Poll: New poll on who you will vote for?

Who?

  • Labour

    Votes: 76 10.0%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 286 37.6%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 324 42.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 75 9.9%

  • Total voters
    761
Status
Not open for further replies.
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
Absolutely. I think it's sad that most people who vote are pretty ignorant when it comes to their individual candidate and their parties policies.

Newspapers are an especially bad place to form an opinion from. That's why I like these leader debates - they are giving millions of people an alternative source of information on which to base their vote.

Well, except that the approval differences between the lib dems and their policies in blind tests suggests that it's working even less well than the newspapers in helping people make a good decision.

The much bigger problem is that the population, overwhelmingly, is made up of complete morons.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Aug 2007
Posts
28,937
The much bigger problem is that the population, overwhelmingly, is made up of complete morons.

This.

After several weeks of hassling a work colleague to try reading the policies of each party, she has finally caved in and downloaded summaries of them to read.

Up until this point she was determined to vote Liberal, as ...

1) She always has
2) She thought Clegg was good on the tv
3) She thinks Cameron is too posh and she doesnt like stuck up people
4) She thinks that Brown is "a blubbering drunk"

Now..it may just turn out after she has read the summaries that she still votes Lib...but at least it will then be due to agreeing with their policies, rather than some stereotypical, media skewed, self-ingrained form of indoctrination.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Posts
4,878
Absolutely. I think it's sad that most people who vote are pretty ignorant when it comes to their individual candidate and their party's policies.

Newspapers are an especially bad place to form an opinion from. That's why I like these leader debates - they are giving millions of people an alternative source of information on which to base their vote.


You should see both the Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates in my costituency of Salisbury.

The Lib Dem is a 26 year old underacheiver who sells Solar panels for a living, and the Labour candidate is roughly the same age and is in desperate need of a haircut and a wash.
The lack of choice from the Conservative candidate is due to the safe seat designation of the constituency. If the LibDems really were 'for change' then they would take the constituency seriously regardless of the percieved limited chance of gaining the seat.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Jan 2006
Posts
10,997
Location
All along the watchtower
12% of GDP is hardly nothing.



Argumentum ad hominem is always a very convincing approach...

Depends how you define gdp, in this case gdp is creaming off a few percent from other people by lending them money which isn't the banks anyway.

So that 12% is actually stealing money from the economy, sounds good though doesn't it.

Of course if you don't understand how the country's financial system works you won't agree.


Ok,briefly, as a tax payer you lend the banks money, they then lend it to you at a much higher rate of interest to buy some rediculously over priced asset, you then spend years paying back the capiltal and interest, they call this gdp.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
Depends how you define gdp, in this case gdp is creaming off a few percent from other people by lending them money which isn't the banks anyway.

So that 12% is actually stealing money from the economy, sounds good though doesn't it.

You appear to be confusing the banks with the government...

Of course if you don't understand how the country's financial system works you won't agree.

I understand all too well about how the country's financial system works and how it is broken, and the cause is not the banks, it's the government.

Ok,briefly, as a tax payer you lend the banks money, they then lend it to you at a much higher rate of interest to buy some rediculously over priced asset, you then spend years paying back the capiltal and interest, they call this gdp.

Is this as opposed to the government taking money from the economy under threat of force, then spending it with a low fiscal multiplier and calling it GDP?

I do love it when statements I make are proved accurate in only a couple of posts ;)
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Jan 2006
Posts
10,997
Location
All along the watchtower
You appear to be confusing the banks with the government...



I understand all too well about how the country's financial system works and how it is broken, and the cause is not the banks, it's the government.



Is this as opposed to the government taking money from the economy under threat of force, then spending it with a low fiscal multiplier and calling it GDP?

I do love it when statements I make are proved true in only a couple of posts ;)

you see, there you go putting words into my posts, I didn't say anything about the government, you asked about the banks bonus's.

Again if you actually researched the subject properly, you would realise that the government have desperately tried to perpetuate this rediculous situation by printing money and extending the life of the rediculous fractional banking system to carry on ripping the country off.

So now we have trillions tied up in huge loans on cardboard boxes all of which are paying interest to provide the banks with their 'profits'. This is set to carry on for at least 25yrs in most cases, whats more it will all happen electronically.
The question is where does the money to pay the interest come from?
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Jun 2004
Posts
26,684
Location
Deep England
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/apr/22/james-murdoch-independent-dodge-city Has this been mentioned already?

The most powerful man in the media, James Murdoch, who controls 40% of the UK press, barged into the offices of The Independent newspaper (which is one newspaper he doesn't control) and launched a four-letter word tirade against the editor.

The reason? An advert for The Independent that stated "Rupert Murdoch won't decide this election. You will". I guess Murdoch Jr strongly disagreed with that :p
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
you see, there you go putting words into my posts, I didn't say anything about the government, you asked about the banks bonus's.

You described why you thought GDP generated by the banks was bad, despite the fact that GDP generated by the state is similar, but far worse, and with a much lower fiscal multiplier.

Again if you actually researched the subject properly, you would realise that the government have desperately tried to perpetuate this rediculous situation by printing money and extending the life of the rediculous fractional banking system to carry on ripping the country off.

Oh dear... What you've just said explains an awful lot about why your position makes absolutely no sense, but you think it does. A fully reserved, fixed banking system is far worse for well, just about everyone, which is why nowhere uses one anymore. I suppose if you really wanted to punish the less well off, it's a good way to go.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2006
Posts
10,276
Location
Belgium land of chocolate
can we have all political talk in the one thread please ? It's weeks away and already boring me to death. Same old arguements with the same people blindly following the same parties repeating just what their parents have said...

It's worse than religion.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
9 Jan 2007
Posts
164,576
Location
Metropolis
can we have all political talk in the one thread please ? It's weeks away and already boring me to death. Same old arguements with the same people blindly following the same parties repeating just what their parents have said...

It's worse than religion.

You have the choice not to read the threads, that's what democracy is all about. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom