Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

AV or not ?

334 replies

theoldbrigade · 20/04/2011 19:00

Thoughts please.

OP posts:
Niceguy2 · 22/04/2011 00:00

Only about 40% of student loans are being paid back 5 years after graduation. Less that 45% get paid back at all!

I'd be interested to know where you got this information from? Are you saying that nearly 45% of students never earn above £15k throughout their working career?

My point is/was that a loan cannot be treated the same as money given away since you ultimately get the cash back (or most of it). As opposed to none of the money you simply gave away. From an economic point of view, which is better? Giving it away or lending it?

crystalglasses · 22/04/2011 00:19

Missingfriend - I have absolutely no problem explaining my decision, and I am highly qualified to do so, but I just didn't see why I should defend it to some jumped up, patronising squirt on the phone.

crystalglasses · 22/04/2011 00:21

Actually I wasn't sure I would bother to vote until that unpleasant little man phoned. but now I'm absolutely going to.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:29

But that type of argument is silly - extended it means something else - if you count second and third rounds as extra votes, and use the same logic it means that voters for main parties who are not eliminated get their vote counted three times for their party where voters for small parties only get their vote counted once for theirs.

Also anyone can be a supporter of a fringe party - if the conservatives really think that voting for a small party first, then the conservatives gives two votes for the conservatives, they can go right ahead!

HHLimbo · 22/04/2011 00:32

Yes of course. AV is a much better system, Im amazed we still have FPTP, its a relic.

HHLimbo · 22/04/2011 00:34

Its surprising that we still have FPTP - a system where someone can be elected with only 10% of the vote.

AV ensures that an MP has the support of at least 50% of voters - this is essential if we want to describe ourselves as a democracy.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:35

Nice to see you are one of our more mature voters crystal.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:36

Key feature of First Past the post = Guaranteed Minority Rule! Yay!

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:40

and who owns the sydney morning herald??? ooh is it.. let me seee... a conservative backer perhaps../. it is ... yes it is! Murdoch!!!

quel surprise....Hmm

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:42

'the Herald has installed massive pillars at its new Pyrmont office depicting a huge etched image of the News Corporation chief' go figure...

we know who's being the No campaign, the same people who like reduced public services, who oppose the minimum wage, love keeping people in peverty whilst they stay wealthy, who love bankers' bonuses and who want businesses to pay even less tax than they do already.

Shame on you,....

JarethTheGoblinKing · 22/04/2011 00:43

NO for me. I think it's overly complicated, will cost a fortune and may dissuade people from voting.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:51

Could you explain how it will cost a fortune? including David Cameron no-one thinks it will cost more except the No leaflet makers - DC has agreed that AV will cost no more. Stop just repeating campaign lies - that is what got me angry enough to research all this so I am sure its not productive to do that. that £250 Million is just complete bollocks fabrication

JarethTheGoblinKing · 22/04/2011 00:56

Cost? Increased explanation on the 'way it works', extra administration, extra campaigning to make people think it's the way to go , did I mention extra explanation?
(people I know who are very politically active have NO bloody idea how AV will work, it's a bit scary... they're clever people too!)

I don't like FPTP, I'd rather have Prop Rep, and this is a crappy half-arsed 'gesture' by the tories to appease the Lib Dems (and wasn't Clegg against AV until v recently??)

If we're changing the way we vote then I don't want this half-arsed waste of time.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 00:57

I think if you stand next to Cameron you can smell the stench of tax dodging, from him, from his cronies, from his wife, his pals .

JarethTheGoblinKing · 22/04/2011 01:02

What are you trying to say missingfriends?

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 01:04
  1. We have info about how to vote in every election - the cost is the same
  2. Campaigning -0 Yes is paid by donation, work largely volunteers, No paid for by big business and murdoch backers - not tax (apart from business supporters of No probably getting breaks from DC for supporting)
  3. Proportional Representation would be expensive - different parliament, more reps, no constituency link, longer decisions.. make your mind up and stop being so stupidly inconsistent - PR is expensive AV isn't - your issue isn't cost at all its a smoke screen.
  4. You don't want any change, you don't want any cost, but you weirdly pretend to want a more expensive, more drastic change that will produce results you say you don't want? You shoudl work for the No campaign with all that BS and inconsistency :)
JarethTheGoblinKing · 22/04/2011 01:09

Don't fucking at me, you patronising arse Hmm

I WANT change, but if there is an extra cost to PR then that is fine (IMO). This may not cost extra on paper, but in extra time, extra explanation, these things cost money and I think it's a huge waste of time.

STOP being so accusatory, read what people are saying, and stop acting like a bully.

and don't fucking bullet point your posts. it makes you look like a controlling tit!

JarethTheGoblinKing · 22/04/2011 01:16

By 'This' I mean AV. Obviously.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 02:49

Bullet Points = controlling? hahahaha Nice to know the NO campaign are full of the paranoid fear filed freaks I thought it was! I sigh because you just really don't get it, and probably never will because you can't move from where you thought you ought to be no matter how good the evidence.

Missingfriendsandsad · 22/04/2011 02:56

When you are hovering over the ballot box, remember who is backing who, and why: Tories, big business, tax avoiders, career politicians and the BNP - No.

Grassroots, democracy campaigners and ordinary folk= Yes

Polls virtually 50:50 despite the huge dollars pumped in by the No campaign to keep things as they are. Vested interests people, Vested interests

jenny60 · 22/04/2011 08:21

Giddy: 57% is hardly resounding though and it followed a confusing election result. But, more importantly, the notion of 'going back' to FPTP is just crazy as it first came into operation in Australia in 1918/1919. There has been a campaign for PR in Australia but not for FPTP.

I get that AV is not much better than FPTP. But it is marginally more democratic and while I don't see any kind of automatic link to PR, I do think that a NO vote would put the PR campaign back decades.

GiddyPickle · 22/04/2011 09:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
theoldbrigade · 22/04/2011 10:06

Well, at least we are having a debate !
Some opinions I find a tad entrenched but no doubt others would find some of my opinions unacceptable.

Think we should be thankful we live in a Democracy, to paraphrase "I may disagree with you but I defend your right to voice your views".

OP posts:
GiddyPickle · 22/04/2011 10:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
theoldbrigade · 22/04/2011 10:47

I am old enough to have voted on the last referendum and listened to every argument.
I find it sad that these days so many people feel disenfranchised and have little, or no interest in having a voice.

GiddyPickle - Odds on the turn out will be less than 35% !!

OP posts: