Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Which party do you plan to vote for in the General Election? Jan-Feb opinion poll Watch

  • View Poll Results: Which party are you planning to vote for?
    Conservative
    108
    22.74%
    Labour
    112
    23.58%
    Liberal Democrats
    28
    5.89%
    UKIP
    50
    10.53%
    SNP
    15
    3.16%
    Sinn Féin
    5
    1.05%
    Green Party
    117
    24.63%
    Plaid Cymru
    2
    0.42%
    SDLP
    3
    0.63%
    DUP
    4
    0.84%
    Independent
    3
    0.63%
    Alliance
    1
    0.21%
    Respect
    2
    0.42%
    Other (please state in a post)
    4
    0.84%
    Not voting
    21
    4.42%

    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by I. Dzhugashvili)
    Good God! Africa's population density is a FRACTION that of Asia or Europe!

    The cult of population decline is sick. Yes, I think it is a sort of racism, even if it often comes from the Green Left, to support the mass extermination of large portions of certain Third World populations "for the Earth". How about instead we release Africa from the chains of debt slavery and allow it to develop itself?
    Worth noting that the top third is a desert where you can't do much.

    The problem for Africa is that it's birth rates are very high meaning that the population in some areas increases faster than they can increase food and energy output ect.. which ties in to the second issue which is that they are too poor to import like we do, too poor to invest in industrial farming and often too protectionist to let advanced western companies come do the innovation for them.

    The fact that Africa is still poor today is not due to debt, it's due their own idiocy for many years. Granted some areas are improving now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gonnagetrejected)
    lmfao greens do not represent anyone. they're a joke party that wants to stay in the eu
    They may want to stay in the EU, but they would still provide a referendum on the matter as they believe in absolute democracy.

    They are not a joke and out of all the parties I've studied, The Green Party have one of the most comprehensive policies list. Look at Policies.greenparty.org.uk .

    They want to change the electoral system so it's totally representative of the population, make sure corporations cannot cheat the system; Amazon paid 0.001% of tax last year, free tuition as education is a right, Anti-privatisation of NHS, Re-nationalisation of the railways; which 83% of the public support - and that's to name a few.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Billy.rickards)
    They may want to stay in the EU, but they would still provide a referendum on the matter as they believe in absolute democracy.

    They are not a joke and out of all the parties I've studied, The Green Party have one of the most comprehensive policies list. Look at Policies.greenparty.org.uk .

    They want to change the electoral system so it's totally representative of the population, make sure corporations cannot cheat the system; Amazon paid 0.001% of tax last year, free tuition as education is a right, Anti-privatisation of NHS, Re-nationalisation of the railways; which 83% of the public support - and that's to name a few.
    Source on Amazon only paying 0.001% since all sorts of numbers are thrown around
    There is no such thing as "free" tuition, somebody still has to pay for it
    What poll is this 83%, because I've only heard of a 70% and a 66%
    You say Anti-privatisation of the NHS as if any of the parties are seriously suggesting privatisation
    Offline

    20
    Probably UKIP.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Who said anything about deprivation? we need everyone to voluntarily stopped having more children.
    You seem to be taking an extremist and alarmist standpoint here.
    and now you seem to be blaming imagrents for all your problems?.
    Your Naivety is pretty bad, you think that all these scientists are lying to you when politicians who are saying it's not an issue are telling the truth.
    Just pointing out, the effect of a one child type policy would worsen the 'ageing population' problem- unless of course you bring in a mandatory euthanasia program too. Considering your standpoints, I wouldn't put that idea past you.

    Reading all your posts- and the argument we had a few days ago I think i can say that you have a 'perfect world' idea in your head. You ignore the impracticality of it, you ignore the fact that all moves towards socialism have been ineffective- Venezualia at the moment for example- and that all moves to greater integration have been negative, e.g the Eurozone. Whilst the idea of bringing down borders may be nice, it is not viable now. There are too many differing culture groups for social cohesion- and hugely differing economic structures for fiscal unity.

    Maybe in 100 years- the interconnectedness of the world may bring about a more similar human race with similar ideas- the continuing rise of automation may also mean that an ageing population is of little consequence also. But, to argue for impractical things now, simply because they match your (minority) viewpoint is silly. You argue that patriotism is bad, however, I believe at the moment it is a necessary counterweight to religious intolerance and despotisms- people to stand up to leaders such as Putin, or states such as ISIS.

    So basically- I would try to focus on ideas that are practical now, not ones that may become so if the world goes a certain way.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by nich01as)
    Just pointing out, the effect of a one child type policy would worsen the 'ageing population' problem- unless of course you bring in a mandatory euthanasia program too. Considering your standpoints, I wouldn't put that idea past you.
    that isn't something I want. I would say we ride the elderly wave and afterwards once the population is at a sustainable level we go for a Column population structure.

    Reading all your posts- and the argument we had a few days ago I think i can say that you have a 'perfect world' idea in your head. You ignore the impracticality of it, you ignore the fact that all moves towards socialism have been ineffective- Venezualia at the moment for example- and that all moves to greater integration have been negative, e.g the Eurozone. Whilst the idea of bringing down borders may be nice, it is not viable now. There are too many differing culture groups for social cohesion- and hugely differing economic structures for fiscal unity.
    i have an ideal world yes. And if people never tried then nothing would change. How many people do you think said that flight would be impossible? Well we can do that. How many said getting to the moon would be impossible? Well we can do that!!! So the way I see it you are standing in the way of growth and development. And that we will should try and not just discount it all as impossible.

    Maybe in 100 years- the interconnectedness of the world may bring about a more similar human race with similar ideas- the continuing rise of automation may also mean that an ageing population is of little consequence also. But, to argue for impractical things now, simply because they match your (minority) viewpoint is silly. You argue that patriotism is bad, however, I believe at the moment it is a necessary counterweight to religious intolerance and despotisms- people to stand up to leaders such as Putin, or states such as ISIS.
    just because not everyone agrees with me doesn't mean I'm wrong, I would point you to the suffragettes, they stood up for what they belived in even though many people said it was impossible or impractical and even silly, and now their 'minority' viewpoint has been taken up by most of society. The same goes for Martin Luther king, nelson Mandela ect. All people who belived in something at the time thought of as 'silly' but is now widely accepted. I have a vision of a perfect world and I will do my hardest to make it a reality.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Free tuition at the point of entry I will add. Fair point, 75%. There's the main parties which state that they will protect the NHS yet they allow private companies to take over hospitals, then pull out of the 10 year contract because they're not making profit - and this effects the patients. There should be a hard-line on privatization and there should be a very clear separation between private and public. If people with money want to but their care from a private hospital then that's fine but state hospitals shouldn't be touched at all and the main parties let deals go on.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nich01as)
    all moves to greater integration have been negative, e.g the Eurozone. Whilst the idea of bringing down borders may be nice, it is not viable now. There are too many differing culture groups for social cohesion- and hugely differing economic structures for fiscal unity..
    While i'm not suggesting the UK join the Eurozone i would point out that it has not failed because it cannot work, it has failed because it is incomplete (mutualised currency but no mutualised debt) albeit you could put that down to the politics of different countries, a properly created currency union though would likely be fine.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Billy.rickards)
    Free tuition at the point of entry I will add. Fair point, 75%. There's the main parties which state that they will protect the NHS yet they allow private companies to take over hospitals, then pull out of the 10 year contract because they're not making profit - and this effects the patients. There should be a hard-line on privatization and there should be a very clear separation between private and public. If people with money want to but their care from a private hospital then that's fine but state hospitals shouldn't be touched at all and the main parties let deals go on.
    Define privatisation?

    What the last 3 governments have gone is tender contracts to the private sector, it's not proper privatisation.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    that isn't something I want. I would say we ride the elderly wave and afterwards once the population is at a sustainable level we go for a Column population structure.

    i have an ideal world yes. And if people never tried then nothing would change. How many people do you think said that flight would be impossible? Well we can do that. How many said getting to the moon would be impossible? Well we can do that!!! So the way I see it you are standing in the way of growth and development. And that we will should try and not just discount it all as impossible.

    just because not everyone agrees with me doesn't mean I'm wrong, I would point you to the suffragettes, they stood up for what they belived in even though many people said it was impossible or impractical and even silly, and now their 'minority' viewpoint has been taken up by most of society. The same goes for Martin Luther king, nelson Mandela ect. All people who belived in something at the time thought of as 'silly' but is now widely accepted. I have a vision of a perfect world and I will do my hardest to make it a reality.
    The ideal is based on your personal convictions, not any real world backing. You've decided in your head that it's the best- and despite no reasonable defence of it you stick to it. You can't just 'go for' a certain structure of population without overwhelming control in people's lives. You must be against liberty I gather, or individual freedom? All of the policies you have suggested reduce personal liberty than increase it. Is it worth it?

    Also, that analogy is incredibly weak. I would argue that firstly both examples actually represented a huge section of the population- the suffragettes obviously supporting half the population You've conflated 'all people' and all people deemed suitable by society at that time. There were more blacks than whites in South Africa during the time of Mandela- so they were actually supporting a majority view, the problem being the majority were not listened to.

    I also find that last sentence rather sinister- I think the same thoughts could be attributed to Hilter. You should rather aim to convince everyone that it is the perfect world- and then act on it, rather than the other way round.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    While i'm not suggesting the UK join the Eurozone i would point out that it has not failed because it cannot work, it has failed because it is incomplete (mutualised currency but no mutualised debt) albeit you could put that down to the politics of different countries, a properly created currency union though would likely be fine.
    The problem with centralised power is it increases the chance of overall failure, and the effect of one **** up is far more catastrophic- I'm very much pro power devolution to individual countries- there's enough difficulty in social cohesion across individual countries, let alone whole continents. Different countries have different economic structures- a country may be in a boom, whilst another in the 'bust' and hence the same fiscal intervention is unlikely to work for both. If you try to homogenise structure problems become more pronounced- now an individual countries bust doesn't effect the global economy too much- however if they all had a similar cycle the effects would be far worse- an average bust may result ina 2008 style crisis, due to no other countries with the demand to increase exports (A normal way out of a recession when competitiveness increases as wages fall or stagnate)

    Basically my thoughts are, people are falliable, so the idea that one person, country or government can be 100% correct is in my opinion 100% incorrect. I favour individual countries with different policies. I am pro EU for it's reduction in trade barriers. There should be no trade tariffs or quotas- free trade should reign, however I think the idea of EU directives is a bad idea- the effect of one bad decision therefore is far worse. I believe if an idea is a good one, people will implement it freely. I believe in a world where countries cooperate, but have their own sovereignty so they can resist bad ideas. And obviously it's not as clear cut as that- a good idea for one country may be bad for others. In the EU now, QE would be more effective for some countries than others, however the monetary union means that it has t be imposed, the choice is above their heads.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Define privatisation?

    What the last 3 governments have gone is tender contracts to the private sector, it's not proper privatisation.
    It's not proper privatization yet however it is opening the doors and paving the way to privatization. We do have to be careful. Government is not serving the interests of the people now.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Billy.rickards)
    It's not proper privatization yet however it is opening the doors and paving the way to privatization. We do have to be careful. Government is not serving the interests of the people now.
    Has tendering contracts for rail services paved the way for proper privatisation? No, we are 21 years on and government still controls what the train companies do (even when they want to do nice things like operate extra services).

    The NHS improved markedly under Blair and his tendering and patient satisfaction is at record highs now. I don't share your fear that they will asset strip and sell off.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by nich01as)
    The ideal is based on your personal convictions, not any real world backing. You've decided in your head that it's the best- and despite no reasonable defence of it you stick to it. You can't just 'go for' a certain structure of population without overwhelming control in people's lives. You must be against liberty I gather, or individual freedom? All of the policies you have suggested reduce personal liberty than increase it. Is it worth it?
    im not sure what you mean by 'real world backing' and I would not say I'm against civil liberties but at the same time there are real issues with population growth which we as a collective need to deal with.

    [qoute]Also, that analogy is incredibly weak. I would argue that firstly both examples actually represented a huge section of the population- the suffragettes obviously supporting half the population You've conflated 'all people' and all people deemed suitable by society at that time. There were more blacks than whites in South Africa during the time of Mandela- so they were actually supporting a majority view, the problem being the majority were not listened to.[/quote]yes and I feel I'm standing up for everyone! for total equality and justice. Also I'm not exactly sure it was a 'majority veiw' and especially with suffrage many women were against equal rights. Plus women's make up 51.4% of the population

    I also find that last sentence rather sinister- I think the same thoughts could be attributed to Hilter. You should rather aim to convince everyone that it is the perfect world- and then act on it, rather than the other way round.
    sorry but that is what I intend to do, I didn't realise is came off like that but hey not the first time I've been compared to hitler.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jean-Luc Picard)
    Green, only party representing people who aren't rich & who care about the future of the planet.
    The Labour Party is the only party representing working class people and the Green Party does not represent people who aren't rich as their economic policies would hit the poorest the hardest. The Greens also believe that it is not a crime if you join terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Now why on earth would anyone want to vote for the greens?????
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Billy.rickards)
    Free tuition at the point of entry I will add.
    i.e. make somebody else pay for an optional task to increase your earnings. Should all pilot training courses also be paid for by the state (ignoring that flying will probably be illegal)? Coaching for sports paid for by the state? etc

    Fair point, 75%.
    All you've done here is thrown another figure at me, not provided a source for a figure

    There's the main parties which state that they will protect the NHS yet they allow private companies to take over hospitals, then pull out of the 10 year contract because they're not making profit - and this effects the patients.
    Which paper do you read, just wondering given just how wrong that conclusion is, also, was Hinchingbrooke your local hospital? I'm guessing not.

    There should be a hard-line on privatization and there should be a very clear separation between private and public. If people with money want to but their care from a private hospital then that's fine but state hospitals shouldn't be touched at all and the main parties let deals go on.
    the public sector is inherently inefficient, if you don't let private corporations anywhere near it (not exactly sure how you intent to do that) there is no competition, no competition means you have a monopoly and therefore can be as expensive and crap as you like.


    (Original post by Simran C)
    The Labour Party is the only party representing working class people
    Oh, that's a good one. Any more jokes?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    RESPECT PARTY ALL THE WAY!!!
    Conservatives are just going to reduce any benefits or loans us students are entitled too, Labour are no different from the Tories imo either...only they pretend to care only when an election pops up, they make these statements of how they are for the working class and make all these vast promises, when the time comes and they get into parliament, they make a COUPLE changes and keep to some promises i grant you...but the majority is just a pack of lies. Also If you can read between the lines of whats happening in the middle east right now...if you vote labour or conservative, your just gonna get a repeat of the events of 02, another Iraqi war and another 1 million iraqi civilian deaths. Respect party all round have the best economic and political policies, if not them then at least the Green party, other than these 2 the rest are ful of lies and propaganda.
    Also if you vote for Respect, the war criminal and co-partner of Bush who was responsible for all those deaths of Iraq and Afghanistan will be put behind bars hopefully!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    oh and btw George Galloway is the only politician who I actually truly respect. He tells the whole truth and dosent cover things up for the benefit of his own pocket.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A summary of the last 5 years worth reading. Link below:-


    www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/28/-sp-david-camerons-five-year-legacy-has-he-finished-what-margaret-thatcher-started
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Each to their own and all that but the GREEN party!!! are people mad?
    Instead of letting your head be rulled cosy green principles just take a close look at their policys (One word madness)
    Just watch The Sunday politics interview with their leader Caroline Lucas see link blob:https%3A//www.youtube.com/b39cad59-772a-4a2e-9b27-b30827353b86
    Again one word madness, don't be fooled, yes we want green policy s but these have to be real not pie in the sky.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.