|
|
Other Topics
Topic has 35 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 27/04/2008, 18:16
|
Dick Smith
 
Joined on 23/08/2004
Surrey and Manche (Pays Mortainais)
Posts 8,915
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
I think you have to hedge it round with caveats about properly functioning democracies, proportional representation, wide political base, in which case it has an ironic, or figurative, truth.
Regards
Dick Smith
Nowhere is there warmth to be found
Among those afraid of losing their ground
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 18:28
|
just john
Joined on 28/04/2005
Montignac le coq
Posts 383
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Dick Smith wrote: | | now just john wrote: | |
Joseph de Maistre stated that “Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle merite.”
(“Every country has the government it deserves”), Lettres et Opuscules Inedits, (1851)
I would suggest that the unfettered social state started with Wilson, unions et al heralding the decline of work ethic in Britain in my lifetime, Maggie tried to remedy some of it until the poll tax debacle did for her, downhill eversince, whoever gets in will find a bill from public private finance. waiting for them, not to mention pensions. Labour = Spend & Bust. Tin hat on ![Cool [8-|]](/cs/images/emotions/cool.gif)
|
|
But John, there is a lot of cause to say that society in general wants the government to spend freely on some things - look at all the polls which showed a public willingness to accept tax rises to spend more on the NHS and, to a lesser extent, education and defence.
The entire Welfare State project was embraced by the nation not on any grounds of cost, but because it meant that the less fortunate/weaker members of society would get a share of the goods (in the Socratic sense).
Not everyone sees society as a profit and loss account.
|
|
I agree with much of what has been said on both sides, I support the Social state, the key word is unfettered. The purse is not bottomless and depends on a work ethic sadly missing in many key areas of recipients.
I have recently been close to the NHS and listened to Consultants, doctors and nurses hysterical laughing at the waste of money in the wrong areas for one example. The real cost is yet to be understood.
Who wants to do the work ethic one?
the real troubles in your life are apt to be things that never crossed your worried mind, and blindside you at 4pm on some idle Tuesday
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 18:33
|
Gluestick
Joined on 22/03/2006
UK and Nord Pas de Calais
Posts 2,343
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dick Smith wrote: | | Ah! The Metro - a free newspaper owned by the Daily Mail. Hardly a Journal of Record... |
|
2. Recorded crimes involving firearms
Peter Kaiza
Firearm crimes involving any type of injury fell by 19 per cent in 2006/07 from 5,004 in
2005/06 to 4,065 in 2006/07.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs08/hosb0308.pdf
Your Cited Source!
Now, according to my maths, 4,065 divided by 365 = 11.1369
Lies, damned lies and statistics?
"Yes, but that apart, Mrs Lincoln, did you enjoy the play?"
Gluestick
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 18:45
|
Albert the InfoGipsy
Joined on 01/07/2006
Kingdom of the Middle Saxons & Vannes (56)
Posts 633
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it, Dick, that you can make jokes at other people's expense but you get all wound up at a bit of teasing?
Quite honestly I believe that the main classifications of labour supporters nowadays are:
Traditionalists, mostly in the industrial heartlands, who keep hoping that the party will go back to its roots
Opportunists, mostly what used to be called yuppies, who realise that much of New Labour policy is to the right of Dave's Tories.
I can't see the traditionalists getting any joy unless/until there are major socioeconomic upheavals. If Labour were to go back to the agendas of the 60's & 70's as things are then they'd lose the support of the opportunists and be out of power for a generation.
In my opinion the reason that turnout gets lower at every election is that it is becoming harder and harder to see any real differences between the major parties and nobody has the courage to try things like voting for the Greens.
Albert the InfoGipsy
"So welcome to the Citadel where the question is 'Am I?'"
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 18:48
|
Dick Smith
Joined on 23/08/2004
Surrey and Manche (Pays Mortainais)
Posts 8,915
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teasing I don't mind, Albert. But the OP asked for a serious debate. Possibly some intelligent comments.
And there is a difference between teasing and insulting. Oh, and in case you forgot, Labour supporters won the last 3 elections.
Regards
Dick Smith
Nowhere is there warmth to be found
Among those afraid of losing their ground
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 18:58
|
Dick Smith
Joined on 23/08/2004
Surrey and Manche (Pays Mortainais)
Posts 8,915
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. Your comic claimed that 8 people a day were shot. That is 2900 a year - shot. Which is not borne out by the figures. The official statistics state that there were c500 injuries in gun-related crimes, and roughly one fatality a week, not the 8 a day you were suggesting. Far too many, but not enough to provoke the hysteria of your post.
Not every gun related crime involved someone being shot. Half of all gun-related crimes involved airguns. This is what the figures say:
SUMMARY
• Firearms (excluding air weapons) were reported to have been used in 9,650 recorded crimes
in 2006/07. This was a 13 per cent decrease over the previous year, following a slight
increase of 0.2 per cent in the previous year. The overall number of firearm offences
(including air weapons) fell by 14 per cent: from 21,527 in 2005/06 to 18,489 in 2006/07.
• Air weapons were reported to have been used in 8,839 recorded crimes, a decrease of 15
per cent compared to 2005/06.
• There were 2,517 offences in which the weapon was classified as an imitation in 2006/07, a
23 per cent decrease compared to 2005/06. Handgun offences were down by 11 per cent to
4,175 in 2006/07.
• Serious or fatal injury accounted for three per cent of all firearm crimes in 2006/07. There
were 566 such injuries (including 59 fatalities) resulting from crimes that involved a firearm
(including air weapons), 12 per cent fewer than in 2005/06.
• Firearm crimes involving any type of injury fell by 19 per cent in 2006/07 from 5,004 in
2005/06 to 4,065 in 2006/07. There was a 23 per cent decrease in the number of offences
involving handguns causing injury in 2006/07, following a 30 per cent increase in the previous
year.
• Weapons (excluding air weapons) were fired in 40 per cent of firearm crimes. Handguns were
fired in 12 per cent of the offences where they were involved, and shotguns in 38 per cent.
• The number of firearm robberies fell by three per cent in 2006/07, having risen by ten per
cent in the previous year. Thirty-seven per cent of these were committed in public highways,
the number of which increased by one per cent from 1,439 in 2005/06 to 1,457 in 2006/07.
• Twenty-eight per cent of victims of firearm related offences (excluding air weapons) in
2006/07 were aged between 30 and 49 followed by 21 to 29 year olds who were victims in 22
per cent of the crimes. Persons aged less than five and over 69 years were victims in 0.2 and
one per cent of the crimes respectively.
• Fifty-five per cent of all firearm offences (excluding air weapons) in 2006/07 occurred in just
three police authorities: Metropolitan, Greater Manchester and West Midlands.
• Overall, firearms (including air weapons) were used in 0.3 per cent of all recorded crimes, or
one in every 300. This proportion is halved when air weapons are excluded.
- now that isn't quite as bad as you were suggesting, was it? And who is manipulating the statistics?
Regards
Dick Smith
Nowhere is there warmth to be found
Among those afraid of losing their ground
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
27/04/2008, 20:19
|
Gluestick
Joined on 22/03/2006
UK and Nord Pas de Calais
Posts 2,343
|
Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dick Smith wrote: | | Gluestick wrote: | |
However, of course, if Labour had have invoked PR as promised in their 1997 manifesto, then they would have lost after 1997.
Which is pretty illustrative of how confused and dispirited the British electorate are right now: as more than one poster has stated in this thread.
|
|
Again, you got any real evidence for either of those statements?
|
|
Independent
PR voting could have left Blair in coalition (23 June 05)
A new study showed that Tony Blair would have not won the elections if these had been held under a proportional system. The study conducted by Patrick Dunleavy, professor of politics at LSE and Helen Margett, a professor at Oxford University, revealed that the majority system currently in place leads to distortion of voters' preferences that makes a huge difference to the patterns of political representation across Great Britain.
LSE and Oxford Profs acceptable enough for you??
"Yes, but that apart, Mrs Lincoln, did you enjoy the play?"
Gluestick
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 (36 items)
|
< 1 2 3 4 > |
|
|
|
France Forum » General Discuss... » Other Topics » Re: Aspirations..................................
|
|
|
|