Brexit....or in.

There must be more to life than football?

Which way would you vote

Remain and voted remain the first time
7
70%
Leave and voted leave the first time
2
20%
Remain but voted leave the first time
0
No votes
Leave but voted remain the first time
1
10%
Can't be arsed
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 10

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18073
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Gibbon » Thu Dec 20, 2018 4:48 pm

I quite like the idea of STV.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Thu Dec 20, 2018 7:06 pm

Well I think its a shocker personally; ultimately I don't believe it adds anything, except giving people their chance to declare their real intentions before turning their vote into a tactical vote.

For me it doesn't address the actual issues of a government made up with imbalanced representation; there needs to be seperation between local representation and central representation.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27300
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Rover the Top » Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:30 am

I don't think there's an argument for having FPP ahead of PR. Well the nation turned down the chance to have a form of PR. Well I don't like that form, so it's different. Well no, it's still PR whether you like it or not, and your personal opinion is irrelevant to the point.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:20 pm

Your logic is SO flawed its unbelievable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proport ... esentation

"Proportional representation (PR) characterizes electoral systems in which divisions in an electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body.[1] If n% of the electorate support a particular political party, then roughly n% of seats will be won by that party."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_ ... rable_vote

"The single transferable vote (STV) is a voting system designed to achieve proportional representation through ranked voting in multi-seat organizations or constituencies (voting districts)."

So, even with STV the proportion of votes are not represented in seats; only within that particular constituency do they take effect.
Rover the Top wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:21 am
We held a referendum not long ago where the majority chose to stick with FFP
So, when you say we had a referendum and "chose to stick with FPP (sic)" (i.e. over PR) your assertion is vastly flawed. There was a referendum between FPP and STV, not between FPP and PR. STV has all the same inherent problems that FPP does, PR does not.

In fact, you know what, I'm going to reneg on saying that STV is a form of PR. It clearly isn't, it's purely a method of allowing a voter their ture intentions prior to tactical voting, and then put forward as a first past the post system of constituencies. The people who voted against the eventual winner remain unrepresented at a collective level.

User avatar
theadore
Inexperienced manager
Posts: 9752
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:25 pm

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by theadore » Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:27 pm

FWIW... The referendum was alternative vote... Not single transferable vote.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:38 am

Which is a form of STV, but yeah, you're correct.

Thr base point still stands though: the vote was not to "stick" with FPP, but to retain FPP over an option to move to AV, which wouldn't have resolved any of the inherent issues of lacl of representation for those who voted against a winning candidate in a constituency.

Incidentally:

" However, STV is considered to be a form of proportional representation, using multi-member constituencies, while AV, in single-member constituencies, is not"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Un ... referendum

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18073
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Gibbon » Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:57 am

theadore wrote:
Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:27 pm
FWIW... The referendum was alternative vote... Not single transferable vote.

Ah that's right. Well whatever, it seemed like a better system than the current one to me.

Referendums are a bloody stupid idea. Letting the ignorant and uninformed have a say in vital matters is just asking for trouble.
I've a vague notion that we should have compulsory political citizenship subject at school where your exam results decide how many bonus votes you get in elections and referendum. Even with a fail you'd still get one vote though. :yeahright: :lol:

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:23 am

Like I've said before, democracy doesn't work...

It's marginally better, and only really achieves guaranteed tactical voting. Not worth the cost of implementing.

Genuine PR, with much larger voting areas with multiple representatives split by the proportion of votes would ensure that most everyone is represented at a governmental level, as opposed to the current nonsense where ~290k Northern Irish DUP voters have almost the same representation as ~2.37 million Lib Dem voters, or nearly 600k UKIP voters having zero representation, 500k Green voters having a sole MP whilst the SNP have 35 MPs for just under a million.

MouseTrap
New signing
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:15 pm
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by MouseTrap » Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:08 am

Wow, the above speaks volumes about the attitudes of some on here, these some that know so much more than everybody else.

We were threatened with armagedden, 500,000 instantly losing their jobs, planes being grounded, going to the back of the que blah blah.
The 'uneducated and ignorant' ignored these threats as they did with the joining the Euro threats.
The majority voted leave, they knew what the worst outcomes might be, they voted to bring democracy back (which doesn't work apparently) and join the majority of countries not in the EU where most of the world's growth is going to take place.
They believe in Britain, leaving 27 to join the rest is not isolation. Its truly incredible the arrogance and hypocrisy of the remain voters that insist on another vote. Sugar coat it all you like, they lost and want a best of 3.
Its shocking so many 'educated' people can't see it for what it is.
The idea of an EU army was a "dangerous fantasy" Clegg said... Hmm.

1 argument I hear is we now know what leaving will mean, do we know what remaining will mean? What comes after the fantasy come true EU army?

I voted out and I've never been so happy with a choice I've made more than that 1.
I hear it needs to go back to the people (in the hope we've changed our mind) but what happens when the results are in and the leave vote has increased?
It's truly disgusting the arrogance of the traitors that insist on a second people's vote.

There's my 2 pence, 2 cents if remain get their way and I write this in 20 years.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:38 am

"The majority voted leave, they knew what the worst outcomes might be."

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Incidentally, if you're so concerned about democracy, you should be supporting a revote to address the issues of illegal overspending by the Leave campaign., without which they probably wouldn't have won..... Flagrant breach of our democratic laws....

As for people changing their mind, the 2017 election results probably show that they have. But I don't personally agree with reholding referendums, it sets a stupid precedence and its not my fault loads of people voting had no clue what they were voting for nor what it meant. Same is applicable when the workibg class continued to vote for Blair's Labour.

So ironically, despite disagreeing with your ill educated rant, I agree that we need to uphold the results of the referendum, despite the negatives that will come along side it (lower standard of living, likely recession, unemployment increases....).

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27300
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Rover the Top » Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:06 am

mrblackbat wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:38 am

Incidentally, if you're so concerned about democracy, you should be supporting a revote to address the issues of illegal overspending by the Leave campaign., without which they probably wouldn't have won..... Flagrant breach of our democratic laws....
I think it's very shaky ground arguing about spending rules and their actual impact on the result. After all, the government spent £9m on a pro-remain mailshot over and above the £7m limit for the campaigns. It may be legal, but does tilt the playing field overwhelmingly one way from a financial viewpoint. So, it's one thing to say people broke rules and deserve to be sanctioned for it. It's another to claim spending unfairly skewed the result when much more was spent on the losing side. Taking opinion polls as a guide, I think it's arguable that the campaigns had little impact anyway.

I'm not opposed to holding referendums, I just think holding a second would cause more problems than it would solve. It's clear that those pushing for one are motivated by a myopic desire to try and reverse the result of the last. If they truly believe people don't understand what "remain" and "leave" mean, there's no way they would argue those same people should have a say on the complexities of the terms post leaving. The question to be asked is problematic, a binary option would mean leaving out a heavily supported opinion, a three-way option would have the risk of failing to produce a clear majority. And even if there was a majority, why not then have a third referendum to be sure people haven't changed their minds again, and so on? After the referendum to join the EEC, opinion polls swung fiercely the other way within a few years, but it took 40 years for the public to be asked again. I think failing to follow through on the 2016 result would create a severe backlash.

And how are you reading the change of opinion in the 2017 election? The two main parties were commited to acting on the result of the referendum, the Conservatives increasing their vote by over 2 million, Labour by about 3.5 million - more than UKIP lost. The three largest parties opposing Brexit only got about 4 million votes between them and all suffered a reduction in votes from 2015. Of course, a general election isn't a single issue vote, and it'd be wrong to assume that just because the two main parties had switched position, everyone who voted for them now wanted to leave - just like prior to that election, voting for them didn't mean you wanted to be in the EU, there was just no credible alternative. But it's even harder to argue that the consensus has changed based on those results.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27300
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Rover the Top » Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:54 am

mrblackbat wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:38 am

So ironically, despite disagreeing with your ill educated rant, I agree that we need to uphold the results of the referendum, despite the negatives that will come along side it (lower standard of living, likely recession, unemployment increases....).
One more point - there seems to be this confident assumption that "uncertainty" means "likely recession". It's a lie peddled by Osborne and friends prior to the referendum, and seems to have stuck despite 2 years of predictions being proved to be pure horseshit. The problem with any economic prediction is that it needs to be shaped around assumptions and constants. Those making the predictions tend to be prudent about uncertainty because it's less embarassing if reality is better than you forecast. And it's impossible to avoid an element of political bias when it comes to the EU, it polarises economists. So it's no surprise that there's an abundance of pro-remain "experts" saying leaving will cause the economy to crash, their starting point is that they believe the economy will crash and they're taking a stab at how bad it will be.

But what then happens in reality is that those managing the economy react and mitigate the effects. It's already happened, the B of E and the Chancellor responded to keep the economy ticking over and things haven't been that different to what was anticipated had the vote not happened. I've seen some remainers claim the economy would be growing at a faster pace had the result gone the other way, but that's not realistic either - if the economy started to grow too quickly it would be checked and we'd still be more or less where we are now.

I can't say for certain that there will be no recession - that's the point about the future being "uncertain". However, there shouldn't be unless the economy is mismanaged, which is a separate issue to us leaving the EU. And the thing that's never mentioned is that being part of the EU doesn't grant immunity from future recessions. Being closely linked to other economies that we have no control over is a danger, because it tends to be the unexpected events that cause the crashes. I've always found that pro-trading bloc economic thinking focuses on the benefits whilst things are good, and sweeps the potential for problems under the carpet. But I think the fact there's no central government is a problem for the economy of the EU, and I think the area covers too great and varied a population to have an effective central government. I've long held the view that the UK would be better off setting our own tariffs and trading terms with the rest of the world, to suit what we require locally. Nothing that's been said over the past few years has changed that view for me.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:44 pm

Not much has happened with the economy so far, because there hasn't been any real change to it yet.

There's about to be though....

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18073
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by Gibbon » Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:47 pm

...and their login portal appears to link to googles homepage.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 14930
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: Brexit....or in.

Post by mrblackbat » Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:47 pm

And?

Post Reply