Politics Where do you stand, politically?

Martin

Martin

Cadet
A bit of a touchy subject for many but I've always enjoyed a good debate around the subject. Although I've only just (two years ago) reached the voting age, and have yet to vote yet (damn these elections only running every four years...), I've always loved to debate around the subject.
--

My Standing: So, if I am to go by the Swedish system I would be seen as a socialist (social-democrat) which would mean that I lean towards left ("red green"). Although I don't really find my political views that easily categorized.. Anyway..

So basically.. For me I feel that the best thing about this country (Sweden) is our welfare system. We have free healthcare (There's a cap at around £100 / year, after which all healthcare is free), and we have free dental-care until we're 20 years old. As well as with other mechanics that are put into place to make sure that you can turn to something/someone to get help if you're having problems. Economical problems or any other. You can get help without having to ruin yourself. Also school is free.

The "downside" of this is that we have slightly higher taxes. The standard income-tax (lowest rate) is ~30%. But I don't mind really. Because we have all these perks that help people in our society, trying to make sure nobody is left on the outside without a roof over their head.

HOWEVER

I am not and never will be against the free market. Competition between companies is a great thing as long as it's somewhat regulated, so that the playing field is somewhat equal. I'm also not against having companies run retirement homes, hospitals etc.. I don't even mind them taking out the profits As long as they're not turning profits by cutting down on necessities.

So, I'm a "lefty" but not a full blown Socialist/Marxist...

--

So where do you stand?

#politics #left #right #socialist #liberal #conservative #anarchist #enviromentalist #elections #government #healthcare #welfare
 
I don't agree with any of the UK parties - they're politicians, therefore they're all lying lowlifes who have no clue what normal day-to-day living is for people.
 
Personally, I have benefited from the current UK government. I'm paying less tax than I was when they got into power, and am paying into an auto opt-in pension scheme. Being 22 years old, I otherwise would not have even considered that, but it's extremely important.

That said, it's all at the detriment of other people, and ultimately, they're still all out for themselves.

I hate politics really.
 
I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative, to quote Jesse Ventura, former governor of Minnesota if I remember correctly.

That said, I have an unhealthy disdain toward politicians in general. I will NEVER vote.
 
Xenon said:
I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative, to quote Jesse Ventura, former governor of Minnesota if I remember correctly.

That said, I have an unhealthy disdain toward politicians in general. I will NEVER vote.
Click to expand...
Don't you feel like by not voting, you lose any and all right to have an opinion about how poorly the country is being run?
 
Azhria Lilu said:
Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. The deciding factor is generally whether I can get to the polling station or not.
Click to expand...
Request a postal vote! We do, don't do queuing :p

On a related topic, I am of the opinion that the minimum age for voting in the UK is too high. I was working when I was 16 years old, and paying income tax... Did I have a say in which government I paid that tax to? Nope.

Maybe restrict it to those who work and contribute to society, but it's something at that age I felt aggrieved about.
 
Azhria Lilu said:
I don't agree with any of the UK parties - they're politicians, therefore they're all lying lowlifes who have no clue what normal day-to-day living is for people.
Click to expand...
This is a very prejudiced view - you can't lump all politicians together and say they are all the same - any more than it is fair to do so for blacks, gays, women, or any group. Some politicians (I would say many) are highly principled, and work very hard to do their best for their constituents. It's a lot easier to snipe from the side-lines than to (literally) stand up and be counted for what you believe.
 
Phil_TC said:
This is a very prejudiced view - you can't lump all politicians together and say they are all the same - any more than it is fair to do so for blacks, gays, women, or any group. Some politicians (I would say many) are highly principled, and work very hard to do their best for their constituents. It's a lot easier to snipe from the side-lines than to (literally) stand up and be counted for what you believe.
Click to expand...

Biggest load of dung ever. Voicing your opinion means nothing. To actually own up to it means everything. Politicians rarely do the latter. They always go back on things they've said when criticized. You have a very naive point of view if you actually think that politicians stand up and get counted for what they believe.
 
I guessed that my post might draw some criticism. Voicing my opinion means a lot to me (even if it attracts this sort of abuse rather than reasoned debate). In Sweden and the UK politicians stand for elections, their votes are counted, and governments are formed based on the results. This is standing up and being counted. The assertion that they always go back on things they've said when criticized is a gross generalization. Some do, some don't. The situation is not as black-and-white as you paint it.
You (rightly) praise your country's welfare system, and other aspects of government. How can you not accept that these was brought about (along with others) by politicians?
In democracies it's important to be able to criticize those who govern us, but I think that the popular attitude of "they're all in it for themselves/all a bunch of liars, etc." is uninformed and lazy - it's much easier to hurl insults than to look at individual issues and make reasoned assessments.
 
Phil_TC said:
I guessed that my post might draw some criticism. Voicing my opinion means a lot to me (even if it attracts this sort of abuse rather than reasoned debate)
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a very fair statement. No one has abused you, you've been disagreed with, but not abused. Don't forget you accused me of being prejudiced because of my statement - I never then came back and accused you of abusing me because my opinion differs from yours.

I think that the popular attitude of "they're all in it for themselves/all a bunch of liars, etc." is uninformed and lazy - it's much easier to hurl insults than to look at individual issues and make reasoned assessments.
Click to expand...

You are making an assumption here that I have not looked at individual issues, made a reasoned assessment or even speaking from personal experience (all of which I have) and my personal opinion as that the politicians in power are not worth my time of day - the ones who actually hold any sway do not care about the little people, they care about themselves - this is proved time and again.
 
Phil_TC said:
I guessed that my post might draw some criticism. Voicing my opinion means a lot to me (even if it attracts this sort of abuse rather than reasoned debate). In Sweden and the UK politicians stand for elections, their votes are counted, and governments are formed based on the results. This is standing up and being counted. The assertion that they always go back on things they've said when criticized is a gross generalization. Some do, some don't. The situation is not as black-and-white as you paint it.
You (rightly) praise your country's welfare system, and other aspects of government. How can you not accept that these was brought about (along with others) by politicians?
In democracies it's important to be able to criticize those who govern us, but I think that the popular attitude of "they're all in it for themselves/all a bunch of liars, etc." is uninformed and lazy - it's much easier to hurl insults than to look at individual issues and make reasoned assessments.
Click to expand...

Is this for real? How have I abused you in any way? Is it because I called you naive? Allow me to explain how politics really work. The politicians "stand up" for an opinion. People vote because the other option is far worse, not because their party is any good. An example being choosing between saving one person and tens of thousands die, or try to save them all and they all die. There is no win, the same goes when voting for politicians.

Although I associate myself with the Socialdemocrats in Sweden, by no means do I agree with everything they say. I don't even agree with half of the things they say. However the core ideas are there. Those weren't brought forward by politicians though, once again that is a very naive point of view. Those issues were raised by the citizens. Not politicians.. Kudos for the politicians that realized that if they wanted to win the election, they have to go with what the people say. But don't you ever, mistake that system for a system where the politicians think of an idea and then present it. They might present ideas from citizens etc as their own, but they're not.
 
Azhria Lilu said:
Not to mention that most of the time the ideas they put forward to get themselves elected hardly ever come to fruition in any way that actually benefits the people who need it.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I'm not saying that every single politician in the world starts off as a bad seed. They might give it a go for a while, being the idealistic people that they might be. However, with time, and the ineffectiveness of the system they just give up. They'll start making sure they're set for life when this ends etc..
 
I didn't expect the issue to raise quite as much heat. Firstly, sorry Azhria, I was not accusing you of using abuse - I should have made it clear that I was referring to Leprechaun's post, and in particular to his use of the phrase "load of dung". And while I maintain that the view you expressed was prejudiced - in that it was a sweeping statement not based on facts related to individuals - I hope I did not do so in an offensive manner.
Leprechaun - I still believe that you are over-generalizing, but I don't feel the need to call you naïve, or to say that I need to explain to you how politics really work.
 
Phil_TC settle down. If you can't handle being called out as naive then you should probably ease up on posting on the internet. Although, I would've called you naive regardless whether this was on the internet or in real life. Enough about that however.

Based on your post I just assumed that you believed in the system and didn't fully grasp how politics really work. In regards to the comment about over-generalizing? Of course I am. That's the whole point. There are "good" politicians out there. Until they actually get to form government that is. At which point they have to redact on their previous promises because the reality is, the system won't allow the changes.

Take "Obamacare" for example. President Obama wanted a lot more than just the way "Obamacare" is right now. However he was unable to implement it fully and as such had to compromise. That is a lie from Obama's side.. Because Obama promised the American people (read: voters) that he would be able to do all this. He didn't. You can twist and turn it all you want but the fact remains if you have promised to do something, but don't , well then you have lied to the people (read: voters).

In a utopian society we wouldn't have politicians that lie to us every four years, trying to gain voters so they can sit in government. We wouldn't have politicians that go back on their promises or opinions because it raises a lot of questions.

Sadly, as it currently stands in today's society, the only parties that stand up for their opinions regardless are the extremist parties.

Ps. The phrase "Biggest load of dung ever" was referred to that excuse. You're not the first one to use it.
 
Enough indeed. While my position remains unchanged, I prefer not to participate in a discussion in which one party maintains such an unpleasant tone.
 
Back
Top