UK Politics

[sun-star]

I don't think it will win them any votes (at least, not any votes they don't already have). It just shows they don't have any new ideas, and are only capable of thinking "we're Tories - we want lower taxes!"

When I studied Politics we were repeatedly told that in opinion polls people say they want higher taxes because it makes them feel virtuous, but that they don't really want them and any party which doesn't promise low taxes is on to a loser. But I do wonder - maybe people say they want higher taxes because they actually do want higher taxes... as long as they can see improvements for their money. I know I'd pay higher taxes (not that I pay taxes, but whatever) for better public services if I could be sure that was what I was going to get. Anyone else?

[Janny]

I was more taken by the way BBC portrayed today's events. Headline: Torys' plans. 15 minutes later: The Lib Dems have declared today that they are the real opposition.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

my mum watched a bit by charles kennedy earlier, and it has finally pushed her into saying she will vote for lib dems, at last!

i have been trying to persuade her for god knows how long

now, just to convince the rest of the uk

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by sun-star

When I studied Politics we were repeatedly told that in opinion polls people say they want higher taxes because it makes them feel virtuous, but that they don't really want them and any party which doesn't promise low taxes is on to a loser. But I do wonder - maybe people say they want higher taxes because they actually do want higher taxes... as long as they can see improvements for their money. I know I'd pay higher taxes (not that I pay taxes, but whatever) for better public services if I could be sure that was what I was going to get. Anyone else?

This was probably true 10-15 years ago, but I suspect there has been a sea-change in public opinion. I think enough people could see the damage that had been done to public services that now their first question when someone promises tax cuts is "where from"?

IMO, public services are better now than they were 10 years ago. Personally, I'd pay more tax and have free tertiary education for all who can benefit from it (like I, and Tony Blair, benefited from).

[Janny]

How very Shakespearian of you.

I would certainly agree with the notion of free tertiary education; I strongly disagree with the idea that x % of the country should go to university. However, this would require a cross in the (sorry, Chry) box of the Lib Dems.

Sunny - I agree with you're questioning. It sounds a very politics department analysis. How precisely do those wanting higher taxes raise their hand?

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

eh, do you mean you would vote for lib dems?
well, then why sorry?
we are in agreement!

[Janny]

No... I'm afraid I was saying that it was unfortunate that we agreed on this issue... since a vote in the old yellow box wasn't gonna happen. But on the plus side, I'm seventeen and won't be able to not vote Lib Dem for another year.

[sun-star]

Now here's a good policy:

from www.bbc.co.uk

Make history compulsory - Tories

Young people in Britain know so little about history that it is an "outright scandal", the Conservatives say.

Shadow education secretary Tim Collins wants history to be made compulsory for children up to the age of 16 - they can currently drop the subject at 14.

Mr Collins told the conference of Catholic head teachers that Iceland was the only other developed country to allow children to drop history at 14.

There has been concern that knowledge of history among children is patchy.

The historian Simon Schama has complained of history in secondary schools being limited to "Hitler and the Henrys, with nothing in between".

This has been my favourite policy idea for ages, I'm very glad someone's finally brought it up.

[Janny]

I read about a comunist policy that rather tickled my fancy.

They would take a cart around town centres at around two in the morning. If someone was incapable of maintaining... erm... vertical-ness, they were chucked on the cart and taken to a 'de-drunking' station, where they had their stomach pumped. At sunrise, they were sent on their merry way.

Oh, letters to the Telegraph...

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Now here's a good policy:



This has been my favourite policy idea for ages, I'm very glad someone's finally brought it up.

i dont agree with this, i did history at gcse, and am currently doing it at a-level. if i was forced to do it at gcse, i probably wouldnt do it at a-level

some people are more suited to vocational subjects, or artistic subjects, than they are to academic subjects

and as for Schama - my history was not hitler and the henrys!
1st year - 1685-1750 british history
2nd year - 1750-1900 british history
gcse - weimar germany, the rise of european dictatorships, the cold war

[The Gaffer]

A quickie: my mate, a history lecturer, has to tell his (university) students who Margaret Thatcher was :eek

Don't know if making it compulsory is the answer: better to teach it better up to age 14!

What about indefinite house arrest without trial? What do folk think of that idea?

[Nurvingiel]

I know who Margaret Thatcher was and I'm not even British! Probably most Brits do know though. All I know is she was PM during the conflict with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.

A quick Google properly names this as the Falkland war. Heh. I was going to say she was the second to last PM, but I left out John Major. Now I'm confused. Anyone care to give me a recent history timeline?

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I was going to say she was the second to last PM, but I left out John Major. Now I'm confused. Anyone care to give me a recent history timeline?

You're right, she was the second to last PM:

1979-90: Thatcher
1990-97: Major
1997-now: Blair

The Falklands war was in 1982.

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

i dont agree with this, i did history at gcse, and am currently doing it at a-level. if i was forced to do it at gcse, i probably wouldnt do it at a-level

some people are more suited to vocational subjects, or artistic subjects, than they are to academic subjects

The answer to your first point is to teach history better. As for vocational/academic - English, Maths and Science are compulsory up to 16 (along with stuff like Citizenship and PE). I wasn't suited to Maths or Science (let alone PE!) but I'm sure it was right that I be taught those things because everyone should know something about them. I think history's the same.

Your history syllabus sounds much more interesting than mine! We did Hitler and the Henrys, but without the Henrys

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I know who Margaret Thatcher was and I'm not even British! Probably most Brits do know though. All I know is she was PM during the conflict with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.

A quick Google properly names this as the Falkland war. Heh. I was going to say she was the second to last PM, but I left out John Major. Now I'm confused. Anyone care to give me a recent history timeline?

she was also a complete fascist, and shouls have been stopped before ever coming to power, evil right-wing evil prize cow.

[Janny]

May it be noted that sun-star has A* grade GCSE maths and double award science.

What confuses me somewhat about this whole detention thing is the fickle nature of the press. It's terrible and evil and American for these people to kept in American custody, but when they get home the first thing Johnny Humphries of the Today programme asks is why are these maniacs being let out at all.

(So I paraphrase a little... what of it? )

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Janny

I read about a comunist policy that rather tickled my fancy.

They would take a cart around town centres at around two in the morning. If someone was incapable of maintaining... erm... vertical-ness, they were chucked on the cart and taken to a 'de-drunking' station, where they had their stomach pumped. At sunrise, they were sent on their merry way.

Reminds me of the gardeners with wheelbarrows after Bilbo's party ...

[Nurvingiel]

From the geography thread...

Is Ken Livingstone (mayor of London) the completely awesome genius who suggested the 5 pound tax to bring your car into the city centre (if you don't live there)? I think that's how the program works.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

From the geography thread...

Is Ken Livingstone (mayor of London) the completely awesome genius who suggested the 5 pound tax to bring your car into the city centre (if you don't live there)? I think that's how the program works.

I actually think it's a stupid idea. People will eventually just get used to the cost and the number of drivers will again go up. Look at NY - to get into the city from NJ it costs at least $7 (I think the George Washington Bridge is now $8 or $9) to go through the tunnels or bridges - doesn't deter anyone from going there because people get used to paying. NY was looking at incorporating the same idea for them - but what's the difference between paying a large toll or paying an entrance fee. Both require payment - but are just declared to be for different things. The only way to get into Manhattan with a car is by bridge or tunnel and in order to do that you have to pay a large toll. I personally take the train because the train station is close to where I live and I see no reason to drive into Manhattan.

[Draken]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

From the geography thread...

Is Ken Livingstone (mayor of London) the completely awesome genius who suggested the 5 pound tax to bring your car into the city centre (if you don't live there)? I think that's how the program works.

I'm following you round Nurv!

Yep that's him. Working pretty well so far, it seems.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Draken

Yep that's him. Working pretty well so far, it seems.

Let me know how it works after people get used to paying. You can raise the cost if people stop caring about the 5 pounds - but like here - when they raise the tolls and stuff - people bitch and moan - but because they're used to paying it - they just get out a bit more money. Right nwo my feeling is that it's only working because people weren't used to paying anything to get in - whereas getting into NY - has always required paying tolls - so people just accept it as a way of life. Eventually that will be the way London will be - but hey - it's a great tax for the city.