Your very own manifesto!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by D_Andreas Sukov, Apr 2, 2010.

  1. D_Andreas Sukov

    D_Andreas Sukov Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,933
    Likes Received:
    3
    As you should all know, we have an election here soon (the UK).

    If you were running, what would your manifesto be like?

    Maybe name 5 policies?

    Ill do mine in abit. Ill let some offer people get attacked before i do:biggrin1:
     
  2. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    5 things?
    1) A managed decline in house prices. A sudden decline would be very dangerous, but zero growth from now on. Build more,(hell, the government has failed to meet its own targets for 20 years), legal restrictions on 2nd homes, limits on how much a bank can lend compared to salary, limits on the % of a house loan which can be guaranteed by mortgage on residential property. The reason is simple: no one is richer because their house costs twice as much, and the whole economy has been skewed by everyone spending every last penny on property.

    2) A managed decline in the UK population. Remove child subsidies. restrict immigration. Encourage emigration. Everything says world outlook is tough and getting tougher, and there are too many people here for this island to sustain. (applies to whole world, of course)

    3)limits on banks to stop the dangerous lending practices which precipitated the last crisis. restrictions in futures trading and the like (which cost everyone a small fortune in unnecessarily high prices). Restrictions on 'bonuses' which are pretty much designed to cause risky behaviour. Bonuses should be taxed more than basic pay, so all they have to do to avoid the hefty tax is pay straight basic. No need to take their banks abroad but might be a few raised eyebrows when they want basic of £10,000,000 a year.

    4)reform of parliament. True proportional election to house of Lords. transferrable vote on a constituency basis for commons. More power to the lords to veto legislation. MPs should be allowed to do whatever they want as well as being MPs so long as they declare it, jail sentences if they dont. No housing or food expenses, though they need office staff. Basic pay only, and paying them in the top 4% of the UK population is very questionable so maybe a pay cut. Probably manage with a few less too, especially with more working politicians in the lords.

    5)I suppose it goes without saying that government should run a balanced budget, so I wont. Though I would note politicians are always too optimistic. Instead, Id say something needs to be done about having millions of visiting workers here while also having millions of unemployed. Increasing minimum wage might be a good start, but it is necessary to remove disincentives to work (ie you get paid more being unemployed). And simply removing benefits isnt the answer, that just makes criminals.

    6) Oh now ive run out and ive just got going. We desperately need to reform the policy of criminalising drug use, which is a farce.

    7)Ive always liked the idea of a law restricting the total number of words in current British legislation. To make a new one, you have to delete an old one. Might make politicians think about what is really necessary.
     
  3. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    were I Brit, Dandelion would get my vote!:clap:
     
  4. Jason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,932
    Likes Received:
    641
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    1) VAT increase (maybe 20%?) plus tobacco and alcohol up lots. Basically stay as we are with other taxes, so a no to the forthcoming NI rise. Probably have to get fuel duty down a bit as it is hurting business. Idea is to increase total tax take without hitting profits, jobs or incomes.

    2) Decrease in spending. In particular proposed new nuclear weapons not to be bought (we can destroy the world with those we've got anyway). Extricate ourselves from Afghanistan and keep well clear of any other wars. New benefits system - based on flat rate entitlements to pensions and key benefits and much less of the supplementary benefits. Schools and NHS pretty much ring fenced.

    3) Policies to foster an enterprise culture. Removal of much social chapter legislation thus making it cheaper to employ people. Curbs on migration including EU migration. Some regulation of banking excesses, but toleration of the bonus culture.

    4) Renegotiation of relationship with the EU leading to a referendum on EU membership in say 4 years. UK requires full Lisbon opt out and opt out from much of earlier treaties, plus restrictions on labour mobility, plus instant end to UK contribution to the morally indeffensible CAP and very quick and substantial reduction in UK's EU contribution. Encouragement for other EU nations to make similar demands, eg Ireland, Sweden, Poland, Czech Republic.

    5) New foreign policy direction. Within our backyard the expansion of the "Council of the Isles" to give a voice to UK, Ireland, Channel Islands, Man and Gibraltar (ie the ultimate extent of Conservative and UNIONIST policies). In the Atlantic working alongside the USA to develop Falklands oil, with close links to the USA. Strengthening Commonwealth links.

    Also a new ethic in politics. Politicians should act from a Judaeo-Christian moral code - and we should all be prepared to respect them for that, and ditch them when they fall (seriously) short. On these criteria Brown has been caught out lying to the Chillcott enquiry, bullies and manhandles his women staff, unleashes the "dogs of hell" on his colleague who dares to say boo to him. His morals show him better suited to a prison cell than another stint in 10 Downing Street. His predecessor Blair - who is supporting him - is probably a war criminal. I cannot comprehend how anyone can vote for such horrid people.
     
  5. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    You and I clearly have opposed views on this, and not simply on what to tax. The question is whether the economy is capable of returning to its previous state, so this is a blip we must just live through, or whether the country was living way above its means for years and the party has now finished. If so, then its a pretty bitter legacy we inherited in the end from the days of Thatcher. People are only allowed to amass personal fortunes because it is in the greater good. If we reach the stage where people work like slaves just so the baron can enjoy life, we rebel. Now, thats hardly the situation here, but disparity in the UK has been increasing steadily in recent years and this has to be reversed. I rather think what we will need will be some good old fashioned protectionism and a fortress europe approach.

    Tell me how bad the situation is really and Ill tell you if this is a pipe dream.

    Internal EU migration is not a problem. If people are able to go home, they will go home. The real difficulty is those who come from elsewhere. Rules on employment conditions are the only way to curb the natural tendency of employers to exploit the employee. As you have pointed out, companies are inclined to threaten to go elsewhere if countries unilaterally make conditions they dont like. We need more institutions like the EU to enforce worldwide compliance.

    Lafarge of UKIP was on any questions on the radio today. I like him, he says what he believes. I dont agree with his views that we would be better off outside the EU, but today he was asked what he thought about drugs, and said publicly he thought criminalisation didn't work. The orthodox politicians on the panel really hated this. Labour is in danger of becoming a laughing stock because its drugs advisors keep resigning because the government refuses their advice, but the conservatives would do precisely the same. Personally, I think Lafarge just won himself another nice chunk of votes with that speech. I like politicians who say what they think. Were he standing here I might just vote for him on that basis, crazy as it might seem.

    How so? whats wrong about subsidising growing more food?

    Dont know as I agree with this. Representatives of the people are supposed to be exactly that, representative of the people.

    I'm afraid that one is easy. There isnt any other likely winner who is any better. If my vote would get Lafarge into westminster to give ukip a voice there, Id help him along. Pretty much anyone who is independant in some way tips the balance in the right direction. The problem is not brown, blair or Cameron, but the system which gives voters no real choice.
     
  6. conntom

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,176
    Likes Received:
    146
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)
    1. Keep England for the English.
    2. Privatize Medicine.....your own medical people opt out of the public system
    3. Build up Defenses (you;re going to need it within 20 years)
    4. Strengthen ties with America.
    5. No troop deployments unless absolutely needed to defend the country from invasion.

    OK Lemon. Let me have it. I know at 19 - you have already figured out the whole world and how everything should be.
     
  7. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    This is an aside, but you have no idea how relieved I am to see this being raised as an issue on the other side of the Atlantic.
     
  8. D_Andreas Sukov

    D_Andreas Sukov Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,933
    Likes Received:
    3
    Right-O.
    Its not a case i have the world figured out, but i have an opinion. Also, litle need to figure it out, i just know how it works here and you dont as you proved in point 1.
     
  9. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
  10. phk

    phk New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Stevenage (GB)
    Aaaah how I love this thread!

    1) Closer intergration with Europe: The more we are part of a fantastic institution such as the EU, the better. When people stick together we're better off and I believe the benefits the EU brings would be even greater if we moved closer to Europe. I'm pro-Euro and if the UK could be part of a "United States of Europe" (I know alot of people will disagree with this, but still) I feel we'd be better off as a country.

    2) Change in the tax system: I think that there needs to be a top rate of 60% for anybody earning over £150,000 and that anybody earning under £15,000 does not have to pay tax. The fact is that the more somebody earns, the more they can afford to be paying towards helping the country, whereas somebody on a low income needs to keep as much of their income as they can to ensure they retain a good quality of life.

    (Statistics show that countries with higher rates of tax for top earners do have, in general, happier populations as government spending can be increased which leads to more investment in the health service, education etc.)

    3) A reduction in the amount of Faith Schools: I went to a state school and I got taught everything I needed to know about religion, how to be respectful towards religion and the varying aspects of each religion. Unfortunately faith schools do create a divide in society and also lead to many atheist parents sending their kids to faith schools because it's the only option. Providing every state school (and private school) can teach to respect all religions, teach the various views or religion whilst enforcing that it is essential to be respectful and tolerant of anybody regardless of any characteristics they may have, then any child, regardless of religion can get the education they need at a state school.

    4) A Codified Constitution: At the moment the British Constitution is, well ... non existent! There are various conventions and signed agreements which guarantee us certain rights and liberties however it's all very messy. A clear written document telling us what our civil liberties are would be hugely beneficial, providing it is flexible to change in the future. We do not want to end up in a situation like the U.S Constitution which is near impossible to change, hence why guns are still legal, so a flexible yet clear Constitution would go a long way.

    5) An elected or partially elected second chamber: At the moment the House of Lords does NOT represent the public at all. It is hugely disproportionate and whilst this has improved in recent years, it's still very very behind. My ideal system would be a chamber where 50% are chosen by a select committee, and are in that position until they die. The 50% chosen are chosen to represent proportionally the British public, in terms of race, religion, gender, sexuality etc to ensure that all minorities have a say in the house of Lords. Then the other 50% should be elected by the public with the rule that the candidates can not be affiliated with any political party whatsoever.

    Ta-da! :p
     
  11. Jason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,932
    Likes Received:
    641
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    The issues of a codified constitution and House of Lords reform are areas we need to think about - but in my view they need to command broad consensus within the nation. There is a real danger of a political party making changes for short-term political gain. Right now I feel the best policy is to leave well alone.

    The beauty of the system we have at the moment is that against the odds it actually works. It is not easy to point to something that has gone wrong because we don't have a written constitution, and hard to see how one could be drafted which is appropriate for the different needs of all four home nations. An elected second chamber is on the cards, but again needs thought. My view is that we need the best in a second chamber - as in the Commons. We don't want average intelligence, motivation, education and leadership abilities - we want highly intelligent people who work their socks off, have a first class education (in school and in life) and have the moral fibre to command respect.

    An MP is a representative of their constituents, not an average of their constituents. A member of the upper chamber should be there because of the sills they can offer, not as a representative.
     
  12. phk

    phk New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Stevenage (GB)
    I agree that any House of Lords reform needs to be done on a nationwide concensus, and you're defo right that the Constitution issue needs to be done perhaps through a series of referendums, or done with as little involvement from the government as possible to prevent, like you said, them using it for short term gain.

    However I don't necessarily agree with you about the 2nd chamber. Yes there needs to be many people of high skills in there, but there also needs to be a direct representation of the public, regardless of whatever education they have just to make sure that there are people in there who are very much in touch with the public (Because you can be hugely skilled in an area but be out of touch with public opinion and what is genuinely best in real life situations). Thats why I believe in a 50/50 system. If slightly contradictory, i'd say that the skilled ones ought to be elected (so people vote using a proportional system similar to the European Parliament from a chosen list of skilled candidates), whereas the representatives of the public need to be appointed by a select committee, if that makes sense.
     
  13. Jason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,932
    Likes Received:
    641
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    Someone in the nineteenth century (can't remember who) said "when political power is entrusted to the masses their education becomes an imperative necessity".

    This is as much a challenge today as then. The average person in the UK reads "The Sun" (or if they can't really read it, they stare at page three). The average person in the UK cannot work out a percentage, cannot place an apostrophe correctly, cannot manage their own personal finances, has minimal or no understanding of debates in science, takes no interest in the arts, plays no active role in religion - depressing, isn't it! Our tabloids are full up with celebrity gossip and the sagas of football heroes. Right now we avoid catastrophe because:
    a) very often the people who don't vote are the people who least understand what they might be voting for;
    b) we have a first past the post system (which actively prevents bland consensus) plus a House of Lords that actually contains a few intellects.

    The idea of making the Commons or Lords reflect the average characteristics of the UK population is the stuff of nightmares. I want some people making the decisions who actually have some skills and abilities and education - not a bunch of "The Sun" readers.

    I also want people with a moral code. I know lots of our MPs have shown themselves lacking in this department. In my view Gordon Brown should be in gaol for his lies and his abuse of his staff. He certainly shouldn't be an MP, let alone PM. By contrast I'm not aware of David Cameron doing anything in any way comparable. Whether or not you actually like him he seems to be a decent guy. I know with whom I would prefer to get stuck in a lift.
     
  14. phk

    phk New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Stevenage (GB)

    I see your point, however I think it's wrong to say that average people can't do enough basic things to make decisions. I've had a state school education all my life and I can do all the things you said, and i'm not hugely intelligent. I have a moral compass and I know the clear difference between what is right or wrong, and even if (concerningly!) the Sun is the largest paper in the country, I still think most of the population have a good enough judgement to make decisions on most issues, and remember, under my proposal 50% of the Lords would still be experts in their respective fields.

    And about Gordon Brown ... I don't believe he was abusing his staff! :tongue: In my opinion he comes across very well and i'd quite happily be stuck in a life with him :smile:
     
  15. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    I think we managed that, but to the extent we didnt its because government tries very hard to keep us ignorant. Not much of a recomendation for the system we have now.

    expert opinion and political parties seem to agree that details such as spelling, apostrophes, arithmetic, theatre, teaching science, are not vital. God preserve us from religions. once again, how does this support the idea the current system works?

    what we have now is a self-perpetuating dictatorship. It certainly keeps the country on an even keel and is heading quite nicely back towards a country run by aristocrats which we enjoyed 150 years ago. Bluntly, most people are too busy to be interested and arent starving as were their ancesters, so just let the political classes get on with it. What saves the situation is that in reality there is little meaningful they can do. Europe is very helpful in this respect, for simply keeping politicians busy running in circles. oh, and free fuel plus a bit of clever science is bacsically what has kept the economy going for the last 100 years and provided the money to keep those people busy and comfortable. Except where a bunch of politicians who totally failed to understand the realities of this century decided it would be more fun to kill each other.

    certainly is for the current governing class.

    isnt that a bit meaningless? one mans morality is another's sociopathic tendencies. Thatcher said 'there is no such thing as society'.

    I thought you said you don't like the idea of ordinary people making decisions? This sound like humphry kicking an idea he doesnt like into the long grass of eternal discussion so nothing gets done.

    damn right, like abolishing hereditary peers and replacing them with political appointees was. Though this change really favoured both established parties at the expense of us the electorate.

    rubbish mate, it stumbles along. we get dangerous dogs acts, bans on pro-gay teaching, wars, imprisonment without trial, no input into decisions at all even when it comes to tiny details like parking restrictions on the street outside your house, MPs who think duck houses are essential parliamentary perquisites.

     
  16. eurotop40

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,524
    Likes Received:
    122
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Zurich (ZH, CH)
    I realise how much the world-wide reputation of certain societies and systems is nothing else than illusion at best (or a nicely told lie).
     
  17. D_Andreas Sukov

    D_Andreas Sukov Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,933
    Likes Received:
    3
    1) Raise tax for the top bracket.
    No-one needs to earn more than £100,000 in a year. Its obscene. Anything over this should be used to help those less fortunate and to fund public services. I know it will cause people to leave, but the vast majority of the rich dont pay tax anyway, so its not going to be a loss. I would like to see tax reform to get at this untouched fortune but dont know enough to write anything on it.

    2)Building of council houses
    One, this will create jobs, and it will give people a trade to continue. Secondly, it will lower poverty, as it will stop people paying for houses they can ill can afford. I personally wouldnt have many up for sale. I think if they had to be on offer for the tenants to buy, it would have to be after something like 5-10 years of living there, to stop private companies just coming and buy monopolies.

    3)Tax bankers bonuses, and highly regulate bank dealings
    A free market really doesnt free the people. It just fills a miniscule %'s wallets. By taxing their bonuses, it will cause banks to pay a decent set wage instead of propping up wages with bonuses which encourage high risk gamblings on markets. It will also get back tax payers money.

    4)Repeal anti trade union legislation
    Workers have very few rights in this country, and as we have seen with the failed BA strike at christmas and the rail strike which was postponed, the companies have an upper hand to the unions, which needs to be stopped.

    5)Freeze University fees
    All parties are talking about increasing the fees, which is wholly unfair, considering students fail to have the economic might to have had anything to do with the recession yet are going to pay for it in the future. Id much rather see a stop to the wars in afgahnistan and a decrease in defence spending to cover it. Public services such as Education and health shouldnt be decreased when they are such a nessecity.




    Ok, there it is. Let the flaming begin.....
     
  18. phk

    phk New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Stevenage (GB)

    BEAUTIFUL.

    Seriously though, I am in total agreeance with this. I don't see how anybody can be opposed to taxing the hell out of rich people, as after all, they are rich!
     
  19. Jason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,932
    Likes Received:
    641
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    There is one big problem with the idea of taxing the hell out of rich people: you can't do it. It is impossible.

    If you are going to tax 100% of income above £100,000 (or even 90% or 80%) then no one is going to take this money as income. They might take it as perquisite earnings (free car, house, plane, lunch). They might take it in stocks and shares. They might earn it abroad. They might employ their spouse, child, granny. They might defer the earning. They might go and live abroad. If all else fails they will pay their accountants to find loopholes. Or they might just put their feet up and stop working.

    Saying you will tax the rich is like saying you want it to be summer all year. It is impossible. No one has ever come up with a way of taxing the rich.

    You can (ie have the ability to) tax the poor and the middle classes. You can tax profits (which basically reduces investment and jobs). You can tax spending (eg VAT) - which hits everyone, but the poor hardest.

    Tax hurts the poorest most. The redistributive mantra sounds so caring and sharing and cuddly, but is the cruelest possible policy in that it doesn't work. The way to help the poorest is to get all taxes down. The biggest single help that can be given is in employment, so one tax that should come down is corporation tax (hard to make that sound like a vote winner, but that is what really helps the poorest). Income tax and NI need to come down. Reducing VAT helps but is not top priority. In the present mess it would be better to put VAT up than most other taxes.

    ****

    I don't agree on freezing university fees either. I think they should be set at zero, as they were in the good old days of Thatcher and Major. And I think we should pay students grants which are adequate to live on, as under Thatcher and Major. I think this is a social policy essential. The US makes a private system work because it has grown up with it - in the UK paid for HE just leads to debt and misery. The sums needed for this are large, but we could find a way. How about a sell off to the highest bidder of the BA landing slots at Heathrow and Gatwick? This subsidy to BA is very hard to justify now BA is no-longer state owned. It would presumably boost the prosperity (and jobs) of many airlines that want these slots.
     
  20. D_Andreas Sukov

    D_Andreas Sukov Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,933
    Likes Received:
    3
    The good ole days of Thatcher and Major? You cant be serious? I may be young, but from all ive been told and read about POolitics then, it was terrible. As for Major, he did very little to qualify it being good.


    The argument for fees, was to open up University places for people who otherwise wouldnt go. Im not doing a joke degree, but without fees, i most likely wouldnt be going as i wouldnt get into Unis who were only taking the very top, mostly orvately educated, students.


    As for tax, there is ways. It will take an awesome bit of legislation, but what you are advocating is bowing down to big business....I wont do that, and you shouldnt either.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted