Are you going to register to vote?

Jagraf

Tropez wrote: »

It isn't about to changing the government because all governments are much of a muchness. They do some things right, they do a lot of things wrong and they annoy a hell of a lot of people one way or the other until they inevitably get voted out and someone else has a go.

But campaigns and pressure groups do and have a long history of shaping government policy. There are NGOs classed as "insiders" in the government that have an incredible influence on government policy, and do regardless of whether a Conservative politician or a Labour politician sits at Number 10.

So, you do think a government is useful, even of only to campaign to. You are relying on others to put a party into government, because you believe in change, yet you don't see the point of voting yourself. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Jagraf

Tropez wrote: »

I'd go for that if it meant that the government could no longer tax me in any form. I think that'd work out quite nicely.

So if there was no government, you would be quite happy going back to the time when employers could treat their staff like animals, so long as you weren't taxed on that.

Good luck. No government means no rules. No one pays tax, no health service, no research, no defence. No one to campaign to.

Tropez

Jagraf wrote: »

Would you rather not have a government? As that is what you are voting for. You can say yes if you want to, I'm just wondering how that would work out.

Of course not. How on earth would the groups I am a member of campaign for change if there was no government to campaign to?

I'm simply opting to be a different part of the political process. If we were seriously in danger of not having a government and my voting could somehow change that then yeah, I'd probably vote. But since we're not Belgium or Somalia, it isn't currently particularly likely, so instead I choose to accept majority opinion - because frankly I've never really felt connected to society anyway - and focus my efforts in areas I feel strongly about.

Tropez

Jagraf wrote: »

So if there was no government, you would be quite happy going back to the time when employers could treat their staff like animals, so long as you weren't taxed on that.

Good luck. No government means no rules.

You can't add conditions to your argument. You said those who didn't vote shouldn't be entitled to government services and that's what I responded to.

Jagraf

Tropez wrote: »

Of course not. How on earth would the groups I am a member of campaign for change if there was no government to campaign to?

I'm simply opting to be a different part of the political process. If we were seriously in danger of not having a government and my voting could somehow change that then yeah, I'd probably vote. But since we're not Belgium or Somalia, it isn't currently particularly likely, so instead I choose to accept majority opinion - because frankly I've never really felt connected to society anyway - and focus my efforts in areas I feel strongly about.

I personally think all parties are too close together at the moment. I don't agree with all policies and there is certainly room for change. However, this does not mean I can rely on others to make decisions for me. You are expecting others to vote on your behalf, and then to campaign for change.

Don't you feel you could do both? Don't you ever use statistics in your research when you campaign for change?

Tropez

Jagraf wrote: »

I personally think all parties are too close together at the moment. I don't agree with all policies and there is certainly room for change. However, this does not mean I can rely on others to make decisions for me. You are expecting others to vote on your behalf, and then to campaign for change.

Don't you feel you could do both? Don't you ever use statistics in your research when you campaign for change?

But by voting you're voting for someone to make decisions for you, and since of those decisions that politicians make some of them are decisions I morally oppose, why would I want to be part of that part of the process? Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat (yeah, I know)... they've all done things while in power and in my lifetime that I find morally objectionable or just something that is in complete contradiction to my personal code of ethics.

So where is the incentive? And furthermore, why do you deem it so important that I discard my own sense of ethics just to tick a "least-worse" option on a ballot paper where the effect of that tick would have meant nothing? The same party have held the local seat since its creation and their majority has barely fluctuated. I checked the statistics.

Hell, maybe if everyone else decided to go and vote and turnout was 100% it might change but you can't force someone to vote because when you do, you force quite a number of them to not take it seriously. The amount of ridiculous protest-candidates that stand in countries where voting is mandatory is hilariously astonishing. I think someone claiming to be Batman stood in an election recently.

Edit: Here we go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n6hvPP06Rs

It wasn't Batman, it was Jesus.

his_missus

I do find it difficult that in the general election I am actually voting for someone to represent my area but that person may not represent the party I want to govern the country.


Your local MP may actually have done a good job for your area but it doesn't necessarily mean you think his/her party will do a good job running the country.

DKLS

Jagraf wrote: »

I think it should be a legal requirement to vote, or destroy your voting paper.

You can't go to cubs if you don't pay your subs. If you don't vote then you shouldn't be entitled to healthcare, education etc.

Why should it be? I have a choice whether I get involved or not in politics by voting and certainly shouldn't be penalised I pay my subs via taxes, I just choose not to vote despite all the sentimental guff reasons posted on such threads.

Jagraf

DKLS wrote: »

Why should it be? I have a choice whether I get involved or not in politics by voting and certainly shouldn't be penalised I pay my subs via taxes, I just choose not to vote despite all the sentimental guff reasons posted on such threads.

I see it in the same way as educating children, its good for the country. I don't expect everyone to think the same as me, but I see it as that important. We need 'someone' to run the country, and as we are democratic, we should act that way.

It's a bit like everyone pulling together with anything, we are stronger if we do.

If we didn't have a government, there wouldn't be any tax, as the country wouldn't be able to run at all.

Spoil your ballot paper.

iammumtoone

i do think everyone should vote BUT I don't think they should vote just for the sake of it. I don't mind who anyone votes for it is a free country but I believe that people should have to actually look into the policies of the party they are planning to vote for rather than just listen to a few headlines about them. It is better not to vote than vote for a party you don't actually know much about.

I also don't like how the voting system works, we are lucky to have a very good and active MP in my constituency I have contacted them on several occasions and always found them to be helpful. I want to vote for them, but the party they stand for may not be the party I want in power. If I had it my way I would vote twice, once for a MP for my area and again for a party leader who I want to be prime minster.