If paying everyone an unconditional basic income doesn’t work, neither does “working hard and getting on”, for exactly the same reason.

It was put to me the other day that if we pay everyone an unconditional basic income, won’t the free market/greed just eventually readjust the price of everything to compensate?

So what they were saying is, eventually the market would just push those “at the bottom” back below the poverty line?

I don’t agree that it would, for numerous reasons.

However if it did, then this is also very bad news for those who “work hard and want to get on” and for those who promote that they are the party that supports those that “work hard and want to get on”

Why?

Because if everyone “works hard and gets on” the market would just push those “at the bottom” back below the poverty line, no matter how hard they work, get on and earn more money?

Example.

We pay everyone £200 a week in unconditional basic income. The market will just readjust and increase cost of living by £200.

Everyone starts “working hard and getting on” and earns an extra £200 a week. The market will just readjust and increase cost of living by £200.

If paying everyone an unconditional basic income doesn’t work, neither does “working hard and getting on”, for exactly the same reason.

The problem isnt immigration, its the dammed up money flow

UKIP will scrap the human rights act, its in their manifesto. farage wants to privatise the NHS, its on film. the problem isn’t immigration its a problem with the supply of resources to meet the demand that each “new” person into the system creates.

its the greedy rich idiots like ms klass, who need to realise they only make so much money because poor people spend it. dam up the flow and everyone loses, the rich included.

its a dammed up money flow that’s the problem, not the immigrants. but getting people to see it, is like trying to get them to see that the world isn’t flat, its round.

Anti Austerlty? Stop Bloody Whining!!!!

The money the pro austerity pushers use is only valuable because we give it value.

If the anti austerity movement was serious about being anti austerity, it would stop whining about what the pro austerity movement was doing and take its ball back, by creating and using its own anti austerity currency instead.

If all the people who say they are anti austerity starting using this “anti austerity currency”, it would create a massive demand for the currency, and with its own currency, it could empower itself by choosing to make austerity a thing of the past

How to have Full Proportional Representation while keeping constituency MP’s

The only way to have real democracy is to have full proportional representation.

And we’ve worked out how to have Full Proportional Representation while keeping constituency MP’s

Elect constituency MP’s as we do now, but weight their votes in parliament in direct proportion to their parties share of the national vote.

Step 1.

Elect all MP’s using the current first past the post system.

This keeps MP’s directly connected and responsible to the constituencies that they are elected to serve.

Step 2.

For the purposes of MP’s voting on legislation in the House of Commons.

Take the percentage share of the national vote that a political party got in the General Election and divide it by the number of MP’s that political party got in the same General Election.

The resulting figure becomes the number of votes that each MP of that political party has on each piece of legislation.

Examples

Conservative party recieves 30% of the vote nationally and wins 300 MP’s

30 divided by 300 = 0.1 votes per Conservative MP

This gives the Conservative party 30 votes in total

Labour party recieves 20% of the vote nationally and wins 200 MP’s

20 divided by 200 = 0.1 votes per Labour MP

This gives the Labour party 20 votes in total

Lib Dem party recieves 10% of the vote nationally and wins 50 MP’s

10 divided by 50 = 0.2 votes per Lib Dem MP

This gives the Lib Dem party 10 votes in total

UKIP recieves 30% of the vote nationally and wins 40 MP’s

30 divided by 40 = 0.75 votes per UKIP MP

This gives UKIP 30 votes in total

Green party recieves 10% of the vote nationally and wins 10 MP’s

10 divided by 10 = 1 votes per Green MP

This gives the Green party 10 votes in total

So national vote

UKIP 30%
Conservative 30%
Labour 20%
Lib Dem 10%
Green 10%

Total vote 100%

Current Representation in parliament based on the above vote share, under first past the post

UKIP 40 MP’s ( 6% vote share on legislation )

Conservative 300 MP’s ( 50% vote share on legislation )

Labour 200 MP’s ( 33% vote share on legislation )

Lib Dem 50 MP’s ( 9% vote share on legislation )

Green 10 MP’s ( 2% vote share on legislation )

Total MP’s 600 (100%)

Representation in parliament using our proposed full proportional representation.

UKIP 30 votes
Conservative 30 votes
Labour 20 votes
Lib Dem 10 votes
Green 10 votes

Total votes 100

One way is democratic, one way isn’t.

Question is.

Do you want to live in a democracy or not?

“Political” Big Brother

We’ve solved the UK General Election TV debates problem

“POLITICAL” BIG BROTHER

Put all the party leaders in the Big Brother house.

Vote one out each week.

The winner gets to become Prime Minister.

1. It Engages the politically disaffected.

2. It Save £millions on election costs

3. Get people to pay to vote to evict leaders from the house, and share the money out equally between all political parties. You then have state party funding at no cost to the taxpayer.

Austerity. Europe. Immigration. Every UKIP Argument DEMOLISHED!!!

  • ANTI EU ARGUMENT DEMOLISHED

    Why should some MP in Clacton vote on laws that affect the people of Bristol?

    The people of Bristol pay millions to the bureaucrats in Westminster.

    We need independence. Anyone know a party of the people offering us independence from the wasters in Westminster?

    £28 million a year in salaries alone. That’s before expenses.

    Why should Bristolians pay the extortionate wages of an MP in Clacton?

    IMMIGRATION ARGUMENT DEMOLISHED

    7 Yes or No questions I asked my local UKIP candidate, that left him speechless.

    Still waiting for his replies

    Immigrants demand stuff. Yes or No.

    Demanding stuff creates work. Yes or No.

    Work creates jobs. Yes or No.

    Jobs create wages. Yes or No.

    Wages create tax revenue. Yes or No.

    Immigrants creates Wealth. Yes or No.

    Immigrants create Jobs. Yes or No.

    Why not try them on yours if you need some peace.

    AUSTERITY ARGUMENT DEMOLISHED

    We already produce enough food to eradicate world hunger.

    Pity there isn’t enough money to pay for it all huh!