The Undecided thread

Watch
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
A corner for them to express their undecidedness, nobody is here to convert anyone to anything, if you'd like to talk it over go ahead. Of course i have my preference like most others but the idea is not to push it up anybody's nose.

So, what;s bothering you?
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#2
Meanwhile, a few ingredients for the mix and for some historical context:

Old Labour never managed to be re-elected, since their inception and first time in charge in 1924. Every time they were voted in, no doubt on the back of a promise to make everyone's lot better as they do now, they were found wanting on the ability to do so and rejected at the earliest opportunity by the electorate. The power by the people to remove a government is the most precious tool in the armoury of the democratic system, no other caters for that. It's not only the ability to vote them in, people vote governments out too.

New Labour and the Blair years were the exception to the rule, Labour won three elections under him and finally broke their duck. He did so by distancing himself from Old Labour, the internal division and the friction with Brown well evident. Brown finally got rid of him, lost the next election. If Brown was Old Labour, Corbyn is very Old Labour and if the historical record is anything to go by... well, let's wait and see what happens.

Conservative? Re-elected a few times, three as well under Thatcher alone. Make of that what you like, nothing odd about it.
0
reply
E102
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
SNP or labour??

I'm still undecided for which one would be best, I know SNP is the best for scotland and I will always believe that but Jeremy Corbyn is honest, uncorrupt and genuine which what the government needs rn.

In my view indyref2 can wait a bit and jeremy hasn't said he is against another vote, just kezia🙄. However my constituency is SNP so it would make sense to vote them, right?

Would they form a coalition if they had to?

My heart says jeremy but my head says SNP
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#4
For the undecided: if you don't know who to vote in, ask yourself if you want to vote this government out but make sure the alternative would be an improvement on anything before rushing your decision.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by E102)
SNP or labour??

I'm still undecided for which one would be best, I know SNP is the best for scotland and I will always believe that but Jeremy Corbyn is honest, uncorrupt and genuine which what the government needs rn.

In my view indyref2 can wait a bit and jeremy hasn't said he is against another vote, just kezia🙄. However my constituency is SNP so it would make sense to vote them, right?

Would they form a coalition if they had to?

My heart says jeremy but my head says SNP
Is there such thing as a top priority driving you, an example would be putting Scotland's interest at the top of the list. Doesn't matter why, the point is to have a criteria to use in our choice of box. Heart first or second? Everyone will have some, whether they realise it or not because we all base our choice on some parameters. You mention honesty, integrity and being genuine as Corbyn's attributes, that may be the criteria. It is entirely up to you what to look for, we all have our own priorities. What is the dearest thing to you, what would you like the most to see happen?

Couldn't and wouldn't advise you on which to choose but this is what I can contribute: wearing different political colours, there is a reason they are so. My list of priorities has to be a different one and it is because of this: to me, the most important thing is the ability to manage the economy to best effect in terms of growth and stability, I regard that as the foundation that pays for the social platform. Without the money to fund the social projects, we can plan them as much as we like for nothing, they won't happen. Economic growth is the utmost basis for all else, how to redistribute that wealth is another matter.

SNP and Labour will do nothing without a strong and stable economy, I don't believe they could mange one and that is why I couldn't go against what I reagrd as the top priority of all. We need social care but also jobs for people to go to and wealth-creation to pay for it, not just to soak the rich until they have nothing left and we are all left celebrating our egalitarianism in poverty.

Had I to choose between those two according to my criteria? Pretty much the same, both of them.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
(Original post by zhog)

Old Labour never managed to be re-elected, since their inception and first time in charge in 1924. Every time they were voted in, no doubt on the back of a promise to make everyone's lot better as they do now, they were found wanting on the ability to do so and rejected at the earliest opportunity by the electorate.
Did 1950, 1966 and October 1974 not happen on your planet?
0
reply
E102
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by zhog)
Is there such thing as a top priority driving you, an example would be putting Scotland's interest at the top of the list. Doesn't matter why, the point is to have a criteria to use in our choice of box. Heart first or second? Everyone will have some, whether they realise it or not because we all base our choice on some parameters. You mention honesty, integrity and being genuine as Corbyn's attributes, that may be the criteria. It is entirely up to you what to look for, we all have our own priorities. What is the dearest thing to you, what would you like the most to see happen?

Couldn't and wouldn't advise you on which to choose but this is what I can contribute: wearing different political colours, there is a reason they are so. My list of priorities has to be a different one and it is because of this: to me, the most important thing is the ability to manage the economy to best effect in terms of growth and stability, I regard that as the foundation that pays for the social platform. Without the money to fund the social projects, we can plan them as much as we like for nothing, they won't happen. Economic growth is the utmost basis for all else, how to redistribute that wealth is another matter.

SNP and Labour will do nothing without a strong and stable economy, I don't believe they could mange one and that is why I couldn't go against what I reagrd as the top priority of all. We need social care but also jobs for people to go to and wealth-creation to pay for it, not just to soak the rich until they have nothing left and we are all left celebrating our egalitarianism in poverty.

Had I to choose between those two according to my criteria? Pretty much the same, both of them.
The first part was helpful...until I saw strong and stable
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by nulli tertius)
Did 1950, 1966 and October 1974 not happen on your planet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...sh_governments

Having checked beforehand, my mistake was no more than this: Labour were indeed re-elected in 50 to be outed in 51 (an almost immediate collapse), won in 64 and were re-elected in 66 before getting the boot in 70, won in February 74 and were re-elected in October, after calling it themselves. Forget that one and Attlee was the only one who served a full first term before collapsing almost immediately, sparking 13 years of Tory dictatorship. Not that much of a re-election after all, 66 was two years into a first term.

So if you want to be picky about it you win but I was in the right area, should have said Blair was the only Labour leader who managed to get them re-elected and serve two full terms. The scourge of the Labour party to many in it, it's true that Iraq didn't help.

Since the war, Labour have been in power for thirty years, ten of them Blairite. Con for 42.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by E102)
The first part was helpful...until I saw strong and stable
You will have to trust me it was tongue-in-cheek but look... what's wrong with a strong and stable economy? You want it weak and wobbly?
0
reply
E102
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by zhog)
You will have to trust me it was tongue-in-cheek but look... what's wrong with a strong and stable economy? You want it weak and wobbly?
I want it uncorrupt and open anyway I think I have made up my mind
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
Maths, natural sciences, physics, physics and maths- da *** do I do at uni and where? Maths is my best alevels subject but in terms of science alevels but chem is better than physics which annoys me. I find physics interesting but it's not the thing I'm best at.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by E102)
I want it uncorrupt and open anyway I think I have made up my mind
Good, not too sure of what you mean by 'uncorrupt and open' but it sounds good. As long as it grows and we get to keep our jobs, that is very important too.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by black1blade)
Maths, natural sciences, physics, physics and maths- da *** do I do at uni and where? Maths is my best alevels subject but in terms of science alevels but chem is better than physics which annoys me. I find physics interesting but it's not the thing I'm best at.
Mate, this may be a thread for people struggling to make a decision but I'm not sure we can help much with that. Please tell me you're not voting for Corbyn too...
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by zhog)
Mate, this may be a thread for people struggling to make a decision but I'm not sure we can help much with that. Please tell me you're not voting for Corbyn too...
Can't vote.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by black1blade)
Can't vote.
OK. What was all that about, what is this decision you're struggling with again?
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by zhog)
OK. What was all that about, what is this decision you're struggling with again?
Ohhh it was like late and I was really tired so I didn't really read the opening thing. I mean I could talk about the election. Even if I could vote, voting labor would probably be a throw away vote in my area.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#17
OK, if there is anything about the election we can help with we'll be around. Good luck with the rest.
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#18
Younger voters may not remember the last Labour experience but it is relevant because history often repeats itself. Part of the New Labour winning formula in 97 was convincing the electorate they had moved on from being taxation junkies and financial irresponsibility, they didn't want to come in and put a penny or two on income tax in the same way we see now with Corbyn. But money to fund the social projects has to come from somewhere, so...

Under New Labour, council tax began to rise in double-digits annually in many places as a way of funding the social agenda by the back door. We pay our taxes and then go on to pay for local services if we want them, that was the de-facto Labour philosophy in their effort to camouflage their need to raise money. Income-tax is directly linked to the ability to pay, council-tax isn't, it is a roof-tax under that philosophy.

We do have the same scenario looming here, were Labour to win. Tories eventually checked that ruse by freezing it from 2009 because if you look at how much it went up from 97 till then it was time for some respite. It was their view that it was time for some because they are not taxation-tunkies, no doubt getting it back on the go is part of the change Corbyn would bring about.

It got to the point where pensioners (or horrible selfish and uncaring people according to Labour) were refusing to pay it on principle, people saying they would pay it but not another extortionate annual rise. To them, owning a house didn't mean they could afford it and the suggestion of selling it, pay up, shut up and move on was totally unfair in their eyes. Don't pay and you get banged up, some of them said they'd rather have that.

There was an old lady chucked out of prison against her will, if somebody pays your bail or bond you are free to go but not to stay. Out of somewhere, a shadowy character turned at her nick and forced the guv to take the money and release her, nobody ever knew who he was for sure. Even if we all have a good idea of where he got the money...

It was to hush the campaign of protest by pensioners against Labour policy, they didn't want the press outside on release day.


The leader of the campaign to abolish the council tax, which has resulted in two elderly members being jailed for non-payment, said yesterday that "dozens" more pensioners were willing to go to prison for the cause.
In a warning to Tony Blair, Christine Melsom, 64, said the IsItFair? campaign was attracting new members by the hour and would continue to fight until the tax was replaced with a fairer system linked to ability to pay.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...o-to-jail.html

I have absolutely no reason to believe history wouldn't repeat itself eventually under Labour, this was only a decade ago. And the older the leopard...
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#19
For the undecided between capitalism and marxism: historical evidence to put it into context.

From its founding in 1949 until late 1978, the People's Republic of China was a Soviet-style centrally planned economy. Following Mao's death in 1976 and the consequent end of the Cultural Revolution, Deng Xiaoping and the new Chinese leadership began to reform the economy and move towards a more market-oriented mixed economy under one-party rule. Agricultural collectivization was dismantled and farmlands privatized, while foreign trade became a major new focus, leading to the creation of Special Economic Zones (SEZs). Inefficient state-owned enterprises (SOEs) were restructured and unprofitable ones were closed outright, resulting in massive job losses. Modern-day China is mainly characterized as having a market economy based on private property ownership, and is one of the leading examples of state capitalism. The state still dominates in strategic "pillar" sectors such as energy production and heavy industries, but private enterprise has expanded enormously, with around 30 million private businesses recorded in 2008.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China

Society is not all, there is such thing as the economy. When looking at the parties we have to scrutinise their qualities on both fronts, promises on the social front cannot be made the sole basis for our choices. You also have to believe the promises will be fulfilled, that whoever wins the arms race in terms of promising 'more' on the social front has the skills to fund them via the economic engine.

Con have been there for 7 years, unemployment has been steadily going down at least and growth has been, well... not too bad compared to others as a result of their economic policies. I'm not here to defend them or promote them, that is the picture.

Labour's economic policies? I don't think they have any, the prospective Chancellor doesn't believe in the economic model we have, Corbyn and everybody around have spent their lives campaigning against it. That is not the problem, they and their followers can do that for free. The problem is that by doing so they show they can't recognize the merits in it, not even in the face of the indisputable historical evidence that proves Capitalism is the workable solution. It's like denying global-warming despite the evidence, it is that mindset that I find worrying.

There is no such thing as a Labour economic policy other than to just keep it going while they help themselves to fund the social agenda. Everything they say sounds counter-intuitive to the notion of a stimulus to the economy, with the uncertainty of Brexit hanging. The only concrete policy is to borrow 'what it takes' to fund the social because interest-rates are very low, renationalise at leisure, let the unions back into the picture to regulate the minimum-wage. Don't worry, it's all 'fully costed', the audiences cry at televised political soap-opera. Deficit-wrestling is out, borrowing is the new season and our kids and theirs will be thankful (couldn't use old people because they will be dead, making it a woman's thing would be too sexist). The children it is, we'll spend some on the re-nationalization program for their sake if you didn't know it yet. Better get it right because of what there is no doubt is that our children and theirs will be paying the loan in cash too.

Because they don't do economics, they throw grains of sand into the engine on a daily basis until it inevitably grinds, also a matter of historical record. Only time it took a bit longer was when they borrowed Tory-like economics what else could they do?
0
reply
Summer15
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by zhog)
For the undecided: if you don't know who to vote in, ask yourself if you want to vote this government out but make sure the alternative would be an improvement on anything before rushing your decision.

Bloody autocorrect on phone! I'll start again...
This is where I'm at at the minute. I don't want to vote labour in but I don't want to keep the Tories in. I thought of voting for another part entirely but I did that in the past and realised it's a wasted vote because it's really only a race of 2 contenders and if I don't vote for either, other people will and one of them will win - not the outsider parties.

I feel forced to vote labour just to keep the Tories out and I don't agree with half of what labour stand for. Fed up of British politics.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Have you experienced financial difficulties as a student due to Covid-19?

Yes, I have really struggled financially (56)
17.34%
I have experienced some financial difficulties (91)
28.17%
I haven't experienced any financial difficulties and things have stayed the same (121)
37.46%
I have had better financial opportunities as a result of the pandemic (44)
13.62%
I've had another experience (let us know in the thread!) (11)
3.41%

Watched Threads

View All