Is there anyway to change the system? Watch

Anonymous774
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#1
Hi all, before I start let me just say I don't get into politics that much so go easy on me.

I think people will agree with me when I say that the current government is a mess. There's no clear leadership, so neither side can do the thing they want and we seem to be stuck in a limbo of no progress.

I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to restructure the way the government works. Such as changing the first pass the post voting system for a start.

I haven't really thought about what major changes could be made to prevent the UK from entering limbo again in the future. Does anyone else have any ideas?

Again I apologise if I said something stupid, I don't usually discuss politics.
0
reply
Amon-ster
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 weeks ago
#2
Politics is a dirty game, just a bunch of posers fighting over power disregarding the ambitions of the country as a whole.

In regards to the voting issue, I think they should put a fine if you don't vote on important matters since during the Brexit a high amount of young people didn't vote tipping the scale.
2
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 weeks ago
#3
If you want genuine change you need:

proportional representation
A Fully elected second chamber
Abolish the monarchy
Adopt a US based constitution
Mass nationalisation including banks
Leave NATO and the EU
Break up tech monopolies and demand far greater protection for free speech
2
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 weeks ago
#4
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
If you want genuine change you need:

proportional representation
A Fully elected second chamber
Abolish the monarchy
Adopt a US based constitution
Mass nationalisation including banks
Leave NATO and the EU
Break up tech monopolies and demand far greater protection for free speech
Jeremy Corbyn and I approve this post.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by Anonymous774)
Hi all, before I start let me just say I don't get into politics that much so go easy on me.

I think people will agree with me when I say that the current government is a mess. There's no clear leadership, so neither side can do the thing they want and we seem to be stuck in a limbo of no progress.

I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to restructure the way the government works. Such as changing the first pass the post voting system for a start.

I haven't really thought about what major changes could be made to prevent the UK from entering limbo again in the future. Does anyone else have any ideas?

Again I apologise if I said something stupid, I don't usually discuss politics.
You have to get more involved.
0
reply
ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 weeks ago
#6
To be honest, there is clear leadership at the moment. BoJo knows what he wants to do, and is doing it in probably the most effective method available to him. True, he could do with a Tory majority which requires a general election, but in that case, FPTP actually helps declare a clear winner. The main problem with FPTP (apart from it being a very inaccurate name) is that it creates geographical divides in treatment between people who can be counted on to vote for someone, those who definitely won't, and those whose minds are up for changing.

Any change to the system would have to be agreed upon by MPs (possibly after a referendum which would also have to be agreed by MPs) then agreed by the Lords (which it typically would easily if comfortably passed by the Commons).
0
reply
SteveyStack
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 weeks ago
#7
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
If you want genuine change you need:

proportional representation
A Fully elected second chamber
Abolish the monarchy
Adopt a US based constitution
Mass nationalisation including banks
Leave NATO and the EU
Break up tech monopolies and demand far greater protection for free speech
Ah because nationalisation has worked so well in the past lol.

Nationalisation of non-key industries is pointless (there is an argument for energy and transport) but banks?

Banking is 10% of the UK economy and if you try to nationalise them they will simply leave. They are also relatively efficient compared to what we all know a nationalised bank would be like.

Some of your points are potentially good ideas, that one is just plain stupid
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 weeks ago
#8
in terms of electoral reform - its a dreamers cause that has no real hope of happening any time soon.

Which is a real shame, but the reality is that the only way to get electoral reform is to have the party who gains a majority through our current system enact it.. and ask yourself, why would any party that is winning in our current system then vote to change the very thing that made them win?

You can vote for the libs, but I guarentee you if the libs ever did get into a position where FPTP was giving them a majority, they would drop electoral reform from their manifesto faster then you can remember what they did to student finance.
1
reply
SteveyStack
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
in terms of electoral reform - its a dreamers cause that has no real hope of happening any time soon.

Which is a real shame, but the reality is that the only way to get electoral reform is to have the party who gains a majority through our current system enact it.. and ask yourself, why would any party that is winning in our current system then vote to change the very thing that made them win?

You can vote for the libs, but I guarentee you if the libs ever did get into a position where FPTP was giving them a majority, they would drop electoral reform from their manifesto faster then you can remember what they did to student finance.
Very good response. One thing I would say is that FPTP isn’t as bad as people think as the Conservatives and Labour often have to adopt popular vote winning policies of other parties and so you can still affect policies without gaining politicians.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by Anonymous774)
There's no clear leadership
There is perfectly clear leadership. The problem is that the leadership does not command sufficient support. That is true on both the Conservative and Labour sides.
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by SteveyStack)
Ah because nationalisation has worked so well in the past lol.

Nationalisation of non-key industries is pointless (there is an argument for energy and transport) but banks?

Banking is 10% of the UK economy and if you try to nationalise them they will simply leave. They are also relatively efficient compared to what we all know a nationalised bank would be like.

Some of your points are potentially good ideas, that one is just plain stupid
This idea that nationalisation hasn’t worked in the past is grossly exaggerated. It depends on what your aims are. Communism was able to turn 2 impoverished backwaters into military superpowers.

As for the banks:

If these private entities crash then the government will have to bail them out anyway. If something is ‘too big to fail’ then the government should own it so there is at least democratic oversight.

As above I’m in favour of s centrally planned economy which makes more sense than ever with rapid technological innovation.
0
reply
SteveyStack
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
This idea that nationalisation hasn’t worked in the past is grossly exaggerated. It depends on what your aims are. Communism was able to turn 2 impoverished backwaters into military superpowers.

As for the banks:

If these private entities crash then the government will have to bail them out anyway. If something is ‘too big to fail’ then the government should own it so there is at least democratic oversight.

As above I’m in favour of s centrally planned economy which makes more sense than ever with rapid technological innovation.
First of all it’s nice to see a reasoned argument in favour of communism for once.

I would personally argue working people to death was the main reason as to why communism resulted in these 2 military superpowers.

The issue with your idea for banks is that we live in a global world and you can’t simply take over the banks and expect these powerful organisations to accept it.

I completely disagree with the idea of a centralised economy. You produce too many things that people don’t want. While it may be useful for the state to produce some things other things are far better left to market forces.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by Anonymous774)
Such as changing the first pass the post voting system for a start.
Completely agree. And so did the Lib Dems back in 2010 who when in coalition with the Tories ran a vote on the alternative vote. Sadly though, we were so on our high horses with outrage because the Lib Dems said they would so something (abolish uni fees) and then didn't (like Boris on a daily basis), it failed.

I can't see change happening soon as the main parties have too much to lose.
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by SteveyStack)
First of all it’s nice to see a reasoned argument in favour of communism for once.

I would personally argue working people to death was the main reason as to why communism resulted in these 2 military superpowers.

The issue with your idea for banks is that we live in a global world and you can’t simply take over the banks and expect these powerful organisations to accept it.

I completely disagree with the idea of a centralised economy. You produce too many things that people don’t want. While it may be useful for the state to produce some things other things are far better left to market forces.
I’m a non Marxist/ Liberal Communist. Most communists you speak to are basically liberals that hate actually existing communism say in the USSR or China and whilst flawed certainly I think there much to admire. I support national self determinism which is why I’m for Brexit and leaving Nato in addition to their capitalistic and colonialist leanings

The age of retirement in China is 60 whilst in the US it’s 66.

Ha ha well yeah, i know the banks won’t like it. Tough. I don’t want to be ruled by these people and neither really do most people. Besides if Russia, China, Iran and North Korea can do it so can we.

What things would the state produce that the people don’t want? I would say that’s far more the case In capitalism where they will create a demand for literally anything no matter how meaningless or harmful for their user


. I support capitalism on the small scale- eg local bakeries, cafes etc
0
reply
NJA
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 weeks ago
#15
Some blue sky thinking?

Name:  jezza.jpg
Views: 24
Size:  96.2 KB
0
reply
landscape2014
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by SteveyStack)
Ah because nationalisation has worked so well in the past lol.

Nationalisation of non-key industries is pointless (there is an argument for energy and transport) but banks?

Banking is 10% of the UK economy and if you try to nationalise them they will simply leave. They are also relatively efficient compared to what we all know a nationalised bank would be like.

Some of your points are potentially good ideas, that one is just plain stupid
This country like most countries have never experienced nationalisation what you base your opinion on is State appropriation which is not the same thing. Nationalisation (like ‘love’ a much misused appellation) should be understood as the right of the individuals that make up the nation to be treated as individual beneficial owners, not the State. ‘Nationalisation’ is regularly used as a euphemism for State appropriation its use should be restricted to a meaning consistent with the organisation of the letters; the individuals of the nation having an equal interest in whatever is considered nationalised in a capitalist society. The industries taken over by the corporate State were prefixed by British (the State that is,not the nation).
1
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by Anonymous774)
Hi all, before I start let me just say I don't get into politics that much so go easy on me.

I think people will agree with me when I say that the current government is a mess. There's no clear leadership, so neither side can do the thing they want and we seem to be stuck in a limbo of no progress.

I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to restructure the way the government works. Such as changing the first pass the post voting system for a start.

I haven't really thought about what major changes could be made to prevent the UK from entering limbo again in the future. Does anyone else have any ideas?

Again I apologise if I said something stupid, I don't usually discuss politics.
FPTP is actually a factor that is working against the limbo. By moving to a proportional system you would have even weaker and unstable governments the majority of the time.

If your aim is simply to stop limbo then only one change is required, the repeal of the fixed terms act. Without the fixed term act a government that gets stuck like May’s would have made the meaningful vote a confidence vote. One way or another, we’d no longer be in limbo.

In terms of making politics better as a whole there are two important changes that should be made additionally..

1) Create a regional Lords. If we have 10 regions of 50 lords each elected in some form then Scotland and London have the same weight and even with commons supremacy you’d start to solve the north-south divide.

2) Although Labour has already started the process, the Tories especially need to become more member led. One of the biggest reasons it took the rise of UKIP to force a resolution on our membership of the EU is the disconnect between the beliefs of MP’s and their members allowing pressure to build.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
If you want genuine change you need:

A Fully elected second chamber
Because thats worked sooooo well for the lower house
Abolish the monarchy
The only unifying force in the country?
Adopt a US based constitution
Why, might i ask?
Mass nationalisation including banks
Good way to implode the economy. Nevermind the fact the country has no money for such an undertaking
Leave NATO
I could get behind this
Break up tech monopolies and demand far greater protection for free speech
We have no tech monopolies...
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by Napp)
Because thats worked sooooo well for the lower house

The only unifying force in the country?

Why, might i ask?

Good way to implode the economy. Nevermind the fact the country has no money for such an undertaking

I could get behind this

We have no tech monopolies...
So you’re against democracy then? I. Any think of any good reason to keep unelected politicians in the upper chamber and 2 reasons to make it so, namely getting rid of the corrupt and unpopular no hopers that tow the party line.

This institution is simply dead. Danny dyer May as well be our next monarch. They no longer serve any purpose and are basically now state funded celebrities with undue influence. Also look at Prince Andrew and how dodgy he is with his dealing with Epstein etc. That man is protected because he is royalty. And that is wrong. I think when the queen goes it should be rolled out even though I like William and Kate.

Because I support in particular the first and second amendment and whilst no constitution is perfect I think it is better than having not having one like us .

I disagree. If we can find the money to fund pointless wars for Israel or Bailing out the banks we can make buy mass infrastructure spending. But I do think we should cut back spending on some things. It will of course be a big shock to our economy but as our economy is unsustainable anyway and also immoral then it’s something that needs to happen. Sometimes when you’ve walked the wrong path it’s better to go back and start again.

Good!

Google, Facebook and Amazon for instance all operate within the U.K and the first two have flagrantly interfered in elections around the globe and are de facto a quasi corporate dictatorship.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 weeks ago
#20
While i disagree with all your suggestions i would focus on a few things..

1) Replacing the monarch with another beurocrat would be horrid. Especially since they do no harm secondly because the monarchy is profitable and is only likely to cost us less rather than more. Finally because the Queen and Will/Kate are beloved. There is no appetite outside of fringe politics.

2) The second amendment is the most retarded thing still enacted. This is not the 1800's where the police lacked the ability to solve crimes.
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

What's your favourite genre?

Rock (154)
24.41%
Pop (155)
24.56%
Jazz (26)
4.12%
Classical (37)
5.86%
Hip-Hop (111)
17.59%
Electronic (42)
6.66%
Indie (106)
16.8%

Watched Threads

View All