they will have to reestablish government functions which were pooled in the EU for the last forty years. Again in the example Aviation, the UK CAA will have to reestablish initial certification activities to meet ICAO responsibilities. The UK CAA was once strong in this area, which centralised to EASA in Cologne from 2003. Most of the UK's specialist are either retired, or in Cologne. The nonsense of spending the money which will no longer be sent to the EU, on the NHS, is that the UK will now have to spend substantially more money to reestablish small specialized agencies (other I can think of are drug certification, Atomic industry oversight, but I am sure there are many more) which will never be as competent or efficient as the EU agencies, as they don't have the scale of the whole EU. The money we pay to the EU is not wasted, most of it pays for required specialized functions of government which are more efficient done once than done 30 times at national level.
    Last edited by rotarySMP; 12-15-2019 at 01:04 PM.

  15. Likes Mark Rand, Tyrone Shoelaces liked this post
  16. #6231
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rotarySMP View Post
    The money we pay to the EU is not wasted, most of it pays for required specialized functions of government which are more efficient done once than done 30 times at national level.
    This is exactly backwards, upside-down, inside-out, whatever you want to call it.

    Economies of scale work up to a point. Anyone who quotes parts understands this "bigger = more efficient" fallacy. Yes, there is a huge difference between one part and two parts, between one employee and three employees. But that difference shrinks as the numbers grow. It disappears entirely when you get to 500 parts or 200 employees or whatever.

    We know this to be fact cuz we got shops and quote parts. We ain't idiot ceo's or college-graduate basket-weavers here.

    After a certain size you no longer get more efficient. In fact, as the layers and layers of bureaucracy increase and the people doing the work get farther and farther away from the decision-making idiots, you get less efficient.

    The entire world at this time seems to be trending in the wrong direction. Not from natural causes, either. As the people at the top of these pos enterprises get more power, they influence the laws to advantage themselves and their worthless oversized companies (bureaucracies same). Otherwise they'd collapse when a little guy comes along and kicks their butts.

    We see this on a daily basis. What did Muckeysoft do whenever anyone came along with a better product ? Bought 'em up and stuck them in a closet, never to be seen again, that's what. All the biggies do that. It's what "mergers and acquisitions" is all about - legalized restraint of trade.

    It would be interesting to see what would happen if we made purchase of another company illegal. Yeah, I know, but still interesting to see these places have to make it on their own. Market of the Invisible Hand is only "free" if there's rules ...

    I propose that you are mistaken in your belief. Localized, smaller, more answerable levels of government and commerce tend to be more efficient. Also more responsive to the actual needs of their constituents and more easily held accountable for their fuckups. They do a better job.

    All in all, we are going the wrong way in this world. Bigger != better.

  17. #6232
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,797
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    746
    Likes (Received)
    2356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    " Daily Mail " or " Daily Torygraph " ? It can't be the " The Sun " because there's too many big words in it.

    Regards Tyrone.

    Peggy Grande: Democrats beware -- British election is final nail in the coffin of the globalist experiment | Fox News

    google search of the text string brought it up ;-)

  18. #6233
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    I don't know a great deal about " Fox News " but what I do know is that it's reputation is pretty low. I don't know who owns it but the old saying of " Whoever pays the piper calls the tune " is usually a good guide.

    Not many columnists are altruistic. An American writer you may or not be familiar with,if you're not you should be, Upton Sinclair, once wrote - " It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it ".

    Regards Tyrone.

  19. Likes Limy Sami liked this post
  20. #6234
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ManicMetalBasher View Post
    #6192 Tyrone
    "Are the lies of " The Daily Mail " , " The Daily Express ", " The Daily Star", " The Daily Torygraph " more to your taste then ?"
    These publications make no pretence about their impartiality, nobody is obliged to buy them.

    Whereas:-
    The BBC is obliged by its Charter to be impartial, it breaks the terms of its Charter every hour of every day.
    The BBC supports the, supposedly independent far left Guardian, by buying 15% of the papers printed!*
    The BBC also supports the, supposedly independent far left Guardian, by placing c90% of its adverts for staff in the Guardian!*
    Corollary, if the BBC needs a non BBC employee to provide a left wing viewpoint someone from the Guardian is ideal. Reliable and their fee
    goes to a supporter of "the cause"!
    Not surprising that the views of BBC and far left Guardian employees are so similar, it's often the same people.
    The BBC also supports the, supposedly independent far left Guardian, by taking on Guardian staff to avoid them being made redundant!

    Paying for the TV licence is not an option, for watching live television legally. Not limited to BBC broadcasts!
    Every TV licence payer who votes Conservative has been subsidising Labour Party activity!
    *These figures are c5 years old.


    # Everybody but Tyrone
    BBC Watch, Is The BBC Biased, Biased BBC, are three websites which report on left wing bias in BBC production. Numerous examples every
    day. Find out the truth about BBC lies for yourself,
    Don't think being in a minority of one will bother me matey. It won't be the first time and I'm pretty sure it won't be the last.

    Regards Tyrone.

  21. Likes Mark Rand liked this post
  22. #6235
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,797
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    746
    Likes (Received)
    2356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    I don't know a great deal about " Fox News " but what I do know is that it's reputation is pretty low. I don't know who owns it but the old saying of " Whoever pays the piper calls the tune " is usually a good guide.

    Not many columnists are altruistic. An American writer you may or not be familiar with,if you're not you should be, Upton Sinclair, once wrote - " It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it ".

    Regards Tyrone.
    For me the statement stands on it's own merit. I could care less who paid for it.

    "It's the thought that counts"

  23. #6236
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,797
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    746
    Likes (Received)
    2356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    Don't think being in a minority of one will bother me matey. It won't be the first time and I'm pretty sure it won't be the last.

    Regards Tyrone.

    We have the same issue here in the states with our NPR, National Public Radio.
    Though mostly funded by private contributions, there is a "your tax dollars at work" aspect.

    It is anything but unbiased. Often the "trial of public opinion" is fanned to flames in what they term "comprehensive journalism".

    I can't listen to it much any more.

  24. #6237
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    For me the statement stands on it's own merit. I could care less who paid for it.

    "It's the thought that counts"
    Not always. If this columnist is being paid to lie to me I want to know why and who's doing the paying.

    I've mentioned this before but I was sat next to a bloke flying to Spain a while ago. We got to talking about our respective occupations. He said " I work in a lie factory ". I was a bit taken aback by that. At first I thought he meant Lye Soap. So I asked him what he meant by that. He replied " I'm a printer on The Daily Mail "


    Regards Tyrone.

  25. Likes Limy Sami liked this post
  26. #6238
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,669
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    472
    Likes (Received)
    1894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    Not always. If this columnist is being paid to lie to me I want to know why and who's doing the paying.
    Um, it was an opinion piece...

  27. #6239
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1236
    Likes (Received)
    5326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Um, it was an opinion piece...
    Yes, apparently. So before I decided to waste anymore of my time and eyesight today I took the precaution of googling the writer. It appears she was an aide to President Reagan back in the day. Mm, given the fact I wasn't Reagan's biggest fan over here her opinions from across the pond won't really be my cup of tea as we say in Blighty. We've got plenty of right wing writers of our own over here thanks.

    Regards Tyrone.

  28. #6240
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, UK
    Posts
    18,939
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    14443
    Likes (Received)
    14512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    Um, it was an opinion piece...
    That old get out, ………...ever noticed how ''opinion pieces'' are never published in papers of different political stance?

    Said ''opinion pieces'' are paid for (and not on minimum wage rates)

    The fact remains politics and the media need each other in order to survive, ………...like dung beetles need shit.

    P.S. Tyrone replied as I was posting.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •