Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm reading threads about the liberal democrat vote decreasing. What difference does that make their in power now they dont care about the vote and it seems to be working very well at the moment, much better then everyone else thought. With the appointment of Ed Milliband labour are taking a huge step backwards so aslong as the lib dems stick with the conservatives theyll be in power for a long while to come. Also David Cameron is the best PM since john major. PEople forget this fact after the last tory goverment ran by major we were left with no debt and money in our bank accounts. After the last labour goverment we are in a trillion pound debt and no money in the bank accounts.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    With hordes of Lib Dem voters deserting for Labour, and if we keep the current voting system, that will play into Labour's hands - they need a much lower percentage of the vote to secure a majority. The lib dems won't stick with the Conservatives forever - I imagine they would much rather be in coalition with Labour but only went with the tories because it would have been hugely unethical for them to have created a govt. with the losing party.

    As for David Cameron being the best PM since Major - lets judge him on how he performs. And secondly Major was a pretty terrible PM - lost all control of his cabinet and as a result went into the '97 election against a resurgent Labour with a split party. The Conservatives were espousing exactly the same sort of economic policies as Labour while they were in opposition and it's ridiculous to somehow think we'd be in any better position had they been in power.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    People who vote labour just think *o its a trillion pound of debt who cares i dont have to pay for it..its not like i have to write a huge check*. They just think that the goverment should keep spending and they dont realise that if they keep on spending then were all dead.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's true that John major is an underrated PM, however Ken Clarke is the main reason that in 1997 labour inherited a golden legacy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If a basic economics course was compulsory for the country, then labour would never get back into power.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by plopplop)
    If a basic economics course was compulsory for the country, then labour would never get back into power.
    LOL! And I think the lib dems are worried that they are losing voters because they have had to side with the tories. There are plenty of people who voted lib dem because they didn't want the tories in power. And now those people feel "betrayed" that the lib dems chose a side. I think the lib dems are going to have to do something to make up the lost votes if they don't want to be pushed out of power. They don't have the same foothold as the other two parties.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by plopplop)
    If a basic economics course was compulsory for the country, then labour would never get back into power.
    If a basic sociology course was compulsory for the country, then the conservatives would never... actually they'd still get votes because so many people don't give a damn about what happens beyond their own back garden.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by plastercaster)
    If a basic sociology course was compulsory for the country, then the conservatives would never... actually they'd still get votes because so many people don't give a damn about what happens beyond their own back garden.
    Sociology is the study of society. It is a social science—a term with which it is sometimes synonymous—which uses various methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop and refine a body of knowledge about human social activity, often with the goal of applying such knowledge to the pursuit of social welfare. Subject matter ranges from the micro level of agency and interaction to the macro level of systems and social structures.

    Sociology is both topically and methodologically a very broad discipline. Its traditional focuses have included social stratification, social class, social mobility, religion, law, and deviance. As all spheres of human activity are sculpted by social structure and individual agency, sociology has gradually expanded its focus to further subjects, such as medicine, military and penal institutions, the Internet, and even the role of social activity in the development of scientific knowledge.

    The range of social scientific methods has also broadly expanded. Social researchers draw upon a variety of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The linguistic and cultural turns of the mid-twentieth century led to increasingly interpretative, hermeneutic, and philosophic approaches to the analysis of society. Conversely, recent decades have seen the rise of new analytically, mathematically and computationally rigorous techniques, such as agent-based modelling and social network analysis.


    Sociology is just applied psychology? Humans by psychological nature are competitive and that is why Capitalism suits us best?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ocassus)
    Sociology...
    I was in no way meaning to be rude about sociology. It's a proper science. What I meant was that most of the research into society seems to favour left wing solutions to achieve what would generally be considered a favourable outcome for society- ie the solution for a high crime rate is not just longer jail sentences, but higher investment in education (among other things). However, when you live in a leafy suburb, the fate of the millions living in poverty in the inner cities isn't of nearly as much concern as your tax bill.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by plastercaster)
    I was in no way meaning to be rude about sociology. It's a proper science. What I meant was that most of the research into society seems to favour left wing solutions to achieve what would generally be considered a favourable outcome for society- ie the solution for a high crime rate is not just longer jail sentences, but higher investment in education (among other things). However, when you live in a leafy suburb, the fate of the millions living in poverty in the inner cities isn't of nearly as much concern as your tax bill.
    It isn't about the tax bill it is about the principle.
    Nearly all students favor left wing politics because they are not as experienced in the world. [And that is rich coming from me].
    I do not live in a leafy suburb, I do not live in one.

    A favourable outcome? Punish not rehabilitate beyond a second chance...
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Agree with Plastercaster. Of course it's fine for these cuts to hit people if you're worth millions and live in a mansion. Of course, for the majority it's ok and sustainable for middle-class families. However, for the working-classes it's simply not fair. If the coalition really wants to cut and 'save money', how about the 123-billion pounds in tax avoidance from the super-rich. Or £97 billion from replacing Trident missiles - enough to pay for 200 hospitals, 1,000 schools and 500,000 houses. However, I fear this is unlikely.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craiky1506)
    Agree with Plastercaster. Of course it's fine for these cuts to hit people if you're worth millions and live in a mansion. Of course, for the majority it's ok and sustainable for middle-class families. However, for the working-classes it's simply not fair. If the coalition really wants to cut and 'save money', how about the 123-billion pounds in tax avoidance from the super-rich. Or £97 billion from replacing Trident missiles - enough to pay for 200 hospitals, 1,000 schools and 500,000 houses. However, I fear this is unlikely.
    They can't just 'cut' 123 billion of tax avoidance.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    They can't just 'cut' 123 billion of tax avoidance.
    You know what I mean, clamp down on it. It's quarter to midnight... I'm allowed to feel a bit tired.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ocassus)
    A favourable outcome? Punish not rehabilitate beyond a second chance...
    I think we can all agree that a lower murder rate is a good thing. Traditionally the right has supported harsher punishment as the answer - sociology shows that that isn't necessarily the case (hence my original statement). However, jail is relatively cheap and appeals to the lowest common denominator of the electorate (see the daily express).
    In terms of principle, I believe the government's duty is to do what is best for its citizens. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with a private school educated judge dishing out 30 years to someone raised by a crack addict in a council flat. So I'd rather the money was spent on giving purpose to the lives of those who would otherwise simply be unemployed so that they work for a living rather than roam the streets with knives at night because there's nothing better to do.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by plastercaster)
    I think we can all agree that a lower murder rate is a good thing. Traditionally the right has supported harsher punishment as the answer - sociology shows that that isn't necessarily the case (hence my original statement). However, jail is relatively cheap and appeals to the lowest common denominator of the electorate (see the daily express).
    In terms of principle, I believe the government's duty is to do what is best for its citizens. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with a private school educated judge dishing out 30 years to someone raised by a crack addict in a council flat. So I'd rather the money was spent on giving purpose to the lives of those who would otherwise simply be unemployed so that they work for a living rather than roam the streets with knives at night because there's nothing better to do.
    'Nothing better to do' is not an excuse. Also being private schooled does not corrupt your morals and arguably gives you a degree more of experience in law and legislation. What you say contradicts the socialist ideal though! I am all for people being given the opportunity to earn living wages through community service whilst looking for a job elsewhere. But only if they put in the sufficient workload to justify that payout. The people who 'can't be bothered' to put out the sufficient workload certainly need to solve the problem themselves, it is not up to the taxpayer to sort out other peoples inability to work due to 'not bothered'.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ocassus)
    'Nothing better to do' is not an excuse. Also being private schooled does not corrupt your morals and arguably gives you a degree more of experience in law and legislation. What you say contradicts the socialist ideal though! I am all for people being given the opportunity to earn living wages through community service whilst looking for a job elsewhere. But only if they put in the sufficient workload to justify that payout. The people who 'can't be bothered' to put out the sufficient workload certainly need to solve the problem themselves, it is not up to the taxpayer to sort out other peoples inability to work due to 'not bothered'.
    Nothing better to do isn't an excuse. But I've led a life mercifully free of any significant hardship (thus far). Private schooled pupils almost definitely do have a better knowledge of law, but my point was that they are in no position to pass judgement - how would their lives have been different if they had been beaten as a toddler and introduced to hard drugs at age 8, rather than raised lovingly in a stable home? For the record, I don't subscribe to "socialism" or any other ideal in its entirety, it's just that left wing politics sits closest to my ideals- and that is that a government should strive to give oppurtunities to those born in the most miserable of circumstances; that requires heavy investment in social services and education. And I agree that people should be offered work instead of benefits by the government- but the only instance of that I can think of that policy being put into place is the USSR.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    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.