Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nilocy]

I think it was more the fact he said it and people just want ammunition against the leaders.

I'll try to convince you to vote lib dem though;

Reasons you should vote lib dem.
All of the points are here, I really cannot be arsed looking through them all. Just read it for yourselves. http://www.libdems.org.uk/our_manifesto.aspx

• Introduction of a proportional voting system, instead of the current first pasta post.
• They're going to scrap tutition fee's in England and Wales (Scotlands already done this, for like the last 5 years, hahahahahaha in your faces english students)
• Scraping the renewal of Trident
• Boost policing in places that need police.]
• Closing the tax gap, introducing a Mansion tax (1% tax on mansions worth over £2mil. Theres over 80k households meeting this)
• Reforming the tax system so theres less loop holes
• On immigration they're going to reintroduce exit controls. So we know how many people are leaving
• Also on immigration giving a one off amnesty to those who have lived in the UK for 10 years
• Nick clegg is a good looking guy

Thats just some of the good reasons.

Edit: Also tories are dicks and hate Scotland. So I aint ever voting for them : D

[TheDarkJay]

Please provide the pros and cons of these, and the research, evidence and fallacy-free logical arguments which suggests they are the best course of action.

This is what I need to consider myself making an informed vote. Until then, my vote would be what I would call "uninformed", which in my opinion defeats the entire point of the voting system.

[fenrif]

Please provide the pros and cons of these, and the research, evidence and fallacy-free logical arguments which suggests they are the best course of action.

This is what I need to consider myself making an informed vote. Until then, my vote would be what I would call "uninformed", which in my opinion defeats the entire point of the voting system.

If you're worried about being uninformed then inform yourself. You have google same as the rest of us, though most of those points are pretty self explanatory as to why they are good things.

Also uninformed votes dont defeat the entire point, only voting for something you dont believe in or support. The point of voting is that everyone gets to voice their opinion.... Not that everyone has an informed opinion.

[Nilocy]

Edit: ninja'd.

Also, heres an interesting point. Do you think its the duty of everyone who can vote, to vote?

Personally I think it is. Lotta people died to keep us with those votes.

[Shades]

Also, heres an interesting point. Do you think its the duty of everyone who can vote, to vote?

Personally I think it is. Lotta people died to keep us with those votes.

We didn't ask them to. Yes I know that sounds uncaring but just because people died to get us votes isn't a good reason to vote. Although I'm glad they felt willing to risk their lives and I think we do owe them thanks for what they have done my point still stands.

You should use your vote because you want a voice, and because it is the best weapon a civilian has in the great democratic machine.

I'm torn between thinking everyone should vote and realising there is a lot of people out there that like reality tv and will buy twilight on dvd....

[fenrif]

In a perfect world yeah, but most of the time you're choosing between two extremely similar assholes, either of which could be lying through his teeth just to get elected. The vast majority of people who I know who don't vote (and to be fair, I've never voted before either) don't do it because it seems such a pointless act. Most people my age are extremely disillusioned with the whole system. Hopefully if the Lib Dems get in they can make steps towards fixing this.

I'd categorize it more as a right than a duty.

[Akigagak]

Let me try. My explanations in are in bold.

• Introduction of a proportional voting system, instead of the current first pasta post.

<This is a good thing. It stops a big, early surge from deciding everything.

• They're going to scrap tutition fee's in England and Wales (Scotlands already done this, for like the last 5 years, hahahahahaha in your faces english students)

<Pros: Student's don't really have much cash. This shouldn't be news. Cons: It's not immediate, and it'll cost them a lot once it's fully in place. However...

• Scraping the renewal of Trident

<This will help massively with tuition fees. £20 billion is a lot of cash. And we don't need trident global politics might be a giant willy-waving contest, but we don't need nukes. no-one needs nukes. Besides, all of europe have nukes, and you can bet they would let one hit anywhere near them.

• Boost policing in places that need police.]

<Fairly simple here. More police where police are needed.

• Closing the tax gap, introducing a Mansion tax (1% tax on mansions worth over £2mil. There's over 80k households meeting this)

<Makes the country more money, adding to the cash regained from canceling trident. The two combined should give them plenty to spend on improving everything, and would help cover the pit of despair that is the NHS.

• Reforming the tax system so there's less loop holes

<Again, simple. Makes the rich pay more, since they were most of the people who were using the loopholes in the first place.

• On immigration they're going to reintroduce exit controls. So we know how many people are leaving

<Mostly good for Census information. Can also help track criminals across the globe.

• Also on immigration giving a one off amnesty to those who have lived in the UK for 10 years

<V.Good. These people have shown that they're staying in the country for more than just money, and they've added plenty of their own to the economy. They've earned it.

• Nick clegg is a good looking guy

<Heh. Well, as politicians go, yes. but he looks nice, more than he looks good. Cameron gives of vibes of twat like some kind of demented microwave, and Brown... Brown is... Yeah.
[/list]


As an aside, did you all see that debacle with the 'angry' father ragging on Cameron in the middle of the street? I smell acting when I watch that footage, and I know what to look for.

And maybe there should be some sort of aptitude test to see if someone is intelligent/has enough common sense to vote rationality.

[TheDarkJay]

If you're worried about being uninformed then inform yourself. You have google same as the rest of us, though most of those points are pretty self explanatory as to why they are good things.

I tried, it's all very spread out, I couldn't find research, evidence or even fallacy-less arguments for a lot of things, and they aren't exactly clear how they'll do a lot of them in the first place.

[lordnincompoop]

Sorry if anyone mentioned this before, but...

UK's Digital Economy Act 2010. From what I've heard, it allows the government to take down sites that they think are doing file sharing, and completely disconnect families from internet access without fair trial (no trial at all, in fact) or forewarning. Even though I'm not a UK citizen, that's pretty... alarming.

[fenrif]

If you're worried about being uninformed then inform yourself. You have google same as the rest of us, though most of those points are pretty self explanatory as to why they are good things.

I tried, it's all very spread out, I couldn't find research, evidence or even fallacy-less arguments for a lot of things, and they aren't exactly clear how they'll do a lot of them in the first place.

Yeah, learning is hard. Why bother, eh?

Lordnincompoop: the digital economy bill/act is an excellent example of how fucked up our government is. Thousands upon thousands of people wrote to MPs asking that they at least consider this proposal before just rushing it through, that they debate it and reason it out, because many people were extremely worried about how it could be used.

A lot of MPs didn't even show up to vote on it, many who had emailed people back saying they were completely against it, voted it in, they did it in the middle of the night ( I think, can't remember) and didn't really debate it or think about it at all.

[baruk]

None of them get my vote. I want logical, concise statements, clearly research with cited sources. I want pleas to reason, not emotion. I want them to actually not only state what they would like to achieve but how they are going to go about it.

When people can show me these, when I can make an informed and rational decision, then I'll vote.

 You want the moon on a stick.

[ed boy]

I'm a week to young to vote, but I have been caught up in the politics thing a bit, and from what I have observed, I have one thing to stay.

From what I can tell, when it comes to politics, almost everybody is doing it wrong. The criteria by which they choose who to vote for are completely illogical. I'd like to go through a few things that I have observed, not just of the voters but the system itself.

-Among my peers, they're completely ignoring half of the political spectrum. They make an analysis of some the political parties (a bad analysis, but sill an analysis), but anything further right than the lib dems gets immediately classified as "facist nazism" and ignored without even their crude analysis

-They go by personal likes or dislikes of someone. I've heard so many people say "I'm not going to vote for X because he's a twat/plonker/bastard". Whether or not you like someone has nothing to do with their aptitude. In fact, I hold the belief that the biggest problem in our society is that people treat people differently based on whether or not they like them or not.

-Ignorance. Oh god, the ignorance. Given the huge number of issues that are debated, and the huge complexities of these issues, it is nearly impossible for any one person to know about the issues in enough detail to make an informed decision about all of the issues. In the political parties, there are different people who play different roles in the government, so problems can be dealt with by those who are suitable. When it comes to individual voters, the voters cannot possibly know enough ot be able to make a proper decision about the issues. This is not the problem. The problem is that people do not know this. A huge number of people know very little about the issues, think they know a lot, and make an uninformed decision.

-The debates and similar things. In a debate, the person who gives the biggest impression on the voters is going to be the one who is the most charismatic and who can think on their feet best. If the PM is doing their job properly, neither of these should matter. If someone can make good decisions about policies, charisma should not be necessary. Similarly, when the PM makes his decisions, I want him the think about the matter in detail, not come up with something off the top of his head

-The questions that are brought up. The questions place a lot of emphasis on two concepts - "right" and "fair". These are concepts that are very hard to define, can change easily, and have a very large grey area. They are also very subjective, and people's views of what is fair and right changes from person to person. I want as little emphasis placed on such imprecise terms as possible.

[TheDarkJay]

None of them get my vote. I want logical, concise statements, clearly research with cited sources. I want pleas to reason, not emotion. I want them to actually not only state what they would like to achieve but how they are going to go about it.

When people can show me these, when I can make an informed and rational decision, then I'll vote.

 You want the moon on a stick.

No, I want Scientific rigour to be introduced into the political system. The moon can stay orbiting the earth ^.^

[fenrif]

None of them get my vote. I want logical, concise statements, clearly research with cited sources. I want pleas to reason, not emotion. I want them to actually not only state what they would like to achieve but how they are going to go about it.

When people can show me these, when I can make an informed and rational decision, then I'll vote.

 You want the moon on a stick.

No, I want Scientific rigour to be introduced into the political system. The moon can stay orbiting the earth ^.^

Seems to me like you want someone to tell you what your opinion should be. Thats what politics is all about, opinions. hundreds of complex issues, all interconnecting in multitudes of intricate ways, and all it comes down to is what you think is best. You can't apply science to something like that. If you value schools higher than the NHS, but someone else thinks the opposite then neither of you is wrong.

This is why you should learn this stuff yourself instead of just asking for it delivered on a silver platter.

[TheDarkJay]

What I want are largely more details, and their reasoning behind decisions. In order to reach those policies, they must have reasoning: Why not present it clearly? After that, I can compare and contrast and come to the conclusion myself based on what I 'value'. I need access to the information first, and have yet to find it.

I try to avoid more than the simplest core "beliefs" when possible. It's better to believe in nothing and know something than know nothing but believe in something after all ^^