Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Can someone please explain the American Voting System to me?

Author
Message
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 08:42
The title says it all really. I was overlooking the *actual* votes that bush won by; and he didn't actually win if you go by actual votes (and this is all still not deeming those 'special' votes where people whine about someone not being allowed to vote).

It's just what gets me, is Bush or Kerry would win a state often by a few percent, in the majority of states it wsa by 1-2%; which depending on the amount of people living there depending on the actual votes taken.

Now here is what baffles me. Bush won Florida by 6%, around 3million people; impressive and all that it is, how exactly does 6% # that number it was assigned.

Each county seems to have a number assigned to it. The confusing part isn't that it has some generalised number assigned; I don't understand what the hell that number actually means, as the number for Florida seems to be the highest in the country; but it doesn't have the highest population area. Infact the highest population areas are where Kerry won quite substancially in.

I also don't get how if someone won by even say 1 vote, that would mean they won the entire 'seats' as it were that entire states has as a whole.
Been over the BBC site for this a few times, and each time; I calculate that in ACTUAL votes, Kerry has 4million more than Bush. But because each state is given a direct number, Bush as won because he has more of the State Votes.

i'm totally confused about how the hell this so-call democracy works; cause from where I'm sitting the UK system is far more democratic about voting for a new party to lead the country.

Also I feel sorry for those who wanted Nader, unfortunately he just didn't get the covered he needed; but if your one of the 6million who voted for him then atleast you can be proud you voted for someone who was right for the job not a lesser of evils.

-/ /-

Another thing which gets me if during the news coverage of the events over the past 2 days; alot of americans seemed to vote Bush because they don't feel they should change leadership during a time of war.

I would like anyone who feels that way to take the time to explain to me what a WAR actually is please. Obviously my oxford definition is wrong, because I'd of seen Afgahnistan & Iraq as conflicts. Further more the 'War on Terrorism' is a spin on the use of words; really it's an American Crusade designed for political support, and state supported revenge.

I mean for gods sake, the whole Afgahnistan inccident was caused by the cold war; and Americans arming the locals to fight against the Russians. All in the name of posturing about 'who is the most powerful'. Although you can say 'well you have to clean up your own, messes' the whole reason for the terrorist attacks was because your government doesn't know when to mind it's own damn business.

While the same can be said about the fact that the IRA had been terrorising the UK; there is a huge difference in what had gone to cause such rife between our nations.
The problems have calmed down to the point where I doubt most kids nowadays really know who the IRA is, let alone why they're a bad thing as far as the english public are conserned.

This said, the IRA after the Collin's treaty was signed; is the product of America sticking thier noses into a conflict it did not belong. I find it highly ironic that a government, which now heavily relies on the support of the British (English) Government; no more than 50 years ago was prepared to let us hang to dry in World War 2, and gave fiscal & weapons to a terrorist organisation who's only goal was to kill the English.
It seems even more hypocritical to have a Terrorism Crusade, after they have actively supported atleast 5 seperate terrorist groups over the years in order to manipulate the world for thier own gains.

The cold war was one of the most prodominant reasons why America, should *NOT* be given the rights of a super-power. The only conflict they ever went in alone on, they got thier asses whooped so badly that those who should've been war heros were damn'd by the public and scorned by the government that had force them to fight against an enemy just to keep them from siding with the Russians.

-/ /-

Alright well I know this is probably going to end as a flamebait post, but really there are alot of issues I find annoying right now.

Lets just hope the british public in the few months has more sense than to put Blair back in, or bring in Hague.
Conservatives did to our financial system exactly what Bush has done to the United States; that was back when I was born with that damn women Prime Minister. Labour have done nothing to truely resolve this by giving contracts for large projects which *could've* created jobs, in the UK.

while sure unemployeed is at an all around low, the problem here is alot more jobs (and benifits) are being given to assylm seekers from other nations.

this might sound cold, but although i understand someones home in Kasikstan was bombed and blown up; i really don't understand why the hell we have to take these people in, give them money to be here and also using the 'equal-oppurtunity' mandate, force employeers to hire someone who is not british in origin.

Blair has said 'well we have halved the number of assylm seekers in the UK over the past year' ... that's wonderful, but for the previous 6 you'd been letting so many in, that our total of seekers was 2x the TOTAL of europe.
I mean for gods sake, if none of the other countries want them; why the hell should we be humanitarian about it.
When you look at how much of a wreck our NHS is, or how are economy has been inflating quite substancially; with the economy almost hitting a depression in the UK, what this has mens is that OUR main trading economy has been hit and hit bloody hard!

I'm kinda surprised these words are comming from me, but 'thank god for the Euro'. if Ireland wasn't using the Euro, the economy would've been hit alot harder; as they seem to put together a large number of the goods we buy.

Really I think it is the turn of the Liberal Democrats to try and ruin the country. they have my vote in a few months, but likihood is people are stupid and our polls will mimic the US.


Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 09:10 Edited at: 4th Nov 2004 09:17
From the brief couple minutes I spent watching the election unfold, this is what I gathered:

The popular vote, which isn't always won by the winning candidate, is basically the number of votes by the regular citizens for either Bush or Kerry. However, each state has a number of college electoral votes that they must make for the citizens inside that state, I guess technically they don't have to vote the same way as the public but there would be a huge uproar if they didn't. Each state has a different number of electoral votes they give, obviously the main 3, which we hear so much about, are Florida (27), Ohio (20), and Pennsylvania (21). The first candidate to receive 270 electoral votes is the winner.

The twist is that there are the provisional votes that are not counted because people go in to vote even if they're not on the electoral role. These votes usually don't matter because the winning candidate wins by a large enough margin that they're irrelevant, however, in the case of this election (and last election it was Florida), Ohio was the deciding state, where Bush one by around 125,000 precinct votes - however, there were 200,000 uncounted provisional ballets that could technically win Kerry the presidency. It is for this reason that Bush isn't technically president until those votes are counted, despite the likelihood that Kerry would get a very large majority of those votes is incredibly low. Hence, Kerry must concede defeat before Bush will make his acceptance speech.

Oh, and although each state usually gives all their electoral votes to the candidate in accordance with the way the public in the state voted. I think the exception is Maine (or Hampshire) where they can split up their votes and give a couple to Kerry and maybe 1 to Bush, although in this election, they gave all of them to Kerry. Also, I similarly have absolutely no idea how they decide which state has how many electoral votes to give, I thought it must've been calculated by the population as well but apparently that is not so.

I think that's it... now would anyone like to explain the Australian electoral system?


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 09:23
Quote: "Also, I similarly have absolutely no idea how they decide which state has how many electoral votes to give, I thought it must've been calculated by the population as well but apparently that is not so."


ya that is the main issue i'm totally baffled about, heh
it sort of makes less sense even more the fact that whoever gains majority gains *all* of those electorals. :-|
always thought a democratic system ment, everyone gets a voice. so you would've thought it would be down to overall votes not a majorty per/state.


Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 09:38
Go here http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6327343/

Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 10:01
What the Fudge!?!

So you go off, vote for someone, who represents someone, but votes on your behalf, who in turn votes for the actual voter, so from 400million potencial voters; this is widdeled down to 270 *actual* voters!?

Now, it isn't just me... that system makes like little to no sense, right? :-|


Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 10:16 Edited at: 4th Nov 2004 10:16
It's a bit of an odd system. But there ya go.

Bush did win the popular vote also, I don't know what news you were watching but he was ahead in popular vote and electoral last I saw. In fact, more citizens voted for Bush this year than ever have for any president in history.


Here we go again!
TRANSGRESS AND I SHALT BAN YE! (Just kidding...)
Newbie Brogo
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jul 2003
Location: In a Pool of Cats
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 10:20
It's called the.. Electoral College, right this down, you'll be quized later...

Each state, has electoral things on them... So the poular vote in that state gets those electoral points.. Although Florida has 27 points, California has 55

Quote: "(from a website)
Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census).
"


For more info on the electoral college check this site out...
http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecmenu2.htm

Lets see if that solves your problem.

And all I have to say is... NADER RULES!!!
Nader should have one, I can see it now:
"Breaking News! bush and Kerry are neck and neck! It all lies on Ohio! The winner of Ohio is surely they president! Oh wait, what's this? Nader has won Ohio!!! Wait.. Wait.. This just in! The predictions for states have gone all wrong, and it turns out nader has actually won ALL THE STATES!!! This is an amazing time in U.S. history! Ralph Nader is the new president! That's President Nader to you!"

.......I like how I captured the excitment...
Check out the link in my sig too for a special treat!

Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 10:48
LOL yes our voting system is screwed up in more ways than that. But it has been that way for ages. It really does need to be fixed. I like the proposed method of just going by the popular vote and you have to get at least 40% of the popular vote to win.

DrakeX
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location:
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 11:01
"you have to get at least 40% of the popular vote to win"

and what's the fallback? a coalition presidency? i don't think that'd work out too well in a 2-party system.

"I calculate that in ACTUAL votes, Kerry has 4million more than Bush"

i'm not real sure where you're getting that number as virtually every site and news station i've seen says that bush has a margin of about 3.5 million votes in the popular vote over kerry.

the concept of electors needs to go. they're not bound by anything but tradition to vote for the candidate for who they are chosen. and in fact, it has happened in the past that electors have voted the other way, but IIRC never enough to change the election. it should be that electoral votes are just that - the vote goes straight to the house to be counted, none of this pointles elector business.

the other thing that needs to happen? proportional electoral votes. that is, where each candidate gets the same percentage of electoral votes of a state as he gets popular votes. in a state like california, this could make a big difference: 45% of the voters there voted for bush, which would mean 24 (or 25.. rounding) votes for bush and 31 (or 30) votes for kerry. each candidate would get a huge chunk of electoral votes from that one state.

the reason we don't do everything by popular vote is simply because there are too many votes to count accurately (and without dissent.. could you imagine florida2000gate in every single election?). just.. mass confusion.

"when it's done" means "we have no idea, we forgot to do that; we were hoping you would all forget we promised <insert exotic promise here>"
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 11:08
We need united city-centric nonpartisan congressional ward representitive by majority voting, really.


Here we go again!
TRANSGRESS AND I SHALT BAN YE! (Just kidding...)
Mattman
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jun 2003
Location: East Lansing
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 11:30
It's not an odd system, its an OLD system. Back in the 1800's when many people didn't really know the presidents and were not educated enough to make a valid vote, they would have the Electoral College which made sense. Now in the age of media and education it has become obselete.

Song of the whenever i feel like updating it....
Where dead bullies go, by Sugarplastic
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 11:35
Quote: "Now in the age of media and education it has become obselete.
"


Fun factoid... US education now is pretty much the worst the civilized world has ever seen . Greek and Roman kids would be deeply ashamed of us. Just a tidbit


Here we go again!
TRANSGRESS AND I SHALT BAN YE! (Just kidding...)
DrakeX
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location:
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 11:45
not meaning to drag the thread off topic, but.. oh, what the hell

i agree with you mouse, i honestly don't see why the kid in the b-level (lowest of the low) class who would rather be doing something else gets as much money thrown at him as i do, when he could be at a trade school learning something useful, and i could be at a highschool with technology programs at a higher degree than "advanced spreadsheet applications."

i really think europe has got school right. and i'm not real sure why we still have a school year based on kids helping their parents on the farm...

"when it's done" means "we have no idea, we forgot to do that; we were hoping you would all forget we promised <insert exotic promise here>"
Sparda
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jan 2004
Location: Pacifica
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 12:47
Actually, Bush did win the popular vote. During the age of rebuplicanism (1780s) the electoral college was designed to give the commoners a voice in government but also to protect against their assumed stupidity. The electoral college also protects states with smaller populations. For example: a vote in Montana counts more than a vote in California. Confusing, huh?


Indian Homie G
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jan 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 12:57
I wrote a speech thats says we should abolish the Electoral College.

AMD Athlon XP 3000+, S3 Deltachrome s8, 512 PC3200 RAM, 160 GB HD
Mr Underhill
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Apr 2003
Location: The Forgotten Worlds...
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 13:47
That's cool. My friend wrote an article about why we should abolish the electoral college for his website.

http://www.blueflamepolitix.org/articles/ElectoralCollege.htm

I agree completely.

Quote: "A kilobyte is 1024 bytes, not 1028.
I mean.... not.. that i.... new that already.... i figured... maybe... CRUD! IM A NERD! -Ion Stream"
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 15:26
Raven, don't even TRY to act like you weren't born and raised in the U.S.





Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Dazzag
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Cyprus
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 16:06
Quote: "400million potencial voters"
Sure about that? Thought the US had under 300million population, with obviously much less than that eligible to vote.

Cheers

I am 99% probably lying in bed right now... so don't blame me for crappy typing
Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 16:52
That just seems to negate voting, no wonder they're always trying to get people to simply vote! (regardless of who for). I don't vote, it's not that I have no political opinions, I just don't see the point in wasting time voting when regardless of which party gets in, they end up doing the same thing.

It's when you work all month, then get your wage slip - then check out all the cool stuff your paying for - like paying national insurance, for OAP's pensions, even though I won't get a state pension when I retire - hmmmm, maybe that money would be better off staying with me? - or in my pension plan?. Along with tax, I'm paying out about 30% of my salary every month.

Scotland is burnt out, our own government, which we fought for over the last umpteen decades, is a joke. People are emigrating in droves, and if it wasn't for my family, I'd be off somewhere as well. Thing is it's not the country, it's the government - and when it gets to that stage, you long for the days when a revolution would clean up all the mess.

Frankly, the only way to get back at the government without ending up in jail, is to refuse credit cards and loans - Labour is trying to control us through our bank balances by punishing us depending on our spending. Like the Bank of England justify an interest rate hike for mortgages by saying that it'll help curb credit card debt (well if you don't have the money you can't really spend it!). Nice one, glad we've got you accountant henchman guys to keep us under control, would'nt like to think we had a choice on what to spend our money on or anything like that.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 20:55
@VanB

You've correctly identified the problem with our great country. Its our Labour government.

The solution is obvious. At the general election next year vote Conservative. Lets all kick out the Labour government and return what is statistically and historically Britain's most effective political party.

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 21:44
Quote: "and when it gets to that stage, you long for the days when a revolution would clean up all the mess."

Absolutely correct, it probably would clean up all the mess wouldn't it... ....but its probably not gonna happen.

AKA teh great Pet Rat.
Peace sells...but who's buying??
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 21:44
Quote: "Fun factoid... US education now is pretty much the worst the civilized world has ever seen . Greek and Roman kids would be deeply ashamed of us. Just a tidbit "


Agreed. If you really want to learn something go to Japan or China. I love both of those school systems. From my friends there telling me and what I have read on them.

Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 21:54
:: cough :: margret thature :: cough ::

Not to be funny, but Conservatives stabbed this country in the back, in the 80s... and Labour rather than trying to take the blade out decided they'll try and cover everything with enough bandaged so you can't see the knife.

Although really this is more all the work of one capitalist woman, taking an economy that was balanced and throwing it into the same chaos that Bush has done with Americas.

Can anyone tell me what exactly my taxes ARE paying for?
my water rates have risen steeply, council tax has risen steeply, i'm paying something like 25% of my pay-cheque each month, because of inflation rent has gone up, waiting times in my local hospital is between 2-3hrs (IN A&E FGS!), there doesn't appear to be more police to prevent crimes (violence in my old area was up sooo much that many of the local police are now offering rewards for people who report them!), oh yeah and cut-backs in alot of companies because of cash flow problems seems to mean alot of people have been made redundant.

So yeah everything is totally peachy right now isn't it. I honestly can't figure out where the hell all of my money could possibly be going!

We need a cabinate who are going to actually do something, rather than promise heaven and earth then deliver nothing!


Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:02
Same here. They get 30% of mine. Though at the first of the year they do give back around 9%. It seems to be all going to help everyone outside of this country. Feed these people, feed those people, free these people, and oh yeah just let the terrorist who organised 9/11 to roam free. I do not understand where it is going as well. I don't know how many working people there are paying taxes in the US but if they get around $10000 from me ... If there is 100,000 other people paying in that much that would be $1,000,000,000. So how many people are paying taxes in the US I wonder.

Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:05
Quote: "and he didn't actually win if you go by actual votes "

sorry didn't read this entire thread but Bush has 3,581,574 more votes the kerry...(as of this morning)

"We make the worst games in the universe."

Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:05
Heh, you want a bigger puzzle. Not only is the US one of the largest Tax turnover countries; but Bush has managed to actually overspend 2Trillion.

I mean for crying out loud, you have a surplus of around 38Trillion a year, how the hell can he spend it all and make a dephicit?!

all i can think of is that simpsons episode,

"They let me sign things with a stamp Marge! A STAMP!"


Dung Beetle
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2004
Location:
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:07
I don't have time at the moment to read the entire topic, but I glanced through it and skimmed Mr Underhill's friend's article. At least one misconception that I've seen repeatedly here is that the United States is a Democracy. It is a Republic.
Damokles
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th May 2003
Location: Belgium
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:07
Quote: "Agreed. If you really want to learn something go to Japan or China. I love both of those school systems. From my friends there telling me and what I have read on them."


:: Cough :: I surely don't think Japan is a good example. According to international studies Finland would be best

- Mind the gap -
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:08 Edited at: 4th Nov 2004 22:10
Quote: "sorry didn't read this entire thread but Bush has 3,581,574 more votes the kerry...(as of this morning)"


yeah i've seen CNN, Yahoo!, BBC, and MSN.
they're posted figures are actually oddly all different, and the BBC has a demographic chart showing the votes in each individual region.

could probably tally it all up again, but when i did it just before the post it was just over 4million votes went to Kerry; because of the difference of votes between California and Florida.
Everywhere else was only a few hundred thousand differnce, but those two were the major millions.

Quote: "I don't have time at the moment to read the entire topic, but I glanced through it and skimmed Mr Underhill's friend's article. At least one misconception that I've seen repeatedly here is that the United States is a Democracy. It is a Republic. "


Democratic System, your only being lead by a Republic government. There is a HUGE difference; as the Irish will no doubt be able to tell you


Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:15
It's a Democratic Republic

"We make the worst games in the universe."

Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:23
Quote: ""They let me sign things with a stamp Marge! A STAMP!""


LOL! - I loved that episode, back when the Simpsons were at their funniest.

I'm glad I'm not the only one wondering where his taxes go, personally I've never had a tax rebate, and was only unemployed for 6 months after college, other than that I've had naff all back from the government in the last 10-odd years. I think they should tell me to keep my tax money for the rest of the year, I've paid plenty. I did'nt think I'd ever feel resentment for the unemployed, but I do a bit - I have a lot of unemployed friends, and they know better than to complain about being busy, or tired, or being woken up at 1pm to go to the pub. How can some people do that? - How is it so easy for them to achieve nothing and not care about it?. Note that I'm not talking about the unemployed as a whole, I'm talking about a certain group of people who live to avoid work and resent the hassle involved in signing on every 2 weeks. I have nothing but respect for those who want to work, but can't for whatever reason.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Mr Underhill
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Apr 2003
Location: The Forgotten Worlds...
Posted: 4th Nov 2004 22:23 Edited at: 4th Nov 2004 22:25
Federal Republic, more accurately.
[EDIT ] lol, Van B posted just before I did. This is in response to Peter's post.

Quote: "A kilobyte is 1024 bytes, not 1028.
I mean.... not.. that i.... new that already.... i figured... maybe... CRUD! IM A NERD! -Ion Stream"
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:06
Quote: "
Not to be funny, but Conservatives stabbed this country in the back, in the 80s... and Labour rather than trying to take the blade out decided they'll try and cover everything with enough bandaged so you can't see the knife.

Although really this is more all the work of one capitalist woman, taking an economy that was balanced and throwing it into the same chaos that Bush has done with Americas.
"


Thanks for that typically factually inaccurate insight, Raven.

To recap, Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 after a Labour government which produced the Winter of Discontent. What did that Labour Government do and what was the Winter of Discontent? Allow me to summarise:

1. practically everyone was forbidden by law from working more than a 3 day week. This even included fundamental public services such as the police force, hospitals, fire services, etc.

2. as one delightful example of this, bodies were not being buried in Lancashire. Anybody who wants to do a google search can find plenty of pictures of bodies decomposing for up to two weeks before being interred;

3. as a further delightful example, dustbins were not emptied sometimes for months on end. Feel free to reflect on what it is like to live in a place and you can't get rid of all your rubbish for weeks and weeks;

4. as a yet further wondrous example, large parts of the country only received intermittent power. All the power unions went on strike on a regular basis and this caused whole power stations to have to shut down;

5. Britain had to beg for a loan from the IMF, a body we had originally assisted in creating, principally to help 2nd and 3rd world powers;

6. unemployment above 1,600,000 - still the largest recorded % of the eligible to work population ever in British history;

7. we were known as "the sick man of Europe";

The result was that in 1979, when the Conservative party was finally elected, Britain had sunk from being one of the world's leading economies to being ranked in the low 30s. Britain was on its knees and, as we now know thanks to leaks, the situation was so bad the military was clandestinely considering imposing martial law.

Contrast the state of the country when Thatcher left power in 1991. We were once again one of the then G7 (now G8). We had the second strongest economy in Europe again. Our people were back at work and the future looked bright.

Raven, a word to the wise. Your views are important but if you want them to be carefully and respectfully considered its important only to post material you can factually support. Otherwise, your credibility will be materially adversely affected and your views will be ignored.

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:18
Nice post Philip ! I didn't know that... very interesting.


Here we go again!
TRANSGRESS AND I SHALT BAN YE! (Just kidding...)
Zero Blitzt
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2004
Location: Different Stages
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:27
Quote: "Raven, a word to the wise. Your views are important but if you want them to be carefully and respectfully considered its important only to post material you can factually support. Otherwise, your credibility will be materially adversely affected and your views will be ignored."


@Raven:
You sir, have been served. Would you like a complimentary glass of water?


Come to #coding. We promise we wont kick you!
DISCLAIMER: Promises may not actually be upheld.
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:33
I was not intending to be rude to Raven. I was just making a basic debating point: the moment you overstretch the boundaries of fact and sense, you lose your credibility and you lose the argument.

In my career I've seen this happen many times. Its a lesson I've learnt the hard way myself.

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:41 Edited at: 5th Nov 2004 08:42
Quote: "
Raven, a word to the wise. Your views are important but if you want them to be carefully and respectfully considered its important only to post material you can factually support. Otherwise, your credibility will be materially adversely affected and your views will be ignored."


If Raven cares to post a factually supported response I will personally eat Philip's hat and clip-on tie.


BlueGUI:Windows UI Plugin - All the power of the windows interface in your DBPro games.
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 5th Nov 2004 08:42
After reading this, I just rememberes why I HATE politics!! Lol..

One thing I did like was how SOOOOO many people in the UK said "no we dont want to go to war".. and good old Tony said "screw you we are!!".

I also agree with the point about wondering where taxes are going.. I recently graduated and am DESPERATELY seeking work as a software programmer. As a graduate I am faced with over £12K of debt to pay off before I even have a mortgage and a job! I do find it interesting how student no longer get a grant yet taxes stay the same.. Lol.

Form a student point of view - I hate the idea that the education is so expensive (more so for foreign people coming to th UK, I had a chinese friend who was paying over £10K a year for tuition alone!). I agree that it maybe shouldn't be FREE as such, but I do think that those that drop out the degree should pay back EVERY penny it cost the tax payer as the theory is those with a degree get higher pay and therefore pay more taxes and over the period of their life pay it back to society.

Oh well.. Me tired after all this reading. Funny how reading about politics sends u to sleep

Pricey
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Feb 2003
Location:
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 00:22
Raven- That is one HELL of a post

Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 01:37
Unfortunately there is a flip-side to the coin philip.
While everything you've said is true, the big picture isn't being explained is it?

It is like someone in 10years saying that the Coalition prevented Saddam's Regime from completing research and manufacture of WMD, and that they went into the country to remove him from power to this end.
While that statement is true, your forgetting the background information which is just as important; if not more so.

I'll talk to my step-dad about the Winter, because I wasn't alive then (and would've been too young anyways). I'm not saying that Conservative are necessarily evil; or that the Thature admin did a bad job... but it is the way the job was completed which is actually what I have a problem with.

It's like building a house, but rather than putting down a firm 2ft foundation like your suppose to; filling it in layers so you can save yourself alot of money.

And also you know what I've said wasn't wrong, she did rip apart alot of what was working in this country for a more capitalist approach. Both Labour and Conservative are bad parties with a very poor history in my opinion... Hense why I feel that the Democrates need to be given a chance to prove themselves.

[post.edit]
justed talked to john before i said anything to make sure and i was remembering correctly.

conservative were in when the winter struck as it was caused by the Miners Strike. as the national grid was in it's infancy reliant very heavily on coal mines, these strikes ment that there was only a limited amount of power. as such in an effort to conserve the power the 3day weeks were implimented; this span from business' to schools. any form of education/entertainment which required electricity became banned with the exception of television and radio, which were cut down to 10am-10pm days.
this didn't matter as much because your electricity would be cut off from 10pm until 7am anyways, and in random areas this was cut even further back. You would be told via radio/tv hense why they were still active.

while the labour government didn't exactly rectify the situation correctly, they were neither the initial cause; nor the government which compounded the problem.


Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 01:52
I vaguely remember the strike, I was really young though, all I can remember from that time is everyone being dirt-poor, like 'How the hell are we gonna eat?' poor. I also remember all the horror stories from miners and frankly coal mining was a horrible and deadly way to make a living back then. One of the local mines here was shut after a shaft fire killed about a dozen miners, they're still down there, minings safety record is practically medieval.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 02:03
Quote: "@VanB
You've correctly identified the problem with our great country. Its our Labour government."

Then again, if it were for the Tories, Scotland wouldn't even have its own parliament.

As for UK's current economical situation, compared to other European nations (esp. the G8 members Germany, France and Italy) it is very healthy. Same goes for the emplyoment rate.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
The ultimative 2D Game Language.
Version 1.00 available now!
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 02:32
Quote: "As for UK's current economical situation, compared to other European nations (esp. the G8 members Germany, France and Italy) it is very healthy. Same goes for the emplyoment rate."


100,000 people in a city
10% of them are jobless
5,000 new babies are born

unemployment drops to 9%, has unemployment actually fallen?
i know it's a lame example, but it is how a government will spin the truth to show that they're helping employ people.

sorry, but over the last 3months i've heard of 3 car factories closing loosing a combined total of 800,000 jobs. with increase inflation this means that it costs even more right now to purchase materials for business' ... this government is trying to stop the public spending too much but hurting the business in the process.

sure our tax surplus is very nice and our FTSE index is quite nice and high. i would be more surprised at this if it wasn't that we happen to have 3x more taxes than any other country in europe, and our best business' here own the railways, oil, and telecommunications (our neccessities).

government spin is a wonderful thing isn't it


Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 02:38
A good example of Labour spin - they take all these unemployed teenagers and put them on training courses, that are really just your benefit+£20 for expenses. Anyone able bodied and unemployed ends up on one eventually.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 02:50
Well, the ILO (International Labour Organization) defined unemployment rate in August was 4.7% for the UK, 9.8% for Germany and 9.4% for France.

Quote: "The ILO definition of unemployment covers people who are: out of work, want a job, have actively sought work in the previous four weeks and are available to start work within the next fortnight; or out of work and have accepted a job that they are waiting to start in the next fortnight."


Play Nice! Play Basic!
The ultimative 2D Game Language.
Version 1.00 available now!
Chris K
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 03:02
From Raven's first post -

Quote: "to put Blair back in, or bring in Hague. "


Hague? HAGUE?!

What? He isn't even the Tory leader. Or even the last Tory leader. What's more he was a drivelling puny wimp.

@ Philip

All that stuff is true but remember that's old Labour. New Labour is different and are definately the party to lead Britain.

To be honest, there is no way in hell Labour aren't going to be re elected. I would bet more on my eyeballs exploding.
Chris K
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 03:15 Edited at: 6th Nov 2004 03:16
Quote: "3 car factories closing loosing a combined total of 800,000 jobs"




Did you shove a few zeros on that?

I can't think of many car factories that would employ over a quarter of a million people.

Quote: " i would be more surprised at this if it wasn't that we happen to have 3x more taxes than any other country in europe"


What?!

European taxes are way bigger than ours.
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 03:18 Edited at: 6th Nov 2004 03:22
Quote: "I can't think of many car factories that would employ over a quarter of a million people."


Indeed.


Quote: "European taxes are way bigger than ours."

I wouldn't subscribe that.


Quote: " that we happen to have 3x more taxes than any other country in europe""

Neither that, though.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
The ultimative 2D Game Language.
Version 1.00 available now!
Chris K
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 03:27
Just did some research, taxes are pretty much the same. (1 or 2% variation)
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 6th Nov 2004 03:30
Yup. I've got some "experience" with that.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
The ultimative 2D Game Language.
Version 1.00 available now!

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-23 02:23:22
Your offset time is: 2024-09-23 02:23:22