Bluemoon labour thread.

[SWP's back]

Tories can't complain about FPTP though. It serves them more than anyone else.

2005 Election...

Lab - 35.3% of the vote 55.2% of the seats
Con - 32.3% of the vote 30.7% of the seats
Lib - 22.1% of the vote 9.6% of the seats

In England, Labour polled seventy thousand fewer votes than the Conservatives, yet won ninety-two more seats.

The fptp system benefited Labour far more. In fact, this was the lowest ever percentage of the vote gained & a party still manaaging an overall majority.

Hence why Labour did not change the system during the last 13 years.

But Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy, you are ruining their argument with facts again mate. You bloody parasite.

 

[Skashion]

Both the Tories and Labour have benefited from the system.

<br /><br />-- Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:51 pm --<br /><br />

2005 Election...

Lab - 35.3% of the vote 55.2% of the seats
Con - 32.3% of the vote 30.7% of the seats
Lib - 22.1% of the vote 9.6% of the seats

In England, Labour polled seventy thousand fewer votes than the Conservatives, yet won ninety-two more seats.

The fptp system benefited Labour far more. In fact, this was the lowest ever percentage of the vote gained & a party still manaaging an overall majority.

Hence why Labour did not change the system during the last 13 years.

But Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy, you are ruining their argument with facts again mate. You bloody parasite.

Apart from the fact that I just tore that argument to shreds in my last post and his own quote claims both the tories and Labour benefit from it...

 

[Anonymous]

Well stop trying to act like you know better than you do and I won't be so condescending. You could have asked me to explain instead of trying to contradict me with such poor evidence and making statements as if they were already proven. FPTP doesn't favour any one party in the sense that one party must necessarily win more seats per vote than another - as you were trying to say. This is the marginals issue I've mentioned constantly. If Labour wins them then they get far more seats than their votes suggest they should. If Conservatives do, then the situation is reversed.

In the 1983 election, the Conservatives won 42.3% of the vote but won 61.1% of the seats. So 1.44% of seats for 1% of the vote. Whereas Labour won 32.2% of the seats with 27.6% percent of the vote. So, 1.17% of the seats for 1% of the vote. Our electoral system hasn't changed one bit though. Wouldn't be surprised if it happens again this election and the tories win more seats per vote. This is the nature of FPTP. Where it does benefit the tories though is that we have three parties and two of those parties have always been more inclined to form election pacts and joint cabinets etc. The outsider of that group is the tories and that's where FPTP benefits the tories. The Liberal (Democrats) are always the party that suffers. By happy chance, 1983 is the best demonstration of this. SDP-Liberal Alliance won 25.4% of the vote and received just 3.5% of the seats. That's 0.14% of the seats for 1% of the vote. So, FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system but because of the relations between political parties, most notably those between Labour and the Liberal (Democrats).

I was merely pointing out that this statement...

Tories can't complain about FPTP though. It serves them more than anyone else.

...is not necessarily true and that in the last few elections fptp has benefitted the Labour party more.

However, I don't really need to point it out now as...

FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system

 

[SWP's back]

Now you are lying. You say 'Primary school head teachers pay ranges from £75-£95k depending on seniority and region,' For 2009-2010 a Group One Primary school head's pay range was £41426 to £55669. You quoted a deputy head teachers pay in the post I was querying, which, of course, will be lower still. I have worked in education for nearly 30 years-the last deputy head I worked with closely was coming up to retirement age at a large inner city primary school-she earned just over £40,000.

40k seems a bit low for a head, the missus is a special needs teacher and gets around 34k + special needs weighting(2k I think). I know a Primary school head and she was on around 60k about 4 years or so ago and a head of year at a secondary school who I know was on around 45 - 50 k

My ex is prmiary school teacher and SENCO (Special Educationary Needs Co-ordinator) and earns £42k (or did a couple of years back).

I have 3 head teachers of primary schools that are my clients. The highest paid one is on just over £80k and looks after a medium sized village primary school just outside Lancaster.

 

[Skashion]

Well stop trying to act like you know better than you do and I won't be so condescending. You could have asked me to explain instead of trying to contradict me with such poor evidence and making statements as if they were already proven. FPTP doesn't favour any one party in the sense that one party must necessarily win more seats per vote than another - as you were trying to say. This is the marginals issue I've mentioned constantly. If Labour wins them then they get far more seats than their votes suggest they should. If Conservatives do, then the situation is reversed.

In the 1983 election, the Conservatives won 42.3% of the vote but won 61.1% of the seats. So 1.44% of seats for 1% of the vote. Whereas Labour won 32.2% of the seats with 27.6% percent of the vote. So, 1.17% of the seats for 1% of the vote. Our electoral system hasn't changed one bit though. Wouldn't be surprised if it happens again this election and the tories win more seats per vote. This is the nature of FPTP. Where it does benefit the tories though is that we have three parties and two of those parties have always been more inclined to form election pacts and joint cabinets etc. The outsider of that group is the tories and that's where FPTP benefits the tories. The Liberal (Democrats) are always the party that suffers. By happy chance, 1983 is the best demonstration of this. SDP-Liberal Alliance won 25.4% of the vote and received just 3.5% of the seats. That's 0.14% of the seats for 1% of the vote. So, FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system but because of the relations between political parties, most notably those between Labour and the Liberal (Democrats).

I was merely pointing out that this statement...

Tories can't complain about FPTP though. It serves them more than anyone else.

...is not necessarily true and that in the last few elections fptp has benefitted the Labour party more.

However, I don't really need to point it out now as...

FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system

Yes, because I haven't been talking about marginals since this thread began, have I?

 

[SWP's back]

-- Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:51 pm --

Hence why Labour did not change the system during the last 13 years.

But Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy, you are ruining their argument with facts again mate. You bloody parasite.

Apart from the fact that I just tore that argument to shreds in my last post and his own quote claims both the tories and Labour benefit from it...

You tore nothing to shreds at all. You complained about FPTP when it was Labour benefitting most recently from it.

You really do think far too highly of yourself don't you.

 

[sweynforkbeard]

40k seems a bit low for a head, the missus is a special needs teacher and gets around 34k + special needs weighting(2k I think). I know a Primary school head and she was on around 60k about 4 years or so ago and a head of year at a secondary school who I know was on around 45 - 50 k

My ex is prmiary school teacher and SENCO (Special Educationary Needs Co-ordinator) and earns £42k (or did a couple of years back).

I have 3 head teachers of primary schools that are my clients. The highest paid one is on just over £80k and looks after a medium sized village primary school just outside Lancaster.

What did you say a few posts back?- 'just because you know somebody etc' and to quote you again-'look up the figures.' Mine are correct regarding head teachers pay scales and easily verifiable. I have no particular bone to grind, I really struggle to imagine which party I will vote for this time. I am not naturally a Conservative but strongly disagree with so much that Labour has done and the LibDems are lightweights with no experience-there doesn't seem much other choice but I don't like to abstain. What to do?

 

[Bill]

Go on then, explain.

Oh, and being condescending just shows you up.

Well stop trying to act like you know better than you do and I won't be so condescending. You could have asked me to explain instead of trying to contradict me with such poor evidence and making statements as if they were already proven. FPTP doesn't favour any one party in the sense that one party must necessarily win more seats per vote than another - as you were trying to say. This is the marginals issue I've mentioned constantly. If Labour wins them then they get far more seats than their votes suggest they should. If Conservatives do, then the situation is reversed.

In the 1983 election, the Conservatives won 42.3% of the vote but won 61.1% of the seats. So 1.44% of seats for 1% of the vote. Whereas Labour won 32.2% of the seats with 27.6% percent of the vote. So, 1.17% of the seats for 1% of the vote. Our electoral system hasn't changed one bit though. Wouldn't be surprised if it happens again this election and the tories win more seats per vote. This is the nature of FPTP. Where it does benefit the tories though is that we have three parties and two of those parties have always been more inclined to form election pacts and joint cabinets etc. The outsider of that group is the tories and that's where FPTP benefits the tories. The Liberal (Democrats) are always the party that suffers. By happy chance, 1983 is the best demonstration of this. SDP-Liberal Alliance won 25.4% of the vote and received just 3.5% of the seats. That's 0.14% of the seats for 1% of the vote. So, FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system but because of the relations between political parties, most notably those between Labour and the Liberal (Democrats).

i reckon you know fuck all, you think you have some sort of diploma or something, scargill of our time, thats you.

vote tory and fuck the cadgers i say.

 

[Skashion]

-- Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:51 pm --



Apart from the fact that I just tore that argument to shreds in my last post and his own quote claims both the tories and Labour benefit from it...

You tore nothing to shreds at all. You complained about FPTP when it was Labour benefitting most recently from it.

You really do think far too highly of yourself don't you.

I knew this would happen at some point, and I did mention it earlier, that inevitably one of my posts would be removed from context. So here it is in its full glory:

Tories can't complain about FPTP though. It serves them more than anyone else. Go on tories, put your hands up if you'd like a system which gave more proportional results. You'd have a hung Parliament every time with the tories as the permanent opposition unless Labour or Liberals fancied a change from each other.

The key part of it being the last bit talking about hung Parliaments and the tories being in opposition unless Labour or the Liberals fancied the tories as the coalition partner instead.

Instead Cheesy only chose to quote the first part and forget about the sentences after it which qualified the statement. I don't know whether it's intentional or not but I'm certainly not in the wrong.

As for me thinking too much of myself, the feeling is mutual. I think you clearly think too much of yourself. Let's not let this hostility distract from the actual issue though, eh?

 

[sweynforkbeard]

Well stop trying to act like you know better than you do and I won't be so condescending. You could have asked me to explain instead of trying to contradict me with such poor evidence and making statements as if they were already proven. FPTP doesn't favour any one party in the sense that one party must necessarily win more seats per vote than another - as you were trying to say. This is the marginals issue I've mentioned constantly. If Labour wins them then they get far more seats than their votes suggest they should. If Conservatives do, then the situation is reversed.

In the 1983 election, the Conservatives won 42.3% of the vote but won 61.1% of the seats. So 1.44% of seats for 1% of the vote. Whereas Labour won 32.2% of the seats with 27.6% percent of the vote. So, 1.17% of the seats for 1% of the vote. Our electoral system hasn't changed one bit though. Wouldn't be surprised if it happens again this election and the tories win more seats per vote. This is the nature of FPTP. Where it does benefit the tories though is that we have three parties and two of those parties have always been more inclined to form election pacts and joint cabinets etc. The outsider of that group is the tories and that's where FPTP benefits the tories. The Liberal (Democrats) are always the party that suffers. By happy chance, 1983 is the best demonstration of this. SDP-Liberal Alliance won 25.4% of the vote and received just 3.5% of the seats. That's 0.14% of the seats for 1% of the vote. So, FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system but because of the relations between political parties, most notably those between Labour and the Liberal (Democrats).

i reckon you know fuck all, you think you have some sort of diploma or something, scargill of our time, thats you.

vote tory and fuck the cadgers i say.

Vote Tory and fuck the cadgers? At the same time? Difficult controlling pencil shake under such circumstances- you might inadvertantly place an X in the box of Galloway's Respect and think of all the polling booths that may be overturned in the throes of your unseemly lust. Please maintain some standards in the hallowed halls of democracy.

 

[Skashion]

Well stop trying to act like you know better than you do and I won't be so condescending. You could have asked me to explain instead of trying to contradict me with such poor evidence and making statements as if they were already proven. FPTP doesn't favour any one party in the sense that one party must necessarily win more seats per vote than another - as you were trying to say. This is the marginals issue I've mentioned constantly. If Labour wins them then they get far more seats than their votes suggest they should. If Conservatives do, then the situation is reversed.

In the 1983 election, the Conservatives won 42.3% of the vote but won 61.1% of the seats. So 1.44% of seats for 1% of the vote. Whereas Labour won 32.2% of the seats with 27.6% percent of the vote. So, 1.17% of the seats for 1% of the vote. Our electoral system hasn't changed one bit though. Wouldn't be surprised if it happens again this election and the tories win more seats per vote. This is the nature of FPTP. Where it does benefit the tories though is that we have three parties and two of those parties have always been more inclined to form election pacts and joint cabinets etc. The outsider of that group is the tories and that's where FPTP benefits the tories. The Liberal (Democrats) are always the party that suffers. By happy chance, 1983 is the best demonstration of this. SDP-Liberal Alliance won 25.4% of the vote and received just 3.5% of the seats. That's 0.14% of the seats for 1% of the vote. So, FPTP doesn't favour the tories because of the nature of the system but because of the relations between political parties, most notably those between Labour and the Liberal (Democrats).

i reckon you know fuck all, you think you have some sort of diploma or something, scargill of our time, thats you.

vote tory and fuck the cadgers i say.

If I know fuck all, prove it. Show that my figures and thus my analysis is wrong. As for my fictional 'diploma', how do you suppose that I prove it exists?

 

[SWP's back]

i reckon you know fuck all, you think you have some sort of diploma or something, scargill of our time, thats you.

vote tory and fuck the cadgers i say.

If I know fuck all, prove it. Show that my figures and thus my analysis is wrong. As for my fictional 'diploma', how do you suppose that I prove it exists?

I think the point he is making is that you know fuck all [of the real world in terms of making something from nothing. Be that starting a business or something else. So far, all you have done is read theory and spend too much time looking at wikipedia while at University. Rather than starting up a business and seeing the amount of tax and red tape that current government throws in your way while at the same time, allowing a benefits culture and nanny state eat away at the country like a cancer.]

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure that is what Bill (if I may be so bold) is getting at.

 

[sweynforkbeard]

i reckon you know fuck all, you think you have some sort of diploma or something, scargill of our time, thats you.

vote tory and fuck the cadgers i say.

If I know fuck all, prove it. Show that my figures and thus my analysis is wrong. As for my fictional 'diploma', how do you suppose that I prove it exists?

I have a photocopy of my Doctorate in Extraneous Studies that was granted to me in 1991 after a phone call to the University of Truth or Consequences, New Mexico and the transmission of $125, that you can show him if it will help.

 

[Skashion]

If I know fuck all, prove it. Show that my figures and thus my analysis is wrong. As for my fictional 'diploma', how do you suppose that I prove it exists?

I think the point he is making is that you know fuck all [of the real world in terms of making something from nothing. Be that starting a business or something else. So far, all you have done is read theory and spend too much time looking at wikipedia while at University. Rather than starting up a business and seeing the amount of tax and red tape that current government throws in your way while at the same time, allowing a benefits culture and nanny state eat away at the country like a cancer.]

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure that is what Bill (if I may be so bold) is getting at.

I'm confused, what exactly, has the 'real world' got to do with a discussion about FPTP, marginals and so on? Fuck all is my best guess.<br /><br />-- Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:27 pm --<br /><br />

If I know fuck all, prove it. Show that my figures and thus my analysis is wrong. As for my fictional 'diploma', how do you suppose that I prove it exists?

I have a photocopy of my Doctorate in Extraneous Studies that was granted to me in 1991 after a phone call to the University of Truth or Consequences, New Mexico and the transmission of $125, that you can show him if it will help.

Schweet. Cheers mate.

 

[SWP's back]

I think the point he is making is that you know fuck all [of the real world in terms of making something from nothing. Be that starting a business or something else. So far, all you have done is read theory and spend too much time looking at wikipedia while at University. Rather than starting up a business and seeing the amount of tax and red tape that current government throws in your way while at the same time, allowing a benefits culture and nanny state eat away at the country like a cancer.]

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure that is what Bill (if I may be so bold) is getting at.

I'm confused, what exactly, has the 'real world' got to do with a discussion about FPTP, marginals and so on? Fuck all is my best guess.

The thread is not only about marginals and FPTP. It is about Labour and the next election, unless you want to PM the OP and get him to change the title. Hence why De Niro sees that are new our of Uni, all excited having completed your degree with your lefty idiology and as he is a hard bitten old timer ;) - I would say he does not reckon your opinions to be based on life experience (I don't think he was talking about marginals or FPTP either).

 

[sweynforkbeard]

I'm confused, what exactly, has the 'real world' got to do with a discussion about FPTP, marginals and so on? Fuck all is my best guess.

The thread is not only about marginals and FPTP. It is about Labour and the next election, unless you want to PM the OP and get him to change the title. Hence why De Niro sees that are new our of Uni, all excited having completed your degree with your lefty idiology and as he is a hard bitten old timer ;) - I would say he does not reckon your opinions to be based on life experience (I don't think he was talking about marginals or FPTP either).

Why do you feel it necessary to talk on other peoples behalf?- and FFS stop brown nosing.

 

[Skashion]

I'm confused, what exactly, has the 'real world' got to do with a discussion about FPTP, marginals and so on? Fuck all is my best guess.

The thread is not only about marginals and FPTP. It is about Labour and the next election, unless you want to PM the OP and get him to change the title. Hence why De Niro sees that are new our of Uni, all excited having completed your degree with your lefty idiology and as he is a hard bitten old timer ;) - I would say he does not reckon your opinions to be based on life experience (I don't think he was talking about marginals or FPTP either).

But the post he quoted was about marginals and FPTP. Why would you quote something and then talk about something completely different? No, De Niro doesn't see that I'm new out of Uni, he thinks my 'diploma' is fictional. Not many lefties left on campus these days you'll be glad to hear. Not on mine anyway - which used to be a very left-wing uni. True, my opinions are not based on life experience. Not had much of a chance yet so that's a non-starter. Marx had some decent life experience though, and Orwell.

The only 'life experiences' I have are these; being £18,000 in debt; living independently for three years in a serious relationship; being a self-employed graduate during a recession. That's about it. At the tender age of 22 I have a lot of life left to live. *fingers crossed*

However, once again, irrelevant to the post he quoted and the degree I apparently don't have.

 

[Helmet Cole]

Surely face-palm/fail is not far away now?

 

[Bill]

anyone can chat shit, its all about putting bread on the table that really matters, you diploma fucking nigels have never done a days work in your life, reading fancy books, wow that takes some doing.

 

[Skashion]

anyone can chat shit, its all about putting bread on the table that really matters, you diploma fucking nigels have never done a days work in your life, reading fancy books, wow that takes some doing.

Y'know, I do feel like a twat for getting an education.