itsafaircopgov replied the topic: General Election - May 7th 2015
Now that we have fixed term parliaments,campaigning officially started on the 19th December 2014 as that is the date from which all election expenses have to be calculated.
Each party contesting a constituency is allowed to spend £30.700 plus 6p per elector.
In reality only the Tories will come anywhere near this figure using money from big city institutions, hedge fund managers and of course Lord Ashcroft.
Expect Tory Kris Hopkins in Ilkley/Addingham and Ukip...sorry Tory Philip Davis in B in W to bombard households with leaflets between now and election day on May 7.
Oyster replied the topic: General Election - May 7th 2015
It's a Torygraph article; of course their reporting of the Green's policies are going to be skewed and lambasted to fit the right-wing narrative - not that I wouldn't agree with much of what's there. I'm not anti-capitalism but why there are so many people in this country happy with the status quo touted by LabCon, I'll never know (and I include UKIP as part of the 'status quo').
I find the Greens to be a hugely exciting party, seemingly genuinely interested in shaking up the entire system and trying to make us a more equal and fair society. Whilst it would be easy to think that Green Party thinking was there solely to improve the lives of the poorest, I'd wager almost everyone would be better off. As we fast approach an age where the richest 1% will be worth more than the other 99%, it stands to reason that money could be far better distributed, with even the moderately wealthy fairing well out of the new system.
It's just a shame the media aren't interested in them - no pint-swilling, chain-smoking, loudmouth leader as clickbait - and therefore stand zero chance of significant expansion any time soon.
BertieWooster replied the topic: General Election - May 7th 2015
I thought it was a very fair article; it wasn't commenting, simply listing the policies that we know of. Are there any that you'd disagree with?
I'd disagree on your last point, and so would the Greens--they're talking about a 'Green surge', and certainly membership seems to be flying, now the fourth biggest party by members in the country.
On the 1%/99%, as I spent yesterday arguing it, Oxfam borrowed a Credit Suisse methodology for determining 'net wealth'. It's calculated by subtracting debts from assets. Thus someone with a huge mortgage but earning £1mpa might not be in the 1%, whereas someone earning only the limit for benefits (c£26kpa) but renting and with no debt would be in the 1%.
ie the whole thing's ridiculous.
Though, if you want to accept it, the original Credit Suisse report using that methodology also suggested, on that basis, that the UK was one of the most equal western societies. Just possibly because we have a huge level of personal debt.
solarplexus replied the topic: General Election - May 7th 2015
BertieWooster wrote: I thought it was a very fair article; it wasn't commenting, simply listing the policies that we know of.
I agree with you "BW". It was a very informative piece, I wouldn't have said that it was biased for or against.
When I did the quiz
- Which party do you side with
- I was surprised by the results. I would consider myself reasonably well-read, yet I clearly didn't know as much about what the political parties actually stand for, as I thought.
I hope the reporter - Matthew Holehouse - does something similar for all the political parties.