The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

Who will you be voting for?

  • Tory

    Votes: 38 9.9%
  • Diet Tory (Labour)

    Votes: 132 34.3%
  • Tory Zero (Greens)

    Votes: 44 11.4%
  • Extra Tory with lemon (UKIP)

    Votes: 40 10.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 9 2.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 31 8.1%
  • Cheese on toast

    Votes: 91 23.6%

  • Total voters
    385
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would love to see the NHS focus more on helping people stay healthy rather than treating them when they're sick. A lot of the things currently treated are preventable, lifestyle related issues. There is increasingly technology available to allow health services to monitor us remotely and step in with preventative measures before we get sick enough to warrant a trip to the doctors.

They seem to do loads of that nowadays to be fair. Blokes get prostrate invites, breast screening is almost part of life these days, smoking/drinking assitance is available, "5 a day", tons.
 

They seem to do loads of that nowadays to be fair. Blokes get prostrate invites, breast screening is almost part of life these days, smoking/drinking assitance is available, "5 a day", tons.

I think it will get a lot more than that. There are loads of apps for instance that let you track your diet. Won't be long before those are linked up to GPs for diabetes patients. Same with things like blood sugar monitors.
 

http://www.economist.com/blogs/demo...c=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/indefenceofspontaneousorder

AMONG the "manifestly silly and occasionally harmful positions" espoused by libertarians, "the idea of spontaneous order might be the silliest and most harmful of all",says Damon Linker in a much-read post at theWeek.

This took me by surprise. It's true that Friedrich Hayek, whom Mr Linker shamelessly abuses, is the most prominent 20th-century intellectual behind the concept of spontaneous order—the theory that systems, such as markets, naturally correct, and function best without human meddling. It's true that Hayek is commonly lumped in with libertarians. It's true that spontaneous order is an idea libertarians tend to promote. Yet spontaneous order is not a libertarian idea. Crystals, the organisation of neurons in your brain, the ecosystem of the Amazon basin, and the English language are all examples of spontaneous order. According to most non-theological cosmologies, the universe itself is a spontaneous order. We should be careful not to give libertarians too much credit.

What it means to say that an order is spontaneous is simply to say its stable macro-level patterns—those things that make a complex system asystem, an instance of order rather than disorder or randomness—do not come about through design, planning or imposition, but arise instead from the interaction of micro-level elements operating according to certain basic principles or rules. The order that arises spontaneously from markets, whereby prices are allowed to fluctuate freely with supply and demand, is a natural wonder admired by libertarians and non-libertarians alike. The idea that the world sometimes works this way is neither silly or harmful. It's just a fact.

So what's in Mr Linker's craw? He writes:

Simply stated, the idea [of a spontaneous order] holds that when groups of individuals are left alone, without government oversight or regulation, they will spontaneously form a social and economic order that is superior in organization, efficiency, and the conveyance of information than an order arranged from the top down through centralized planning.

I detect at least three problems here. First, Mr Linker has got the idea of spontaneous order somehow tangled up with the idea of utopian anarchism. Second, Mr Linker seems unclear about the distinction between the unplanned development of norms or rules and the unplanned higher-order patterns that rule-bound behaviour can generate. Third, he suggests a false dichotomy between utopian anarchy and central planning.

Libertarian theorists of spontaneous order, such as Hayek, certainly do argue that central planners cannot hope to impose an economic order more attractive and beneficial than the order known to arise spontaneously from a well-functioning market system. They happen to be right about this. They do not, however, argue that when groups of individuals are left alone, innocent of all government, that the Chicago Mercantile Exchange will somehow pop into existence like a mushroom under a damp elm.

According to Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek and everyone else who knows what he or she is talking about, well-functioning markets depend,inter alia, upon clear property rights and a judicial system that enforces agreements and resolve disputes. These institutions set the basic rules that govern the elements in the system (eg, you and me, in our capacity as buyers and sellers of goods, services, and labour) and account for its stable, higher-level emergent properties, such as allocative efficiency. The "rules of the game" determine the pattern or order that emerges when we, the players, play by those rules. The not-really-libertarian idea, if I may pursue the games metaphor, is that certain clear and simple rules can produce unpredictably complex and rewarding patterns of play. It's not that a bunch of random athletes dumped without instruction on a pitch will sooner or later spontaneously produce a gripping, well-ordered sporting spectacle. It's important not to confuse, as Mr Linker does, the process by which rules come about and the often surprising and complex patterns of activity those rules might bring about. So where do the micro-level rules that generate macro-level order originate?

Hayek argued that the rules that give rise to the higher-level order of the market are not the result of government planning—at least not initially. They emerge from a chancy process of socio-cultural evolution, and it's by no means bound to happen. Neither Adam Smith, he of "the invisible hand", nor Hayek believed that one can simply throw people together and the institutions of modern liberal capitalism will "spontaneously" appear. The puzzle of modern economic growth is a puzzle precisely because formillennia nothing like it ever got going and then suddenly it did get going with alarming and immensely beneficial consequences. Thinkers such as Smith and Hayek are so profoundly valuable because they have helped us to recognise the role these rules play, once chanced upon, in bringing about the wealth and well-being of the extended market order. Because these rules are of such enormous utility, Smith and Hayek implored governments to codify and enforce them. That is to say, they wanted government tooversee and regulate markets, as do libertarians who count on governments to enforce contracts and define, clarify and protect property rights.

Smith and Hayek resorted to the idea of a spontaneous order not to argue against the necessity of government, but to argue against mercantilism and the micromanagement of the economy, and to remind us that the patterns of behaviour that arise from the rules we impose through legislation often fail to match our best-laid plans. Smith's fat volumes onjurisprudence are not the work of man who believes public policy to be pointless, or that government rules are not necessary for prosperity. Hayek's magnum opus, "The Constitution of Liberty", is a work in favour of, among other things, a constitution. Reading Mr Linker, however, one gets the idea that the entire classical liberal tradition is an enterprise in state-smashing utopianism. You probably already know, as Mr Linker should know, that it's not.

State-smashing libertarians may be silly and they may be harmful. Some of them areenamoured with the idea of spontaneous order, it's true. But that's not an argument against spontaneous order any more than Hitler's vegetarianism is an argument against kale.
 
Read this earlier.

A HUNDRED THINGS THAT THE TORIES ARE NOT BOASTING ABOUT:

Tories have axed 576 Sure Start Centres.
Bankers' Bonuses have risen by 64% in just 1 year.
Food Bank usage has grown by 700%+ in 3 years.
1 million are now employed on Zero-Hours Contracts.
The Disabled have suffered real term cuts of 1.7% this year in benefits some now live in official poverty as defined by the DWP.
52,701 firms have been declared Insolvent since 2010.
379,968 persons have been declared Insolvent since 2010.
Unemployment is 20,000+ higher today than May 2010.
Private Rental Homes cost on average £9,084 year to rent (£1,128 up from Apr 2010)
Tories have axed 5,601 Nurses since May 2010.
Council Tax rises imposed on the poor & disabled have led to 450,000 being summoned to courts since April.
1 million people have had to sell their family home to pay for Elderly Care in the last 5 years (in fairness that does include 2 years of a Labour government). HOWEVER Cameron promised that no one would have to sell their family home to pay for elderly care.
More than 250,000 Disabled people have been forced to take place in the Work Programme unpaid.
Water Charges are up 20% since 1 Apr 2010.
20% of Law Firms are facing bankruptcy and 500 have shut in 6 months amid Legal Aid cuts.
Stamp Prices are up 46-56% since May 2010.
Suicide Rates have climbed 8% in just 1 year.
Number of Children in Class Sizes of more than 30 has doubled in a year.
Free Schools are under-subscribed but they get more money per pupil & freeze out poor kids.
Tories axed 5,000 Firefighters and hundreds of Fire Stations.
Waiting Lists for families seeking to rent social housing have soared to record highs.
Housing Benefit Bill has climbed to more than £20 billion as Private Landlords cash in with record rents.
The number of Cancelled Operations in our NHS have doubled and are at their worst for 8 years.
OBR predict Household Debt will grow more than £500bn this parliament.
The Tories sold the Royal Mail for 50% less than it's now valued.
Gas Prices are up 31% since May 2010.
Homelessness is up 28-34% since May 2010.
Rough Sleeping in London has grown 85% since Boris Johnson became Mayor.
House Building, last year, fell to a 90 year peacetime low.
Electricity prices are up 22-39% in price since May 2010.
The UK suffered a 97% drop in Affordable House starts in 6 months under Grant Shapps .
£12bn+ of NHS has been put up for sale under this government.
33% of NHS Walk In Centres have been axed.
Wage Growth is just 0.7% which is much lower than inflation.
Profit Tax is to be cut by 25% (from 28% to 21%).
3.5 million now live in Child Poverty as Tory welfare cuts & sluggish wage growth bite.
800,000 more households are living in Fuel Poverty & this excludes the impact of recent price rises.
Numbers of Working Poor have doubled in 3 years & include homes with 2.2mill children.
Numbers living in temporary accommodation have grown 11.4% since Q2 2010.
'The 50p rate' High Earner Tax was cut by 10% (from 50p to 45p)
VAT Tax was hiked by 14% (from 17.5% to 20%)
EMA was scrapped for 500,000 as drop out rates climb
Bedroom Tax clobbered 660,000 of which 2/3rs are disabled & 1/4 single parents.
The Tories and their Lib Dem pals trebled Tuition Fees.
Record number of PFI contracts signed in the first year of a Tory government.
Bus Fares are up 22% under the Tories.
£5bn spent on back to work schemes that are less than 2% successful.
7,968 Hospital Beds Axed.
Rail Fares are up 27% since 2010.
The Number of GCSE Students getting A/A* Grades has fallen by 6% since 2010.
35,000 Police personnel have lost their jobs under the Tories.
42,000 Armed Forces personnel to lose their jobs even though £2bn went unspent.
Tories abolished Equality Impact Assessments to cover up the immorality of their policies.
Tories lost several court cases against NHS closures & the Risk Register.
The Tories halved a worker's right to 90 days Redundancy Notice.
£168m in donations are raked in by the Tories including £20m from Private Health.
Chair of UK Statistics Authority tells Gove to stop lying about Education.
Chair of UK Statistics Authority tells Hunt to stop lying about NHS Spending.
Chair of UK Statistics Authority tells Cameron to stop lying about Debt Reduction.
National Debt has risen £447 billion.
NHS Spending did not rise as promised.
NHS 'Never Events' have more than trebled (evidence)
NHS Negligence complaints lodged have increased 49% since 2010.
35,000+ NHS Staff have been axed.
5,000 Firefighters have been axed.
Minimum Wage rises have been below inflation every year of Tory rule.
University Applications fell by 6% in Jan 2013.
Treatments are no longer free on the NHS in parts of England.
10 Prisons have been axed & 4 more are to close.
4 Profit Making Prisons have been opened.
The Tax Gap has grown by £3bn to £35bn in the last year alone [evasion/avoidance]
6% of Prison Cells have been cut in 1 year.
£829m cut from the Children's & Families Budget.
The percentage of A-Level Students getting A/A* has fallen 3% since 2010.
Food Prices are up 19% under the Tories.
11,000 Fat Cat NHS Bosses given a 13% pay hike while nurses pay frozen.
At least a third of Ambulance Stations have been axed since 2010.
NHS GP Funding cut by £400 million.
NHS Funding For Cancer, Stroke & Heart Patients cut by 12-26%.
A&Es waiting times at their worst for 8+ years.
Michael Gove overspent £1bn on Free Schools & Academies at State Schools expense.
NHS Direct was axed and replaced by a botched and fragmented NHS111.
NHS Patient Satisfaction went from record high under Labour to record low under the Tories.
Government wasted £1.4 billion on NHS Staff Redundancy Payouts.
Government axed a plan to rebuild 715 Crumbling Schools.
Just 3% of CEOs in the FTSE 350 are Women & Cameron has fueled a more Sexist tone to our politics.
31% of UK women have suffered Domestic Abuse and it has risen in 25% after the Tories came to power. Legal Aid cuts, police cuts & the Bedroom Tax make it harder for women to escape it.
Tories cut Child Benefit for middle-class families while giving tax cuts to millionaires.
Number of people Working Unpaid is at a 13 year high.
The Government used your taxes to fund racist vans that drove around London warning immigrants to "Go Home". The Advertising Standards Authority has now banned them.
1.8 million workers now earn less than the National Minimum Wage.
More than 600,000 Public Sector workers have been axed.
Job creation: There were more workers born in the UK employed in Britain in Jul-Sept 2010 than 3 years later on 30 June 2013.
On world disability day the Tories shut 36 Remploy Factories and axed 1,000 disabled workers.
Job Creation: 70% of new jobs created in the UK under the Tories have gone to non-UK citizens which makes a lie of the Tory claim they've created a million new jobs.
95 Academy Bosses rake in more than MPs with the top 10 giving themselves £2million between them.
The Tories have Privatised Educational Services, Auditing, Consultancy and Prison Services worth £5 billion.
Were it not for Ed Miliband & the pressure of the UK public Cameron would have taken us to war in Syria.
Tories have privatised 1 major NHS Hospital, have put another major hospital up for sale and have handed 12 community hospitals to profiteers.
Sure Start Funding has been cut by 28% as Cameron breaks his SureStart promise,
In total the Tories have broke 12 key promises to the people that gave them their vote.
 

Somethings would have had to suffer to try and sort out the absolute mess the last Labour government left us in- is my response.

Fact is, Labour left us in a state and the conservatives have made a hash of cleaning it up.

NOT a reason to do it all again with Labour next year. Please for the love of god not Labour. It is not the working class mans vote and certainly shouldn't be stuck with due to miss placed allegiance to the anti Thatcher movement relevant 30 years ago.
 
Somethings? Has anything not gotten worse under the Tories?

Will everything continue to crumble under the Tories? Absolutely.
 
Last edited:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/demo...c=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/indefenceofspontaneousorder

AMONG the "manifestly silly and occasionally harmful positions" espoused by libertarians, "the idea of spontaneous order might be the silliest and most harmful of all",says Damon Linker in a much-read post at theWeek.

This took me by surprise. It's true that Friedrich Hayek, whom Mr Linker shamelessly abuses, is the most prominent 20th-century intellectual behind the concept of spontaneous order—the theory that systems, such as markets, naturally correct, and function best without human meddling. It's true that Hayek is commonly lumped in with libertarians. It's true that spontaneous order is an idea libertarians tend to promote. Yet spontaneous order is not a libertarian idea. Crystals, the organisation of neurons in your brain, the ecosystem of the Amazon basin, and the English language are all examples of spontaneous order. According to most non-theological cosmologies, the universe itself is a spontaneous order. We should be careful not to give libertarians too much credit.

What it means to say that an order is spontaneous is simply to say its stable macro-level patterns—those things that make a complex system asystem, an instance of order rather than disorder or randomness—do not come about through design, planning or imposition, but arise instead from the interaction of micro-level elements operating according to certain basic principles or rules. The order that arises spontaneously from markets, whereby prices are allowed to fluctuate freely with supply and demand, is a natural wonder admired by libertarians and non-libertarians alike. The idea that the world sometimes works this way is neither silly or harmful. It's just a fact.

So what's in Mr Linker's craw? He writes:

Simply stated, the idea [of a spontaneous order] holds that when groups of individuals are left alone, without government oversight or regulation, they will spontaneously form a social and economic order that is superior in organization, efficiency, and the conveyance of information than an order arranged from the top down through centralized planning.

I detect at least three problems here. First, Mr Linker has got the idea of spontaneous order somehow tangled up with the idea of utopian anarchism. Second, Mr Linker seems unclear about the distinction between the unplanned development of norms or rules and the unplanned higher-order patterns that rule-bound behaviour can generate. Third, he suggests a false dichotomy between utopian anarchy and central planning.

Libertarian theorists of spontaneous order, such as Hayek, certainly do argue that central planners cannot hope to impose an economic order more attractive and beneficial than the order known to arise spontaneously from a well-functioning market system. They happen to be right about this. They do not, however, argue that when groups of individuals are left alone, innocent of all government, that the Chicago Mercantile Exchange will somehow pop into existence like a mushroom under a damp elm.

According to Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek and everyone else who knows what he or she is talking about, well-functioning markets depend,inter alia, upon clear property rights and a judicial system that enforces agreements and resolve disputes. These institutions set the basic rules that govern the elements in the system (eg, you and me, in our capacity as buyers and sellers of goods, services, and labour) and account for its stable, higher-level emergent properties, such as allocative efficiency. The "rules of the game" determine the pattern or order that emerges when we, the players, play by those rules. The not-really-libertarian idea, if I may pursue the games metaphor, is that certain clear and simple rules can produce unpredictably complex and rewarding patterns of play. It's not that a bunch of random athletes dumped without instruction on a pitch will sooner or later spontaneously produce a gripping, well-ordered sporting spectacle. It's important not to confuse, as Mr Linker does, the process by which rules come about and the often surprising and complex patterns of activity those rules might bring about. So where do the micro-level rules that generate macro-level order originate?

Hayek argued that the rules that give rise to the higher-level order of the market are not the result of government planning—at least not initially. They emerge from a chancy process of socio-cultural evolution, and it's by no means bound to happen. Neither Adam Smith, he of "the invisible hand", nor Hayek believed that one can simply throw people together and the institutions of modern liberal capitalism will "spontaneously" appear. The puzzle of modern economic growth is a puzzle precisely because formillennia nothing like it ever got going and then suddenly it did get going with alarming and immensely beneficial consequences. Thinkers such as Smith and Hayek are so profoundly valuable because they have helped us to recognise the role these rules play, once chanced upon, in bringing about the wealth and well-being of the extended market order. Because these rules are of such enormous utility, Smith and Hayek implored governments to codify and enforce them. That is to say, they wanted government tooversee and regulate markets, as do libertarians who count on governments to enforce contracts and define, clarify and protect property rights.

Smith and Hayek resorted to the idea of a spontaneous order not to argue against the necessity of government, but to argue against mercantilism and the micromanagement of the economy, and to remind us that the patterns of behaviour that arise from the rules we impose through legislation often fail to match our best-laid plans. Smith's fat volumes onjurisprudence are not the work of man who believes public policy to be pointless, or that government rules are not necessary for prosperity. Hayek's magnum opus, "The Constitution of Liberty", is a work in favour of, among other things, a constitution. Reading Mr Linker, however, one gets the idea that the entire classical liberal tradition is an enterprise in state-smashing utopianism. You probably already know, as Mr Linker should know, that it's not.

State-smashing libertarians may be silly and they may be harmful. Some of them areenamoured with the idea of spontaneous order, it's true. But that's not an argument against spontaneous order any more than Hitler's vegetarianism is an argument against kale.
Crystals don't spontaneously order though, crystals have an ordered state that occupies a lower energy than a disordered state.
 
Please for the love of god not Labour. It is not the working class mans vote and certainly shouldn't be stuck with due to miss placed allegiance to the anti Thatcher movement relevant 30 years ago.

So which party is the working class to vote for?

Conservatives - No
Liberal Democrats -No
UKIP - an even bigger NO

If you can't afford private health care or private education, if you don't have decent private pension provision, if you can't afford private care provision, if you care about the elderly, the sick and the needy then there is no option but to vote Labour.

If you are dependent upon state provision òf services or benefits, if you're in employment but adversely effected by the cost of living crisis then you have no choice but to vote Labour.

There's £37 billion of cuts coming to pay for tax cuts at the end of the next parliament.

The choice and consequences are that clear!
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top