Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 228

Thread: UK Politics Thread

  1. #31
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    If the UK were within this effort and contributing our expertise, then the EU's efforts may be more effective. Policy-wise, the UK is the money-laundering centre of the world. This isn't due to lack of expertise, but due to intentional policy. And if we were to agree to work towards this ideal that you said you'd like, then because of our experience in aiding money-laundering, we'd also have the most expertise in reducing it. So once again, you describe an ideal and blame the EU for not being able to live up to it, when it's the UK which has the greatest part in thwarting this ideal of yours.
    I'd be interested to see where it states the UK is the Capital.

    Ireland shelters Apple.
    Netherlands for Starbucks.

    Lichtenstein is another. Monaco. Several States in the USA are very useful. Yes, many British Overseas Territories. And the Seychelles. Malta. Cyprus. Quite the list!

    And all those bright minds doing it come from all over the world. Probably most of them are not resident here - possibly not anywhere.

    My ideal?? I didn't draft the EU rules they are pushing through. I merely point out that there are enough countries inside the EU who don't want it to proceed - and certainly enough outside of it that make this a lovely PR stunt that keeps a lot of bureaucrats employed without really doing anything.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  2. #32
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    I'd be interested to see where it states the UK is the Capital.

    Ireland shelters Apple.
    Netherlands for Starbucks.

    Lichtenstein is another. Monaco. Several States in the USA are very useful. Yes, many British Overseas Territories. And the Seychelles. Malta. Cyprus. Quite the list!

    And all those bright minds doing it come from all over the world. Probably most of them are not resident here - possibly not anywhere.

    My ideal?? I didn't draft the EU rules they are pushing through. I merely point out that there are enough countries inside the EU who don't want it to proceed - and certainly enough outside of it that make this a lovely PR stunt that keeps a lot of bureaucrats employed without really doing anything.

    Once again, I point you to the extra 5000-10000 additional bureaucrats estimated to be needed by the UK to deal with the customs post-Brexit, of which around 1000 have already been recruited at 100k per position filled. If you want to moan about unnecessary bureaucrats employed at exorbitant expense, why not point to that instead? I don't like paying a lot for government either. That is one of the reasons why I can't stand Brexit, which shrinks the economy whilst growing the size of government.

  3. #33

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Oh it claims to be a balanced budget. Doesn't Labour always? By growing our way out of debt. Which requires debt now and then guaranteeing growth later on. And of course getting all the rich individuals to pay is part of it.

    Tax avoidance requires something more than the UK doing something since profit is moved abroad by accounting magic so there is nothing to tax in the UK since all the product was bought at cost. I'm no accountant, but Lewis Hamilton demonstrates that big ticket items would be bought abroad, owned by companies and loaned to the end-user if the attempt at purchase tax was instigated. Try to get them as they are the company owner? Either have it owned by a Foundation or else have the Directors as cutouts.

    Very rich individuals can pretty do the same thing. Linky. Before the final vote is collected and Corbyn wins, all the money will be flitting to places where it is nigh on impossible to get it with shell companies in the middle declaring bankruptcy leaving no paper trail.
    First of all, let's step back and note that global loss of revenue to multinational tax evasion is likely much less than $1 trillion a year. This is presumably more than what is lost to individual or miscellaneous avoidance, but let's say that's an equivalent amount. So, let's even say $1.5 trillion lost yearly to all (income tax) avoidance. We should now calculate and compare against total global tax revenues, but let's extrapolate from more accessible data on tax revenue as % of GDP. In 2015, global tax revenue was 15.22% of GDP. In 2016, global GDP (again according to the World Bank) was $75.6 trillion - let's say 15% of $75 trillion then, or $11.25 trillion. So on the highest end, your looking at something over ~10% of all tax revenue lost to avoidance. The real proportion is almost certainly lower, and to the extent avoidance is a part of life I don't suppose we have reason to believe it isn't already maximally exploited.

    To simplify matters let's look at the data for the UK in the first source above. The estimated loss for the UK is annually ~$1 billion. This is a little more than 0.1% of annual UK tax revenue. Even a much less conservative estimate would therefore be expected to remain far below 1% of revenue. (I don't know why the UK seems to lose much less as proportion of tax revenue than, say, the US or Japan, but that's another story.)

    The conclusion, then, is that profit shifting has its limits already. With policy changes, both unilateral and multilateral, it can be further restricted and at the moment the UK probably has more than enough power to force the issue without losing much further revenue (in the worst case; the best case is of course increasing revenue and setting long-term trends).

    The idea that raising taxes and closing loopholes will cause an exodus of enterprise and revenue is therefore unsupported, and in itself lends toward a strong argument for immediately reining in private enterprise across the board.

    Next: a country can't hope to succeed by trying to retire outstanding debt within the current framework, since it always eventually requires the sale of the metaphorical "arm and a leg". Debt is not the problem; monetary policy and international finance is. States need to reassert their power in social welfare policy, while they still have some power left - without wielding it to undermine each other for short-term profit. This Prisoners' Dilemma isn't a perfect cage.

    That tends not to work for Countries - the Credit Rating collapses, and things get very bad.
    Yes, countries like Argentina or Greece are fairly easy to push around, but come on: Britons never never never shall be slaves.

    Getting all countries to harmonise their tax codes is the way forward. But making promises might also also work...
    Yes, it is necessary.

    I'm all for changing the logic of the framework. Better that than Labour drive us to Peonage.
    Do you really see Labour's policies as retaining a neoliberal framework, eventually concluding in national paralysis and individual suppression? Or, does Labour lean more into this than other parties do?
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Member thankful for this post:



  4. #34

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    First of all, let's step back and note that global loss of revenue to multinational tax evasion is likely much less than $1 trillion a year. This is presumably more than what is lost to individual or miscellaneous avoidance, but let's say that's an equivalent amount. So, let's even say $1.5 trillion lost yearly to all (income tax) avoidance. We should now calculate and compare against total global tax revenues, but let's extrapolate from more accessible data on tax revenue as % of GDP. In 2015, global tax revenue was 15.22% of GDP. In 2016, global GDP (again according to the World Bank) was $75.6 trillion - let's say 15% of $75 trillion then, or $11.25 trillion. So on the highest end, your looking at something over ~10% of all tax revenue lost to avoidance. The real proportion is almost certainly lower, and to the extent avoidance is a part of life I don't suppose we have reason to believe it isn't already maximally exploited.
    To slide in before the Truce, just let me raise one oversight: the estate tax.

    I don't know how this sort of tax is instantiated elsewhere, but in the United States it seems the American estate tax is one which principals can substantially evade through tricks, loopholes, and asset structuring.

    https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/m...r%20FINAL1.pdf
    https://www.nbcnews.com/business/tax...lected-n457236
    https://www.cbpp.org/research/federa...ral-estate-tax
    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brief...pay-estate-tax

    Links above suggest something less than a majority of potential liability evaded, but I recall once reading a piece that described how estates worth billions in taxable assets could be manipulated by decedents and relatives to somehow yield tens of millions in revenue upon taxation.

    Something to look into re: Britain.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  5. #35
    Ni dieu ni maître! Senior Member a completely inoffensive name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    I live on the org, feeding off of what few thanks are tossed at my posts. It is up to you to make sure I don't starve.
    Posts
    8,411
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    In before the truce.
    In all these papers we see a love of honest work, an aversion to shams, a caution in the enunciation of conclusions, a distrust of rash generalizations and speculations based on uncertain premises. He was never anxious to add one more guess on doubtful matters in the hope of hitting the truth, or what might pass as such for a time, but was always ready to take infinite pains in the most careful testing of every theory. With these qualities was united a modesty which forbade the pushing of his own claims and desired no reputation except the unsought tribute of competent judges.

  6. #36
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    To slide in before the Truce, just let me raise one oversight: the estate tax.

    I don't know how this sort of tax is instantiated elsewhere, but in the United States it seems the American estate tax is one which principals can substantially evade through tricks, loopholes, and asset structuring.

    https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/m...r%20FINAL1.pdf
    https://www.nbcnews.com/business/tax...lected-n457236
    https://www.cbpp.org/research/federa...ral-estate-tax
    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brief...pay-estate-tax

    Links above suggest something less than a majority of potential liability evaded, but I recall once reading a piece that described how estates worth billions in taxable assets could be manipulated by decedents and relatives to somehow yield tens of millions in revenue upon taxation.

    Something to look into re: Britain.
    Holding assets in an offshore Foundation seems to be the best option. Ideally with wholly owned subsidiary companies to have key assets to enable share trading and divesting of assets if you want to do so. A few thousand a year to run and takes about 3 days to set up.

    Thanks for the numbers. Often I've been told that adequate taxing would balance the books on the welfare state and to be honest I've never thoroughly looked into it.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  7. #37

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  8. #38
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    3,804

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Nah! Marillion
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  9. #39

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    [Sigh]

    No I'm saying - and focus carefully here - that to nationalise many industries below market value whilst also looking to raise capital from the capital markets (privately owned - boo! Baddies) whilst forcing all large companies to give 10% of their shares to their UK employees (not really - most of the money would go to the State) is not possible.

    Norway could do this easily. They. Have. The. Money. It is in a wealth fund and is worth over a trillion dollars. The UK either prints it directly or indirectly - or flat out steals it.

    This has nothing to do with your sense of fairness. Corbyn's ideas might well be geared towards a fairer society. But sadly pouting and saying that it should work because you want it to isn't going to cut it.

    Corbyn's ideas are fine as a backbencher. He has the purity of not having to deal with reality for decades and the 25W lightbulb of a brain that ensures he doesn't challenge his beliefs.

    You too might have good intentions. But your puerile approach in trying to snarkily attack straw men is fine for a discussion forum (well, does not harm) but not running a country.

    I see, you're worried that Labour's policies (but not Brexit ) would somehow wreck the UK economy. Your fundamental errors are in believing that money is a finite resource (and perhaps wildly overestimating the cost of Labour's proposals), and that a mere Corbyn PMship would naturally provoke a devastating capital strike or a declaration of war by capital markets. You think capitalists would be politically motivated to punish the UK even for relatively tame reforms. If your qualms were shown to have a weaker basis than you assume, would you have a different attitude toward Labour's platform? Which, just to reiterate, is not at all an extreme platform for Labour historically.

    (In case you raise the specter of a US/CIA backstop alliance with the UK military, civil service, and capitalists to overthrow a UK Labour government, that's the least likely outcome - but would surely just be more reason yet to demand economic revision.)
    @Idaho


    On Corbyn and Brexit for the sake of saving Org real estate: his response to Johnson begging for new elections was deft. Some had been predicting their dispositions would be reversed... Also I forgot about the existence of the House of Lords. Pro-Brexit lords tried filibustering the recent 'No Hard Brexit' bill. Didn't even know they had filibusters across the pond. Apparently it's much weaker than it is here, as evidenced by the failure just now and by the fact that the British record for filibusters is only like 3 hours. Lightweights. @ACIN
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  10. #40
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    I see, you're worried that Labour's policies (but not Brexit ) would somehow wreck the UK economy. Your fundamental errors are in believing that money is a finite resource (and perhaps wildly overestimating the cost of Labour's proposals), and that a mere Corbyn PMship would naturally provoke a devastating capital strike or a declaration of war by capital markets. You think capitalists would be politically motivated to punish the UK even for relatively tame reforms. If your qualms were shown to have a weaker basis than you assume, would you have a different attitude toward Labour's platform? Which, just to reiterate, is not at all an extreme platform for Labour historically.

    (In case you raise the specter of a US/CIA backstop alliance with the UK military, civil service, and capitalists to overthrow a UK Labour government, that's the least likely outcome - but would surely just be more reason yet to demand economic revision.)
    @Idaho


    On Corbyn and Brexit for the sake of saving Org real estate: his response to Johnson begging for new elections was deft. Some had been predicting their dispositions would be reversed... Also I forgot about the existence of the House of Lords. Pro-Brexit lords tried filibustering the recent 'No Hard Brexit' bill. Didn't even know they had filibusters across the pond. Apparently it's much weaker than it is here, as evidenced by the failure just now and by the fact that the British record for filibusters is only like 3 hours. Lightweights. @ACIN
    Both Brexit and a Milnian government are equally detrimental to the UK's economy, in demonstrating how unstable and untrustworthy the UK is. Unless you are self sufficient, which no country in the world is or can be, with the possible exception of the US, then you need to trade for what you don't have, using currency that is essentially markers of your country's ability to provide goods and services. Both Brexit and a Milnian government are completely untrustworthy in this regard.

  11. #41
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Both Brexit and a Milnian government are equally detrimental to the UK's economy, in demonstrating how unstable and untrustworthy the UK is. Unless you are self sufficient, which no country in the world is or can be, with the possible exception of the US, then you need to trade for what you don't have, using currency that is essentially markers of your country's ability to provide goods and services. Both Brexit and a Milnian government are completely untrustworthy in this regard.
    Hardly.

    The ultimate question is: does the UK pay its debts? In Brexit, there would be an adverse affect on the UK economy. But the bills would still be being paid. In Corbyn's plans (as stated at least) he could be Nationalising companies at book value not traded value. And enforced selling of 10% of companies. In essence, stealing as National policy. Might the next step be capital controls? This is thought to be so likely that Labour has had to state they won't do it.

    So, both bad economically. But one is worse.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  12. #42

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Both Brexit and a Milnian government are equally detrimental to the UK's economy, in demonstrating how unstable and untrustworthy the UK is. Unless you are self sufficient, which no country in the world is or can be, with the possible exception of the US, then you need to trade for what you don't have, using currency that is essentially markers of your country's ability to provide goods and services. Both Brexit and a Milnian government are completely untrustworthy in this regard.
    Leaving aside your opinions of individual members of the Labour Party, what complaints do you have with the Labour platform?

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Hardly.

    The ultimate question is: does the UK pay its debts? In Brexit, there would be an adverse affect on the UK economy. But the bills would still be being paid. In Corbyn's plans (as stated at least) he could be Nationalising companies at book value not traded value. And enforced selling of 10% of companies. In essence, stealing as National policy. Might the next step be capital controls? This is thought to be so likely that Labour has had to state they won't do it.
    Why do you think that exactly?

    Analysts have valued the regulated asset values of water and energy networks potentially facing nationalization at around 125 billion pounds ($159 billion).
    Labour’s policy document goes on to say that parliament could seek deductions from the determined price based upon:

    - pension fund deficits

    - asset stripping since privatization

    - stranded assets

    - the state of repair of assets

    - state subsidies given to the energy companies since privatization
    Where is the theft? How does this affect the continuing capacity and willingness of the UK to honor its debts?

    The existence of company stock and the rules for how it can be created and distributed are a function of law. Transferring 10% over 10 years (far less than 50% majority ownership, as older socialist plans have aspired to) to employee funds is not an unprecedented or pernicious disruption; it's just an exercise of regulatory authority. The business community will, as is typical, carry on and seek to identify and exploit loopholes.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  13. #43
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Hardly.

    The ultimate question is: does the UK pay its debts? In Brexit, there would be an adverse affect on the UK economy. But the bills would still be being paid. In Corbyn's plans (as stated at least) he could be Nationalising companies at book value not traded value. And enforced selling of 10% of companies. In essence, stealing as National policy. Might the next step be capital controls? This is thought to be so likely that Labour has had to state they won't do it.

    So, both bad economically. But one is worse.

    Corbyn's manifesto economics are actually less radical than that now espoused by those implementing Brexit. However, we both know that he isn't limited to that. The difference is that I recognise the consequences of what he has in store, and reject it, whereas you still support Brexit despite its indisputably dire effects on the economy. You offer up sovereignty arguments, but why are Corbyn's sovereignty arguments invalid whereas yours are valid?

  14. #44
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Leaving aside your opinions of individual members of the Labour Party, what complaints do you have with the Labour platform?



    Why do you think that exactly?




    Where is the theft? How does this affect the continuing capacity and willingness of the UK to honor its debts?

    The existence of company stock and the rules for how it can be created and distributed are a function of law. Transferring 10% over 10 years (far less than 50% majority ownership, as older socialist plans have aspired to) to employee funds is not an unprecedented or pernicious disruption; it's just an exercise of regulatory authority. The business community will, as is typical, carry on and seek to identify and exploit loopholes.
    Labour supports Brexit?

  15. #45
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,205

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    The Telegraph claims most Britons now just wants Brexit Delivered: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...eveals-public/

    This includes 35% of Remainers and 54% of the population overall (a significant increase on the referendum result).

    The gambits in Parliament may well force Boris Johnson to extend the timetable but it looks like he will not be the one blamed for it. It has to be said, it's difficult for the Opposition to oppose an election after getting their emergency No-No-Deal Law passed and not look like they're afraid of the Prime Minister winning outright.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  16. #46
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    The Telegraph claims most Britons now just wants Brexit Delivered: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...eveals-public/

    This includes 35% of Remainers and 54% of the population overall (a significant increase on the referendum result).

    The gambits in Parliament may well force Boris Johnson to extend the timetable but it looks like he will not be the one blamed for it. It has to be said, it's difficult for the Opposition to oppose an election after getting their emergency No-No-Deal Law passed and not look like they're afraid of the Prime Minister winning outright.
    Was this the same as the last Telegraph poll that claimed the same, that turned out to be a series of leading questions?

    NB. The current PM, featured prominently in the short excerpt visible, was the Telegraph's star columnist.
    Last edited by Pannonian; 09-11-2019 at 01:39.

  17. #47
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Subsidiary question: does democracy trump every other consideration? If a democratically valid decision is made, does it get implemented whatever the results may be?

  18. #48
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Subsidiary question: does democracy trump every other consideration? If a democratically valid decision is made, does it get implemented whatever the results may be?
    Definitely not!

    There are plenty of examples of "Bad" democracy. We generally call this "populism".

    The idea behind democracy is that the unwashed are given freedom between very limited choices and are free to choose. All big decisions are kept out of their hands since they don't really understand what they want.

    We saw this in every country where people were allowed to vote on the EU. Every country voted no, which just demonstrated a lack of understanding of their own wants. When the question was rephrased (and parameters tweaked) all got it right the next time!

    Same with Brexit. No one really understood the question. Everyone implicitly believed the politicians for once. And sadly there are just some xenophobic racists / ex-Empire fantasists / the criminally insane who also are allowed to vote.

    So clearly - for their own sake - this one wasn't really "democracy" but an outpouring of lies, misplaced anger and hatred so clearly can be ignored.

    We need to trust the MPs all who represent a minority of their constituents and where the House is led by a minority party since the opposition is too cowardly to hold an election.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  19. #49
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Definitely not!

    There are plenty of examples of "Bad" democracy. We generally call this "populism".

    The idea behind democracy is that the unwashed are given freedom between very limited choices and are free to choose. All big decisions are kept out of their hands since they don't really understand what they want.

    We saw this in every country where people were allowed to vote on the EU. Every country voted no, which just demonstrated a lack of understanding of their own wants. When the question was rephrased (and parameters tweaked) all got it right the next time!

    Same with Brexit. No one really understood the question. Everyone implicitly believed the politicians for once. And sadly there are just some xenophobic racists / ex-Empire fantasists / the criminally insane who also are allowed to vote.

    So clearly - for their own sake - this one wasn't really "democracy" but an outpouring of lies, misplaced anger and hatred so clearly can be ignored.

    We need to trust the MPs all who represent a minority of their constituents and where the House is led by a minority party since the opposition is too cowardly to hold an election.

    Since you're being facetious, shall I present you with another question? If the referendum gives any mandate to implement its findings, and the country is charged with its implementation, does it carry within its mandate and implementation a responsibility to keep its other promises too? What shape does its implementation require? Is it the responsibility of the people who disagreed with the premise, or do the decision makers, ie. those who decided to do this, own responsibility?

    If you want that in short:
    1. Do the Leave government have to keep its other Leave promises?
    2. Will the winners accept responsibility for the results?

    It's within your power to answer these questions. In any normal election, any voter can easily answer these questions. In any normal election, the actions committed during a campaign are also due for scrutiny, but I'm not going to put you through that process. The actions of the Leave campaign would void the whole referendum (as they did in other elections elsewhere).

  20. #50
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Let's go back to basics:

    We have a First Past the Post, winner take all system where the winner has often less than 30% of the popular vote in their area yet all the authority
    They get elected on a party manifesto which is neither exhaustive nor legally binding. They add in their own local issues that are based more on winning votes than something they have any intention of doing - since they go to Westminster and have little to do with the day to day running of the area they nominally represent.
    They then go to Westminster where they every vote they make is monitored by the Whips and they know that their career is based on party loyalty - which can change dramatically outside of the election cycle but they are not held accountable for this.
    The PM is any person who can win a vote. Even if this involves bribing people with Government money to do so. As long as they get just over 50% of the House they have effectively 100% of the power. So that can mean what? 15% of the populace voted for them.

    And on top of this all power is technically the Monarch's but not really and this balance itself is not clearly delineated. Oh, and decisions of the Monarch can not be challenged in law, but the Monarch can choose to change her mind if asked.

    To reiterate, in normal elections there is NO requirement to follow through on ANY promises WHATSOEVER. In this case, Boris was taken to court (as you probably recall) and was not found guilty. There are several other cases that have been brought and to date none have been successful. So as far as the Law is concerned there is nothing that was in breach.

    And on top of this mess we had a referendum.


    The rot started (from the UK perspective) right at the start. Cameroon wanted a mandate to do what he wanted. He's cut from the same Etonian stock as Boris - they want to be the leader doing what they want, not the leader doing what other people want. So, he was only interested in the "remain" answer - since he probably had decided to leave if the answer was "leave". Anything to do with "leave" became boring detail.

    In essence, although the Ballot (the legal part of the process) had two simple choices - leave and remain you desperately try to add everything else on to this to cloud the issue as far as possible... We the voters set the outcome, not the process. A contract is governed by what is written in the contract, not posters stuck up around it. The Politicians are responsible for getting there since they have the power. Leave voters have no power over the MPs.

    In essence, as long as the Ruling Classes screw something up badly enough that itself is reason to not undertake the activity?

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  21. #51
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,205

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Since you're being facetious, shall I present you with another question? If the referendum gives any mandate to implement its findings, and the country is charged with its implementation, does it carry within its mandate and implementation a responsibility to keep its other promises too? What shape does its implementation require? Is it the responsibility of the people who disagreed with the premise, or do the decision makers, ie. those who decided to do this, own responsibility?

    If you want that in short:
    1. Do the Leave government have to keep its other Leave promises?
    2. Will the winners accept responsibility for the results?

    It's within your power to answer these questions. In any normal election, any voter can easily answer these questions. In any normal election, the actions committed during a campaign are also due for scrutiny, but I'm not going to put you through that process. The actions of the Leave campaign would void the whole referendum (as they did in other elections elsewhere).
    Point of Order: Rory was being ironic, not facetious. I will criticise him for not punctuating his point with "Or, in other words yes" and for being more acidic than he should have been but his point was otherwise quite clear, and relevant.

    To answer your question I would say "yes, in every instance." That is why we must be careful to maintain the "democratic machinery" of our society to mitigate against truly terrible decisions. Even so, we can see that modern democracies that the elected legislature often makes decisions that seem "wrong" after the fact. A Prime example of this is the US Congress refusing to go to War with the Axis Powers until After Pearl Harbour. Despite the US having been generally allied with the UK and France since WWI Congress not only refused to declare War, it made every effort to block the US from even selling the UK weapons - a situation which led to the UK having to ship its Gold Bullion to the US to buy expensive Thompson Machine guns.

    That decision not only permanently wrecked the UK economy by depleting our gold reserves, it lengthened the War probably by years.

    As regards the Comportment of the UK Government, the referendum was not an election and since then we have had an election. At the time that the Referendum was held the majority of the Pro-Leave camp were not in government. They did not so much make promises as sales pitches and some of those pitches were, frankly, a bit ludicrous. I struggle to see how anyone could actually expect that all the money that presently goes to the EU, pre-rebate, would end up in the NHS. Some of it would obviously have to go to replace EU subsidies. As regards other claims - the Leave camp cannot be directly blamed for the failure of negotiations because the negotiations were conducted primarily by Theresa May.

    This idea that the "winners" must accept all responsibility for all facets of the outcome remains ludicrous - it is like saying the Irish must accept responsibility for us holding a referendum on membership because that was a foreseeable outcome of the Lisbon Treaty being enacted the way it was.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  22. #52
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    1. Parliament orders government to publish plans for no deal.
    2. Government dissolves Parliament.
    3. Government refuses to publish plans for no deal.
    4. Scottish court rules that government's dissolution of Parliament is illegal.

    Do Leavers support the government's actions to thus implement Leave?

  23. #53
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    1. Parliament orders government to publish plans for no deal.
    2. Government dissolves Parliament.
    3. Government refuses to publish plans for no deal.
    4. Scottish court rules that government's dissolution of Parliament is illegal.

    Do Leavers support the government's actions to thus implement Leave?
    What do you suggest leavers do?

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  24. #54
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    What do you suggest leavers do?

    Note all the wrongdoings done by a government in the name of implementing their decision? How many illegalities would you accept from a government if it's done to enact your decision to leave the EU? Does your democratic decision trump the rule of law and the primacy of Parliament? If you want to argue that the latter continues to matter, then what's the line at which you accept that it's not worth it? If you will never accept that leaving the EU is not worth it, then does that mean whatever the government does in the name of enacting your decision is acceptable?

  25. #55
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Note all the wrongdoings done by a government in the name of implementing their decision? How many illegalities would you accept from a government if it's done to enact your decision to leave the EU? Does your democratic decision trump the rule of law and the primacy of Parliament? If you want to argue that the latter continues to matter, then what's the line at which you accept that it's not worth it? If you will never accept that leaving the EU is not worth it, then does that mean whatever the government does in the name of enacting your decision is acceptable?
    Illegalities? Which ones are they?

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  26. #56
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Illegalities? Which ones are they?

    The latest one being the prorogation of Parliament. The reasoning behind the court decision is revealing too.

  27. #57
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,343

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    The latest one being the prorogation of Parliament. The reasoning behind the court decision is revealing too.
    The Scottish Court, not the English Court that had the opposite view.

    And the Scottish Court chose not to order anything do their judgement is toothless.

    The English Court reasoning is interesting too - that nothing that has been done is against the law.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  28. #58
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,225

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    The Scottish Court, not the English Court that had the opposite view.

    And the Scottish Court chose not to order anything do their judgement is toothless.

    The English Court reasoning is interesting too - that nothing that has been done is against the law.

    That says everything about the mentality of Leave. If they can get away with it, then it's acceptable.

  29. #59
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Illegalities? Which ones are they?

    that judgement is contested, and being resolved in the courts.

    are there others?
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  30. #60
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    duplicate post
    Last edited by Furunculus; 09-11-2019 at 19:54.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

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
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO