SNP in practice

[TestMangler]

fast forward 10/15 years

Wales - independence & Bankrupt
Scotland - independence & Bankrupt

England - Independence & prosperous

[BrilloPad]

fast forward 10/15 years

Wales - independence & Bankrupt
Scotland - independence & Bankrupt

England - Independence & prosperous

Caveat creditor as IMF chiefs mull unpayable debts - Telegraph

We learn that public debt in the rich economies fell from 124pc of GDP at the end of Second World War to 29pc in 1973, a dream era that we have left behind.
The debt burden has since climbed at a compound rate of 2pc a year, accelerating into an upward spiral to 105pc of GDP after the Lehman crash. It is as if we had fought another world war.

So we are all suffed.

[Zero Liability]

Caveat creditor as IMF chiefs mull unpayable debts - Telegraph

We learn that public debt in the rich economies fell from 124pc of GDP at the end of Second World War to 29pc in 1973, a dream era that we have left behind.
The debt burden has since climbed at a compound rate of 2pc a year, accelerating into an upward spiral to 105pc of GDP after the Lehman crash. It is as if we had fought another world war.

So we are all suffed.

That is a good article, albeit the only thing that tends to piss me off about Evans-Pritchard is that he tries to paint the Germans in a negative light for not wanting to bailout the periphery (and why should they, anyway?), and he seems to take little issue with the notion of credit expansion as the cure-all to the world's problems pushed by the IMF and its viper queen.

[TheFaQQer]

That's a good point, but I think people probably accept that FPTP means it's the number of seats that count. My point was that with people having to be encouraged to register, and the general disillusionment with politics, it's not going to be good if it appears that the government is chosen by a back room deal between the political elite rather than by the election result, no matter what the law says and the reality of the situation.

February 1974 - Conservatives got the most votes, Labour got the most seats. Heath tried to cling on to power because he claimed the popular mandate, but failed.

Note that Clegg says that the Lib Dems will talk to "the biggest party first" without clarifying which he actually means to give a bit more wriggle room. Bless him, he still thinks he's going to be relevant by the middle of May.

This government was chosen by a back room deal rather than the election result, though - that's part of the problem with coalitions. No party ever says "this is what we'd give away to form a coalition", so no one ever votes for what a coalition ends up offering.

[TheFaQQer]

If the Queen Speech is voted down, you can be damned sure a vote of no confidence would follow in very short order.

Would the electorate thank the opposition parties for forcing another election straight away? Or would the opposition be canny enough to block the things that they don't want to happen whilst they work on improving their popularity and then engineer the vote then?

A vote of no confidence doesn't even guarantee a new election - everyone gets another 14 days to see if they can form a new government, which (as I said earlier) could mean that you flip from one side of the house to the other until the next vote of no confidence and then come back. Would the electorate reward the opposition for trying to sneak in that way without an election?

[Batcher]

If the Queen Speech is voted down, you can be damned sure a vote of no confidence would follow in very short order.

If the party trying to form the government can't get their Queen's Speech voted through then they can't form the government. There is no need for a vote of confidence.

[TheFaQQer]

If the party trying to form the government can't get their Queen's Speech voted through then they can't form the government. There is no need for a vote of confidence.

That used to be the case, but no longer - this government included it in the Fixed Term Parliament Act.

So you can fail to pass the budget or the Queen's speech, but you still require a separate vote of no confidence.

[minestrone]

For all his fat uselessness Salmond was fairly pro business, Sturgeon however is the worst of both the socialist worlds, the working class chip on the shoulder socialist and the educated 'it all looks wonderful on paper' socialist.

I am hoping whatever foul offspring Ed and Sturgeon produce dies quickly before it can do permanent damage to the country.

[d000hg]

Labour won't die in England, as their core vote is chavs, immigrants and thickos they won't be running out of voters anytime soon, even if some of them have joined UKIP

Oh do at least try to be the slightest bit objective.

I don't think that is as impossible as some might think, although it could kill off one of them for good.

Labour have already lost Scotland with their partnership with the Tories in 'Better Together' so a Tory/labour coalition might kill them off in England too, except for England's inability to actually vote a government in

I could see a ConLab alliance only if SNP appear determined to be a PITA in a way that upsets the English public. A way to give the bird to SNP as a temporary measure until they can figure out how to have another election which SNP can't ruin... but I don't know if/how that can be done.

[original PM]

pretty much a statement of the petty mindedness of todays people.

negative voting to stop someone winning rather than pinning your colours to the mast to try and help your party win.

Lets face it you have Labour who are probably slightly left of centre if not centre and Tories who are slightly right of centre.

Not a lot to choose from except that Dave seems to be a better leader the Ed - in fact Ed is just a bit too weird!

Your views may vary!