General election results 2015

[Nick Armstrong]

(I'm trying out one of them there rhetorical questions that we go in for in here)

:biggrin:

Whatever next?!?

:anotherbiggrin:

[Beef Oven!]

:biggrin:

Whatever next?!?

:anotherbiggrin:

It seems to have worked!

[ahinton]

I almost posted something in contradiction to your point, but is it not better to just let you boys and girls reinforce one another's world view?

Not in my view; it would be better to post your contradiction and then boys and girls who happen to pop in here (if any), in addition to the members already here, can assess its merits or otherwise for themselves should they so choose; at least you might then have said what you mean in such contradiction...

(and I'm trying out one of them there rhetorical questions that we go in for in here, so don't worry about answering).

Trying doesn't always result in success, any more than providing the answer above caused me to "worry about" doing so.

[ahinton]

It seems to have worked!

What does, how and for whom?

[P. G. Tipps]

Didn't some business leader say that business needed more 'flexibility?'

And when pressed, didn't he have to agree that what that really meant was greater ease in firing people?

Yes.

The other equally important bit that you missed out is that it also makes it easier to hire people.

The alternative is less firing and hiring making for poor competitiveness and productivity and ultimately almost certain economic collapse. That's the real post-socialist global business world that exists today whether we like it or not (and I don't particularly), so take your pick. Even Cuba has finally realised that, and is continuing to loosen the economic shackles.

As for Election Result itself I'm now relieved we have a Government which can govern, whether it turns out to be wisely or not. The Coalition, essential in 2010, had run its course and, by the end, had over-served its purpose. To borrow an old celebrated phrase about available alternatives, first-past-the-post is the worst form of electoral system in the world, apart from all the others, imvho.

Okay, Cameron's a slick chancer all right whose sole political ethos seems to be 'bend with the prevailing wind', but his enthusiasm, work-rate and motivating techniques are undeniable.

Congratulations to him on achieving an unlikely victory against all the odds.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes.

The other equally important bit that you missed out is that it also makes it easier to hire people.

The other equally important point that you missed out is, on terms more favourable to the employer than to the employee.

The alternative is less firing and hiring making for poor competitiveness and productivity and ultimately almost certain economic collapse. That's the real post-socialist global business world that exists today whether we like it or not (and I don't particularly), so take your pick. Even Cuba has finally realised that, and is continuing to loosen the economic shackles.

It depends how far Raoul goes, and whether he might be listening to Papa Fidel, insofar as Papa Fidel is still capable of giving an opinion.

As for Election Result itself I'm now relieved we have a Government which can govern, whether it turns out to be wisely or not. The Coalition, essential in 2010, had run its course and, by the end, had over-served its purpose. To borrow an old celebrated phrase about available alternatives, first-past-the-post is the worst form of electoral system in the world, apart from all the others, imvho.

...having weighed up all the possible alternatives, one assumes?

Okay, Cameron's a slick chancer all right who's sole political ethos seems to be 'bend with the prevailing wind', but his enthusiasm, work-rate and motivating techniques are undeniable.

So undeniably were Joseph Stalin's.

[P. G. Tipps]

So undeniably were Joseph Stalins.

I'm no Cameron fan. Two huge and quite unnecessary (and maybe even ruinous) referenda and all solely for anticipated political gain.

However, to associate him with one of the most prolific political serial-killers in history is utterly ridiculous.

[Serial_Apologist]

I'm no Cameron fan. Two huge and quite unnecessary (and maybe even ruinous) referenda and all solely for anticipated political gain.

However, to associate him with one of the most prolific political serial-killers in history is utterly ridiculous.

But to deprive words such as enthusiasm, work-rate and motivating techniques of value judgement in the way that you did was inviting comment.

[P. G. Tipps]

But to deprive words such as enthusiasm, work-rate and motivating techniques of value judgement in the way that you did was inviting comment.

Indeed ... but there is comment and comment, S_A ... :winkeye:

[Serial_Apologist]

Indeed ... but there is comment and comment, S_A ... :winkeye:

:shuteyes:

[ahinton]

As for Election Result itself I'm now relieved we have a Government which can govern, whether it turns out to be wisely or not. The Coalition, essential in 2010, had run its course and, by the end, had over-served its purpose. To borrow an old celebrated phrase about available alternatives, first-past-the-post is the worst form of electoral system in the world, apart from all the others, imvho.

What? - with so tiny a majority and a mere 11,334,920 votes out of 30,691,680 when the other six main parties (never mind the also-rans) combined polled 18,423,037 and their now blabbing about wanting to consier abolishing the UK Human Rights Act 1998 against which a 38 degrees petition has, in just over a week, attracted some 254,900 signatories, which is the equivalent of almost 2.5% of those who voted Conservative? I doubt that it will be able to govern any better, or even as "well", as the previous coalition!

[ahinton]

I'm no Cameron fan. Two huge and quite unnecessary (and maybe even ruinous) referenda and all solely for anticipated political gain.

And at least one more to come during the term of this Parliament!...

[P. G. Tipps]

What? - with so tiny a majority and a mere 11,334,920 votes out of 30,691,680 when the other six main parties (never mind the also-rans) combined polled 18,423,037 and their now blabbing about wanting to consier abolishing the UK Human Rights Act 1998 against which a 38 degrees petition has, in just over a week, attracted some 254,900 signatories, which is the equivalent of almost 2.5% of those who voted Conservative? I doubt that it will be able to govern any better, or even as "well", as the previous coalition!

I'm always intrigued by this combining all the losing opposing parties' votes and suggesting this somehow invalidates the victory of the party with the most seats/votes?

Surely it is the 'most popular' party that should govern and not a rag-bag, disparate coalition of the 'less and even least popular'?

Furthermore, 'petitions' don't matter. Votes and seats do.

Nevertheless, I do agree with you on the Human Rights issue however inconvenient these laws might be to some on occasion.

[MrGongGong]

I'm always intrigued by this combining all the losing opposing parties' votes and suggesting this somehow invalidates the victory of the party with the most seats/votes?

.

Why?

It means most people wanted something else
if you add those who didn't vote (and NOT voting is as much a statement as voting) then you will find that the supposed "support" is very fragile indeed

[ahinton]

I'm always intrigued by this combining all the losing opposing parties' votes and suggesting this somehow invalidates the victory of the party with the most seats/votes?

Then enjoy (as long as you might be able, should you so wish and insofar as you can) your sense of intrigue.

Surely it is the 'most popular' party that should govern and not a rag-bag, disparate coalition of the 'less and even least popular'?

Who should govern, whether and to what extent they might prove to be capable of governing and the rest must surely be dependent upon whether they have an overall majority or not - and, whilst there's no need for two-party coalition any longer (at least for the time being), the current government's situation is far from "victorious" in terms of the numbers of votes polled and the numbers of other parties that could well unseat this and that government proposal.

Furthermore, 'petitions' don't matter. Votes and seats do.

If petitions don't matter, why did the Tories set up an e-petition website? Of course votes and seats matter in any case but, whilst the Tories have increased their vote tally, the Labour party has increased its slightly more than has the Conservatives, despite the widespead interpretation of the results being a disaster for Labour. The main events of the election results in terms of votes polled have been a disaster for the LibDems and great successes for SNP and UKIP.

Nevertheless, I do agree with you on the Human Rights issue however inconvenient these laws might be to some on occasion.

Well, thank God for that - but whose idea is the possible abolition of UK HA? Yes, right in one - it's that of the party that's polled just enough votes and gained just enough seats to consider itself to be in some kind of "majority government" (which statistics demonstrate to be far from the case)...