Politics Today

[Rosencrantz]

Fair point. Would they have won or gained many more seats with PR. Probably not, right?

Based on Labours 40% vote share in 2017 they would have had 260 seats rather than the 262 they got, so not much difference. However the Conservatives vote share was 42.3% which would have given them 275 seats rather than the 317 they got.

Of course that is just a straight percentage share of 650 seats. There are many different types of PR.

 

[Rosencrantz]

For the entirety of human history people have moved to find work. Those that come here to work are net contributors to the economy. I see no problem with this unless you believe the false narrative that British people are losing out on jobs to migrants.

If your issue is with people moving here and claiming out of work benefits before finding a job then I have sympathy with your argument - but that is the failure of successive governments to tackle that issue when they could have done and in the grand scheme of things is a negative that I can tolerate. Regardless it certainly isn't the EU forcing us to pay these people benefits neverendingly.

Ultimately the aggressive attitude this government is taking to immigration will lose you talented people and that is always a bad thing.

The Angles and Saxons (not to forget the Jutes) all migrated to our green and pleasant (or heavily wooded at the time) land seeking better land to subsist on. Immigration control back in those days was rather more confrontational though.

 

[Alistair20000]

Yes, I know it's Ed Ball's

I have got to like Ed Balls a lot more since the voters gave him the The Elbow. Rather like Michael Portillo he has become a nicer person.

Kept us out of the wretched Euro too

 

[tavyred]

For the entirety of human history people have moved to find work. Those that come here to work are net contributors to the economy. I see no problem with this unless you believe the false narrative that British people are losing out on jobs to migrants.

If your issue is with people moving here and claiming out of work benefits before finding a job then I have sympathy with your argument - but that is the failure of successive governments to tackle that issue when they could have done and in the grand scheme of things is a negative that I can tolerate. Regardless it certainly isn't the EU forcing us to pay these people benefits neverendingly.

Ultimately the aggressive attitude this government is taking to immigration will lose you talented people and that is always a bad thing.

The 'immigrants are net contributors' argument is slightly more nuanced than most people think. For every French or Irish person earning a whacking great wage in The City and ergo putting in more than they take out, there are more Eastern Europeans in part time, low wage jobs all accessing in work benefits and obviously taking more out than they put in. When the latter cohort is assessed in isolation the cost to the taxpayer is in the billions it is said.
I don't think its a particularly healthy immigration system to see the higher paid skilled immigrant workers subsidising the low paid unskilled variety. All immigrant workers should be net contributors surely?

 

[spanky]

Tavy is a man for the white working class...

... unless they are Eastern European.

 

[tavyred]

English/British working class Spanks.

 

[Spoonz Red E]

That article raises some interesting points although comes across as rather one-eyed (I don't believe the blurb that he was a Leaver who changed his mind - the tone of the article simply doesn't back this up).

Easily checked.
This tweet from his account in May 2016.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735364868841177088

 

[Grecian2K]

Re my polite post in rebuttal to your own personal accusations and insinuations against me then Tavy - NO REPLY?
#nosurprisethere

 

[tavyred]

Those personal accusations and insinuations are what exactly?

 

[IndoMike]

Based on Labours 40% vote share in 2017 they would have had 260 seats rather than the 262 they got, so not much difference. However the Conservatives vote share was 42.3% which would have given them 275 seats rather than the 317 they got.

Of course that is just a straight percentage share of 650 seats. There are many different types of PR.

Thanks for doing the maths (or should I say "math").
Tavers said he didn't bring up the topic of PR after he voted for Labour in 2017 (they lost, if course). I implied that maybe he didn't bring it up because being the incredibly smart guy that he is he'd probably worked out that the Tories still would have won. Or am I crediting him with too high an IQ?