Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

SouthLondonUser

kingstreet wrote: »

So what happens if the party I voted for in the Euro Elections wins no seats? I'm left without representation?

Really?

I think you may be misunderstanding how FPTP vs proportional representation works.

The concept of "your" MP is very strongly felt in FPTP systems, because each constituency elects one MP, and one only. This has its pros, like a strong link between MP and electorate, but also cons, like the fact that, if you are a Labour voter in a Tory stronghold, or viceversa, you will never be represented by someone who shares your views. Your MP will listen to you on non-trivial matters, like the roof of the local school leaking, but not on crucial policy matters on which there is a fundamental disagreement.

Not to mention the huge distortion that may follow, eg a party with 33% of the votes can win 55% of the seats (quite typical), or a party with 55% of the votes can win 90% of the seats(it happened to the SNP in Scotland).

By contrast, in proportional systems your vote is less likely to be 'wasted'. the details depend on each system, but typically each constituency elects more than one MP. So the link between MP and electorate is less strong, but you are more likely to have a representative who agrees with you on something.

Also, most parliamentary systems have stipulations / codes of conduct whereby each MP must act in the interest of the whole country, and not just of their constituency. This is true of the UK Parliament and also of the European Parliament. It's a fair principle, but it's also, practically, a rather moot point!

SouthLondonUser

Tromking wrote: »

I made a comment on the democratic deficiencies incumbent in the EU institutions (in my opinion) you then engaged in your usual ‘whataboutery’.

Ha ha ha ha ha...

I don't honestly remember your comments vs other people's comments, but I remember most criticism on this point derived from a factually inaccurate understanding of EU institutions. In other words, critics didn't know what they were talking about.

Whataboutery is minimising a flaw trying to shift the focus away from it. Party A is corrupt. So is party B. That's whataboutery.

Pointing out fake news is not whataboutery. For example, when people criticise the EU Commissions because Commissioners are not elected directly, pointing out that neither are UK ministers is not whataboutery - it is simply exposing Brexiters' propaganda as nonsense, because 1) what was decried as a fault is, in fact, a common feature of most, if not all, modern democracies, including the British one and 2) AFAIK no Brexiter decries the lack of direct election for UK ministers

Tromking wrote: »

Like a lot of angry Remainers, you feel you have the right pose questions and demand answers and bizarrely hold Leave voters to account. You don’t.
The way it works on discussion boards like this, is that you give your take on an issue based on an honestly held opinion and others respond.
If you can’t handle other people’s opinions without getting angry, then take your control freakery elsewhere.

I am beyond speechless.

Anyone on a discussion board has the right to ask questions, including inconvenient ones like: "How? Why? What's the source of that statement? Etc".

No one has an obligation to answer, but, well, if you can't / refuse to, then any one will draw their own conclusions...

I'd like to think that, unless one totally made stuff up, one should be able and willing to answer such questions.

It is evident you are not used to these tough questions. This explains a lot.

I am also confused how you can infer that I can't handle other people's opinion, since it's YOU who are refusing to answer some very simple questions??

SouthLondonUser

adindas wrote: »

But there is simple answer to this "People know, you also know that Brexit is the democratic mandate from people as the result of the referendum. It has also been ratified in the parliments".

I asked you how
A) that it is in the UK's interest to Brexit
can possibly derive from
the opinion that the euro was a mistake.

The economist you quoted, for example, agrees with B but not with A.

That the people voted for it is not an answer. I didn't ask you if the people voted for it.
We all know that a slight majority voted for it 3 years ago; we also know that there were many irregularities in the campaign, many blatant lies, that much has changed since then, etc.

kingstreet

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

I think you may be misunderstanding how FPTP vs proportional representation works.

The concept of "your" MP is very strongly felt in FPTP systems, because each constituency elects one MP, and one only. This has its pros, like a strong link between MP and electorate, but also cons, like the fact that, if you are a Labour voter in a Tory stronghold, or viceversa, you will never be represented by someone who shares your views. Your MP will listen to you on non-trivial matters, like the roof of the local school leaking, but not on crucial policy matters on which there is a fundamental disagreement.

Not to mention the huge distortion that may follow, eg a party with 33% of the votes can win 55% of the seats (quite typical), or a party with 55% of the votes can win 90% of the seats(it happened to the SNP in Scotland).

By contrast, in proportional systems your vote is less likely to be 'wasted'. the details depend on each system, but typically each constituency elects more than one MP. So the link between MP and electorate is less strong, but you are more likely to have a representative who agrees with you on something.

Also, most parliamentary systems have stipulations / codes of conduct whereby each MP must act in the interest of the whole country, and not just of their constituency. This is true of the UK Parliament and also of the European Parliament. It's a fair principle, but it's also, practically, a rather moot point!

Spider Legs suggested MEPs represent only those who voted for them. Is that the case, or not?

I know the difference between FPTP and PR and I voted Green in the WM because in doing so we would avoid a fourth BP MEP so technically I do "have" an MEP but was exploring a hyperthetical.

Tromking

@southlondonuser

The democratic legitimacy of EU institutions is a matter of opinion and personal standards as to what constitutes democracy. I can’t help that your standards are way lower than mine.
You bat away such opinions by saying that U.K. Ministers are also appointed into post, casually ignoring the fact that in a parliamentary democracy the executive is drawn from democratically elected MP’s of the largest democratically elected political party. Please don’t respond by citing the incredibly rare occurrence of Ministers coming from the House of Lords.
As Tony Benn once said (I paraphrase) , you judge democracy on whether they act in the full glare of public scrutiny and the voters ability to get rid.

SouthLondonUser

@Tromking, for the billionth time, the indisputable fact remains that, however you spin it, the UK electorate has no say whatsoever on who gets to be Minister of what. The fact that British Ministers are almost always MPs does not change this fact nor does it make the appointment of British ministers any less indirect.

Not to mention the incredibly perverse and distortive effects of FPTP in the UK, on which I already commented multiple times.

You talk about public scrutiny. Great. How much public scrutiny is there behind the currently ongoing process to choose the next British PM?

As I already pointed out once, there is a way to make the EU democracy more direct, but that would be anathema to the Brexiters: i.e. give more power to the directly elected European Parliament and less power to the member states. Again, most Brexiters like to imply that the EU is full of unappointed and unaccountable bureaucrats. Not true: in summary, and simplifying somewhat, the key decisions and appointments come from either the European Parliament or the (democratically elected) governments of the member countries.

Tromking

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

@Tromking, for the billionth time, the indisputable fact remains that, however you spin it, the UK electorate has no say whatsoever on who gets to be Minister of what. The fact that British Ministers are almost always MPs does not change this fact nor does it make the appointment of British ministers any less indirect.

Not to mention the incredibly perverse and distortive effects of FPTP in the UK, on which I already commented multiple times.

You talk about public scrutiny. Great. How much public scrutiny is there behind the currently ongoing process to choose the next British PM?

As I already pointed out once, there is a way to make the EU democracy more direct, but that would be anathema to the Brexiters: i.e. give more power to the directly elected European Parliament and less power to the member states. Again, most Brexiters like to imply that the EU is full of unappointed and unaccountable bureaucrats. Not true: in summary, and simplifying somewhat, the key decisions and appointments come from either the European Parliament or the (democratically elected) governments of the member countries.

Rudimentary lessons on parliamentary democracy required.

SouthLondonUser

kingstreet wrote: »

Spider Legs suggested MEPs represent only those who voted for them. Is that the case, or not?

Well, what do you mean by "represent"?

MEPs must supposedly act in the interest of the entire Union. So, in this broad sense, each MEP supposedly represents the whole Union. In practice, that's bull****. A Brexit MEP is not going to represent the interests of Polish farmers, nor is a Polish MEP going to represent the interests of Brexiters.

Do you mean elected in your constituency? http://www.europarl.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/en/european-elections/uk_meps.html

Do you mean that you can approach them? Eg if all the MEPs in your costituency are from Party A and you support Party B, can you contact a Party B MEP elected elsewhere?

SouthLondonUser

Tromking wrote: »

Rudimentary lessons on parliamentary democracy required.

I am all ears and looking forward to having my mind blown away with superior insight

Tromking

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

I am all ears and looking forward to having my mind blown away with superior insight

ie.
We don’t directly vote for Ministers or PM’s?
They are all drawn from MP’ s in Parliament.
Here to help.
(This is painful BTW).