Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The strange case of Britain’s demise

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 584 posts

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#311

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

TapWaterBandit wrote: post #276
Adverblessly wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Israel with proportional representation, every small party has outsized power since every one of them has enough power to vote down the current government by joining hands with the opposition. As a result, decisions that are undesirable by the majority are consistently made. We are currently after an election but before forming a new government and as part of the coalition negotiations the upcoming government…

This is interesting. Does Israel have parliamentary supremacy? In NZ we have MMP which is proportional but Supreme Court rulings on law do no "override" action as parliament is still supreme. So it can't override laws perse.

If you have a constitution (I'm not sure what happened after you rejected Australia's, but you're still in there and it's not too late to join) then the Supreme Court can override laws which it deems unconstitutional.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#312

Post by nine_zeros »

hermitcrab wrote: post #279
nine_zeros wrote: post #144

As an outsider, but generally appreciative of British culture's influence on me, I was (and continue to be) flabbergasted with Britain's inward outlook. For the vast majority of British history, Brits were only wealthy when they traded outside. The trade took various forms such as East India company, trading outposts, industrial trade outside the island, colonization, financial capitalization etc. Britain ruled the s…

>The trade took various forms such as East India company I think Indians might question calling what the East India Company did to India 'trade'.

It was a medieval style of corporation based on wealth extraction and exploitation, but a corporation it was.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#313

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

gman83 wrote: post #253
dignick wrote: post #145

Like in the US, democracy in the United Kingdom is faltering. Our first past the post electoral system means the Tories can retain power with a third of the (active) electorate voting for them. Labour believes first past the post serves them well, but it doesn’t, because they would have been leading a coalition government in the last several elections under Proportional Representation. Instead it requires Labour to b…

Proportional representation also has its problems. Look at the Netherlands, which has 17 different parties in parliament and led to it becoming increasingly difficult to form coalitions, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%932022_Dutch_cabine...

Yes voters should just buckle down and vote for a big left/right party. Voters are getting too much democracy for their own good!

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#314

Post by gghhzzgghhzz »

Silhouette wrote: post #305
akiselev wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point UK government services don’t need reform, they need funding. Austerity has absolutely crippled everything.

The problem with that argument is where the money comes from. If you look at government tax take relative to GDP we aren't paying in much less tax than at any other time in most of our living memories. If anything it is the other way around. We'd all like public services that do everything for everyone but few of us would be willing to pay what that would actually cost and many of us literally couldn't afford it. Mea…

The NHS has been in continuous reform. Thatcher / Blair / Brown / Lansley / Hunt.

Most of these reforms have included injecting private sector and internal markets into the system.

You may agree or disagree with these reforms, but it's difficult to argue that they don't incur overhead. Outsourced contracts need administration, legal frameworks; private parties take profit or else they wouldn't exist.

I'd argue it is likely that most of the extra funding is seeping out through these reforms, plus the legacy of not nationalising the whole health system - GP surgeries, pharmacy, generic drug manufacturing - when the NHS was formed.

I agree with you on the prevention aspect. but my thought is that a more joined up system including GPs, pharmacy and especially social care, would manage a lot of lifestyle related issues much better.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#315

Post by chimeracoder »

grumpyprole wrote: post #296
akiselev wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That referendum was poison pilled with the “alternative vote” and sold to voters as a easy path to the BNP getting elected. It was just as much party politics as the Brexit vote, not a genuine attempt at direct democracy.

And also the adverts of sick babies who would not get the funding they needed if the money was spent on implementating proportional representation. A similar lie was used to sell Brexit.

> And also the adverts of sick babies who would not get the funding they needed if the money was spent on implementating proportional representation

Proportional representation and ranked choice voting are orthogonal concepts. A referendum for ranked choice voting doesn't necessarily implement proportional representation.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#316

Post by chimeracoder »

VK538FY wrote: post #289
dignick wrote: post #145

Like in the US, democracy in the United Kingdom is faltering. Our first past the post electoral system means the Tories can retain power with a third of the (active) electorate voting for them. Labour believes first past the post serves them well, but it doesn’t, because they would have been leading a coalition government in the last several elections under Proportional Representation. Instead it requires Labour to b…

I understand your point. 'First past the post' may not be ideal for your country. For other countries, it is appreciated despite its inconveniences. Example: Québec. We inherited 'first past the post' from England. The results are obvious: small parties with significant numbers of voters in many ridings don't end up in parliament. But Québec is a rural province with only one city worthy of the name, Montréal, almost…

> But Québec is a rural province with only one city worthy of the name, Montréal, almost half the population of the province. That city has a demography very different to the rest of the province. In a proportional system, the will of the big city would simply sweep away the rural regions that don't have the same weight. People have learnt to accept 'first past the post' and any change would upset the balance that exists today.

That's a very long-winded way of saying "some people's votes are weighted more than others", which is an inherently undemocratic principle.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#317

Post by chrisbaker98 »

digianarchist wrote: post #239
raverbashing wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially Corbyn, though of course he couldn't "support it" outright because that would mean agreeing with Tories (and he couldn't oppose it outright without angering a lot of Labour members)

Another rewrite of history. He backed Remain.

Corbyn is a lifelong Eurosceptic who voted against every expansion of EU power that came before him in his entire ~30 year career as an MP pre-2016. He only "opposed" Brexit in 2016 because he had to.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#318

Post by cuteboy19 »

gghhzzgghhzz wrote: post #228
mytailorisrich wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nationalisation with control handed to the workers . And of course there's also the little thing about McDonnell and Corbyn being Marxist and socialist. Again, too many people still seem not to be willing to see what's not even hidden. History should really be compulsory over the whole of secondary school. Edit: they had hinted it very strongly but did not mention it in the 2017 manifesto apart from calling to promot…

You are missing a few things here. Firstly that involving workers in the ownership and running of a company is a successful model that is working in German for example. Focus on short term shareholder value is not good for employees or the company. You are posting on a site that has a large percentage of people working in start-ups. Comments like your kind of goes completely against the audience. Secondary, I've hear…

Youre both wrong. under marxism public utilites would be owned and run by the workers i.e. the people in total, not just the workers who happen to work at the utility. this is because union ownership of public utilites is a recipie for failue and cannot be compared to successful for profit coops

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#319

Post by VK538FY »

culi wrote: post #293
VK538FY wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your point. 'First past the post' may not be ideal for your country. For other countries, it is appreciated despite its inconveniences. Example: Québec. We inherited 'first past the post' from England. The results are obvious: small parties with significant numbers of voters in many ridings don't end up in parliament. But Québec is a rural province with only one city worthy of the name, Montréal, almost…

I don't know if you've fully considered the alternatives here. Alternatives like Approval or even RCV (which admittedly has its own issues) don't at all weaken the rural vote here. Approval means all those rural parties can be voted for instead of having to be consolidated and also increases the chance that some city folk will vote for them. RCV allows rural people to vote for the longshot candidate they ACTUALLY wan…

I appreciate your suggestions but would really need to see some simulations to digest the potential effects. Not that my opinion counts for much but it's always good to suggest alternatives when one criticizes. That said, the duopoly isn't always so bad historically. Many cases of individual candidates who broke party lines or walked the fine line. It depends to a great degree on party discipline or the lack thereof.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#320

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

mjfl wrote: post #211
dignick wrote: post #145

Like in the US, democracy in the United Kingdom is faltering. Our first past the post electoral system means the Tories can retain power with a third of the (active) electorate voting for them. Labour believes first past the post serves them well, but it doesn’t, because they would have been leading a coalition government in the last several elections under Proportional Representation. Instead it requires Labour to b…

Isn't a parliamentary system effectively proportional representation? It's just prime minister that's first past the post, but from a proportional vote in parliament? Labour is not going to save Britain. They are just going to redistribute money that is more and more and more "not there" anymore. The EU is not going to save Britain, they are having a crisis too. Nothing will save Britain, it is doomed for the next co…

OP is using the term loosely, but the issue is with FPTP a candidate can win with one vote over 1/n percent of the vote. So if there are 10 candidates the winner need only 10% of the vote plus 1 vote to win.

That's an impoverished version of democracy.

Post reply on HN