Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 17:05:14
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Lead-Footed Trukkboy Driver
|
At least the policies are written down and plain(ish) to read with a overt philosophical basis. They may be nuts but they are at least good enough to tell you precisely how nuts they are:
http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/philosophical-basis.html
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/25 17:05:24
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 17:11:43
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Personally I am quite happy with much of the scope of the green agenda. I would argue that nuclear power is needed as a stable core for our energy needs with renewable making up the difference however.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 17:24:09
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Lead-Footed Trukkboy Driver
|
Just spotted this little tit bit on the UKIP "policies for people" section:
Encourage councils to provide more free parking for the high street.
As a person with a professional interest and involvement in this sphere I feel I can give this a response:
Obvious vote grab is obvious. This is akin to promising to be nice to good people (like you) and not nice to bad people, as in it is pretty much an empty phrase that promises something that most people would really like without actually addressing the issues that cause it to be a problem. Without attempting to resolve the issues around available kerb space/off street parking provision, land prices competing stakeholders etc. they may as well be promising to hope for the best.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 17:25:53
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
Rather ironically, the power/resources matter is just about the only place I disagree with the Greens (I'm very pro-nuclear power). Besides that, they are probably the closest we have to a significant left-wing party (and I mean actually left wing, not the kind of left wing that Labour pretend to be which is all vaguely centerist), and their focus on counteracting rampant consumerism and the increasing wealth gap is something I'd wholeheartedly support.
If there was a significant party that basically took the Green principles minus the actual, you know, 'green' stuff, I'd probably be throwing my vote their way.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 17:52:25
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
Paradigm wrote:Rather ironically, the power/resources matter is just about the only place I disagree with the Greens (I'm very pro-nuclear power). Besides that, they are probably the closest we have to a significant left-wing party (and I mean actually left wing, not the kind of left wing that Labour pretend to be which is all vaguely centerist), and their focus on counteracting rampant consumerism and the increasing wealth gap is something I'd wholeheartedly support.
If there was a significant party that basically took the Green principles minus the actual, you know, 'green' stuff, I'd probably be throwing my vote their way.
I agree with your initial statement; I'm not sure whether I would ever vote for the Greens, but damn, if they supported nuclear power it would certainly sway my opinion.
|
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 19:36:41
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience
|
It warms the cockles of my heart to see so many people pro-Nuclear here. It's got to be the stop gap til we come up with a sustainable alternative.
I am close as hell to becoming a Green activist, but I think their policies on Nuclear and GM are uninformed fear mongering and it holds me back. Shame really.
The Greens got into power in Ireland a few years ago as a minority party in a coalition, and they completely ceased to exist as a national force directly afterwards. They'd be forced to compromise on everything they believe, just like the Lib Dems. (I've never really understood why that works like that. I mean, why do people blame the Lib Dems for having to backtrack? They should blame the Tories, because the Tories are the ones who forced them to do it. Weird. )
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 19:52:12
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Da Boss wrote:I mean, why do people blame the Lib Dems for having to backtrack? They should blame the Tories, because the Tories are the ones who forced them to do it. Weird. )
Well, the lib dems were the one to backtrack. They could have grown a spine, but no
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:00:31
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience
|
That's just not how coalition governments work though. It's my impression from looking at the UK that the parties there aren't very good at coalition government.
I understand the sentiment, but in the end, what could they do? Leave Government and force another general election? Proving that they are unreliable and "can't deal with power"? Or swallow something they don't like in the hopes of getting something else down the line (which is politics). If anything, the Conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty terrible coalition partners,
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:07:53
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Da Boss wrote:. I mean, why do people blame the Lib Dems for having to backtrack? They should blame the Tories, because the Tories are the ones who forced them to do it. Weird. )
It's more down to the fact that as the minority partner, they quite simply haven't pushed for the commitments that they made during the last election trail which people actually regarded as important. Instead of keeping lower tuition fees as one of their bargaining chips, they went for AV. Instead of refusing to increase VAT, Clegg prioritised House of Lords reform.
In other words, the Lib Dems used up all their bargaining power with the Tories in attempts to increase their own power, instead of following through on what people voted for them for. And people know that. Coalition and compromises aren't a problem, it's the multiple abandoned policies in the pursuit of greater political power.
Or in other words, the lies. And the clear evidence of a lack of any real ethics, or sense of responsibility to their voterbase. Instead of being the third, alternative party, they've just demonstrated that they are the same party as the other two with a different colour on the electioneering pamphlet.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/25 20:10:18
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:23:56
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Da Boss wrote:
I am close as hell to becoming a Green activist, but I think their policies on Nuclear and GM are uninformed fear mongering and it holds me back. Shame really.
Can you link me to some of this 'uninformed fear mongering'? I don't want to start an argument, but as someone who is not a fan of nuclear power I would be interested to see if they really are talking rubbish or if they just don't agree with your views.
(Apologies if I sound like a tw*t - I've tried rephrasing to be less confrontational but it's not really working. I am genuinely not intending to sound insulting though!)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:28:54
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Da Boss wrote:That's just not how coalition governments work though. It's my impression from looking at the UK that the parties there aren't very good at coalition government.
I understand the sentiment, but in the end, what could they do? Leave Government and force another general election? Proving that they are unreliable and "can't deal with power"? Or swallow something they don't like in the hopes of getting something else down the line (which is politics). If anything, the Conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty terrible coalition partners,
Ketera gave a better, less facecious a reply
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:28:58
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Da Boss wrote:That's just not how coalition governments work though. It's my impression from looking at the UK that the parties there aren't very good at coalition government.
I understand the sentiment, but in the end, what could they do? Leave Government and force another general election? Proving that they are unreliable and "can't deal with power"? Or swallow something they don't like in the hopes of getting something else down the line (which is politics). If anything, the Conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty terrible coalition partners,
We have fixed term parliaments now. If a coalition falls apart mid parliament, we're stuck with a minority government for the rest of the parliament (5 Years). AFAIK, there's nothing anybody can do to force a general election.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:41:37
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
Ketara wrote: Da Boss wrote:. I mean, why do people blame the Lib Dems for having to backtrack? They should blame the Tories, because the Tories are the ones who forced them to do it. Weird. )
It's more down to the fact that as the minority partner, they quite simply haven't pushed for the commitments that they made during the last election trail which people actually regarded as important. Instead of keeping lower tuition fees as one of their bargaining chips, they went for AV. Instead of refusing to increase VAT, Clegg prioritised House of Lords reform.
In other words, the Lib Dems used up all their bargaining power with the Tories in attempts to increase their own power, instead of following through on what people voted for them for. And people know that. Coalition and compromises aren't a problem, it's the multiple abandoned policies in the pursuit of greater political power.
Or in other words, the lies. And the clear evidence of a lack of any real ethics, or sense of responsibility to their voterbase. Instead of being the third, alternative party, they've just demonstrated that they are the same party as the other two with a different colour on the electioneering pamphlet.
Yeah, this is where I stand on the LibDems. It's not the fact the entered a coalition as the lesser part (I would have been more irritated from an ideological standpoint with a Con/Lab coalition), it's the fact that I can't think of a single promise made pre-coalition that they have actually fulfilled. There should be at least some give-and-take in a coalition, and during this last tenure, it's been all giving to the Tories and no taking the initiative to try and do anything with their promised policies.
I think you'd have to be either mad or on the LibDem payroll* to say they've come out of this partnership better off than they went in
*Funny enough, I actually put this question (have the LDs improved their image/status since entering the coalition?) to a LD press manager a couple of years back in a Q&A, he said they had. I think he was the only one in the room who actually believed it....
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:44:08
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience
|
Interesting stuff, thanks for the answers. I hadn't realised that about the fixed term. That's mental. Why bother making a coalition then? The smaller partner will ALWAYS be screwed.
Ketara: Okay, good points. But I could see electoral reform as a bigger issue than student fees (though both are huge issues) in a certain light.
Peebs: No problem mate, your post was really polite. I can link you an artilcle by a journalist who articulates many of the reasons I am pro nuclear if you like, but essentially I think renewable is not there yet as an alternative and fossil fuels do more damage to the environment. Nuclear suffers from the usual problem that it's failures are dramatic, but rare, like airplane crashes etc. There are no free lunches with regard to energy but I definitely feel that nuclear energy needs to be part of any approach to energy supply.
Article:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/ireland-s-energy-we-need-to-debate-the-nuclear-option-honestly-1.2113299
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 20:53:43
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Da Boss wrote:Interesting stuff, thanks for the answers. I hadn't realised that about the fixed term. That's mental. Why bother making a coalition then? The smaller partner will ALWAYS be screwed.
Not always. They carry the ability to scupper the major party if there is not a give and take, which means they can get policies through that benefit them (meaning "the nation" rather than the party, but eh  ). The major party can't kick them out so they have some serious sway if they have the backbone to stick up for their core values. Leaving government means that they lose all of that for no real benefit.
The major party gets a potential majority if the partner parties agree to vote together, for example as part of an agreed upon "you vote for this and we do this for you" idea.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/25 20:55:36
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:01:11
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
-Shrike- wrote: Paradigm wrote:Rather ironically, the power/resources matter is just about the only place I disagree with the Greens (I'm very pro-nuclear power). Besides that, they are probably the closest we have to a significant left-wing party (and I mean actually left wing, not the kind of left wing that Labour pretend to be which is all vaguely centerist), and their focus on counteracting rampant consumerism and the increasing wealth gap is something I'd wholeheartedly support.
If there was a significant party that basically took the Green principles minus the actual, you know, 'green' stuff, I'd probably be throwing my vote their way.
I agree with your initial statement; I'm not sure whether I would ever vote for the Greens, but damn, if they supported nuclear power it would certainly sway my opinion.
That's what I was thinking, which is why I read their manifesto more closely. They have a lot of very extream policies that they don't talk about so much including:
Banning private ownership of all "lethal weapons" including air rifles and bows
Banning ALL animal testing (no more vital medical testing)
Banning modern farming in any current recognisable state
Enforcing the promotion of vegitarian and vegan diats in all public sector hospitals and schools
In essence reduce the UK militery to zero. I am a pacifist and belive conflict should be avoided, but they are relying on Europe as a buffer with no input to european millitery security.
They want serving members of the millitery the right to refuse orders on grounds of moral objection and to form trade unions
Make all research done at universities, even when privately funded, public information.
Massive increases in car tax, ignoring the massive rural population that cannot rely on public transport.
Basically they have the policies of a naive urban student activist.
|
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:04:44
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
SilverMK2 wrote:
The major party gets a potential majority if the partner parties agree to vote together, for example as part of an agreed upon "you vote for this and we do this for you" idea.
The issue comes when, like the LDs this time around, they end up voting for the Conservative policies without actually getting any concessions from them.
On a slightly tangential note, I just saw an episode of the BBC series 'Inside the Commons', and I reccommend it to anyone who wants a closer look at the real (and frankly rather hideous) nature of British politics. Personally, I was appalled by the kind of schoolboy tit-for-tat, timewasting and general poor attitude some MPs seem to have for the whole affair. It really is quite a distressing state of affairs when you see how petty, chidlish and ignorant some of our elected leaders can be. The prevailing attitude from what I saw (and mostly from Tories, it has to be said, altthough that might just be what was filmed) was that the whole thing was something of a game, a point-scoring event rather than something that actually effects people's lives. It should still be on Iplayer if anyone didn't catch it.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/25 21:05:51
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:05:32
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience
|
Banning animal testing, hahahahahahahaaha. That's a brilliant policy. I can't wait to see it enforced.
Christ.
I'm okay with making all research public though. No reason not to.
Banning modern farming is lso hilarious. Promoting vegetarianism is actually pretty sensible though- meat production is wreaking havoc on the world environment.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:08:46
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Da Boss wrote:That's just not how coalition governments work though. It's my impression from looking at the UK that the parties there aren't very good at coalition government.
I understand the sentiment, but in the end, what could they do? Leave Government and force another general election? Proving that they are unreliable and "can't deal with power"? Or swallow something they don't like in the hopes of getting something else down the line (which is politics). If anything, the Conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty terrible coalition partners,
We have fixed term parliaments now. If a coalition falls apart mid parliament, we're stuck with a minority government for the rest of the parliament (5 Years). AFAIK, there's nothing anybody can do to force a general election.
I belive we have a fixed maximum term, but you can have one before. You have to have either two votes of no confidence in two weeks or 2/3rds of parliment vote to have an early election.
|
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:10:57
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Stone Bonkers Fabricator General
We'll find out soon enough eh.
|
Da Boss wrote:It warms the cockles of my heart to see so many people pro-Nuclear here. It's got to be the stop gap til we come up with a sustainable alternative.
I am close as hell to becoming a Green activist, but I think their policies on Nuclear and GM are uninformed fear mongering and it holds me back. Shame really.
The Greens got into power in Ireland a few years ago as a minority party in a coalition, and they completely ceased to exist as a national force directly afterwards. They'd be forced to compromise on everything they believe, just like the Lib Dems. (I've never really understood why that works like that. I mean, why do people blame the Lib Dems for having to backtrack? They should blame the Tories, because the Tories are the ones who forced them to do it. Weird. )
Pretty much this. Some parts of the environmental movement have wised-up and recognised that we're going to have to solve this problem with infrastructure-level solutions, but there's still plenty of whackaloons about who think they're going to convince the entire planet to go 100% organic and drastically cut back their access to modern amenities, and a fair few of them are in the Green Party. I'm going to an event in a couple of months with Patrick Harvey(co-leader of the Scottish Greens), I'll be asking whether he agrees with his colleagues in the Greens of England & Wales that supporting groups like Take the Flour Back and attending "protests" with them where they destroy publicly funded GM research crops is appropriate behaviour and his answer will determine whether they get my vote in 2016 at Holyrood.
|
I need to acquire plastic Skavenslaves, can you help?
I have a blog now, evidently. Featuring the Alternative Mordheim Model Megalist.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:12:19
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
Da Boss wrote:
I'm okay with making all research public though. No reason not to.
No private company or charity would get universities to do research if they could not keep the data secret until they are ready to publish it, so would lose billions. It would be massively damaging to the russle group.
|
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:14:18
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
Steve steveson wrote: -Shrike- wrote: Paradigm wrote:Rather ironically, the power/resources matter is just about the only place I disagree with the Greens (I'm very pro-nuclear power). Besides that, they are probably the closest we have to a significant left-wing party (and I mean actually left wing, not the kind of left wing that Labour pretend to be which is all vaguely centerist), and their focus on counteracting rampant consumerism and the increasing wealth gap is something I'd wholeheartedly support.
If there was a significant party that basically took the Green principles minus the actual, you know, 'green' stuff, I'd probably be throwing my vote their way.
I agree with your initial statement; I'm not sure whether I would ever vote for the Greens, but damn, if they supported nuclear power it would certainly sway my opinion.
That's what I was thinking, which is why I read their manifesto more closely. They have a lot of very extream policies that they don't talk about so much including:
Banning private ownership of all "lethal weapons" including air rifles and bows
Banning ALL animal testing (no more vital medical testing)
Banning modern farming in any current recognisable state
Enforcing the promotion of vegitarian and vegan diats in all public sector hospitals and schools
In essence reduce the UK militery to zero. I am a pacifist and belive conflict should be avoided, but they are relying on Europe as a buffer with no input to european millitery security.
They want serving members of the millitery the right to refuse orders on grounds of moral objection and to form trade unions
Make all research done at universities, even when privately funded, public information.
Massive increases in car tax, ignoring the massive rural population that cannot rely on public transport.
Basically they have the policies of a naive urban student activist.
Yeah, some of that is pretty silly. But then they raise some very valid points that various other parties like to tiptoe around or outright ignore. For example, from their 'Philosophical Basis' page:
Conventional political and economic policies are destroying the very foundations of the wellbeing of humans...
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, society has expected continual increases in material affluence for the people of the world, and has therefore relentlessly pursued the goal of economic growth. Some nations, such as our own, have indeed become very rich and yet within them there is still abject poverty....
We should instead aim to develop sustainable economies, which improve well-being focused on human values rather than consumerism.
As human beings, we all have the potential to live co-operatively and harmoniously with each other, and with reverence and respect for the complex web of life of which we are a part. Yet it has become increasingly obvious that this potential cannot be realised while basic human needs remain largely unmet.
Society should guarantee access to basic material security for all
Now admittedly I did have to sift through a lot of eco-based rubbish to get to that, but the point is that they do seem to focus very much on the societal issues that other parties either omit or approach from a very different angle.
Which is why, to go back to my earlier comment, if you were to cut the focus on Green issues, you would have a left-wing party that actually represented the needs of the people, which to my mind Labour have ceased to do.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:39:37
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
Oh ye, they do have many very good policies, but they have too much crazy in there. UKIP have some very good points about decentralisation of power, increase of the personal alowance and increases in the value of vocational education, but both have a total detachment from reality when you look closely at their core aims.
|
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 21:41:09
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Paradigm wrote:
The issue comes when, like the LDs this time around, they end up voting for the Conservative policies without actually getting any concessions from them.
The funny thing is that the Tories actually followed through on their side, and gave the concessions asked for. The problem is that in the first case ( AV ), it's more or less an issue for the great British public to decide, as it strongly affects the constitution. So laughingly, the Tories gave the Lib Dems their referendum for AV, and everyone voted against it. And after that, there was absolutely no way the Lib Dems could publicly turn around and demand it was implemented against the will of the populace.
Which led to the Lib Dems muttering about forcing it through despite democracy ( true colours?).
The second time (Lords) the Conservatives tried to put in a triple line whip against it, but the backbenchers wouldn't have it.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/25 21:51:02
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/25 22:30:51
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience
|
Steve steveson wrote: Da Boss wrote:
I'm okay with making all research public though. No reason not to.
No private company or charity would get universities to do research if they could not keep the data secret until they are ready to publish it, so would lose billions. It would be massively damaging to the russle group.
Hmm. Perhaps you're right, but I have the feeling that it wouldn't be as damaging as you think. They're still going to want their research done, and it'd be expensive as hell to get it done in house.
The radical in me also says that losing those billions in return for honesty might be worth it, as far as progress goes. If this sort of thing was in place years ago, Big Tobacco wouldn't have been as able to hide the harm caused by cigarettes, as just one high profile example.
But perhaps I need to think on this some more. My gut says it's a good idea, but my gut is full of gak.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/26 08:05:57
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
They would just take it elsewhere. I'm sure Cal-tech, Harvard, Yale etc would happily take on the work of Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial etc. The UK universities would lose massive funding and research for doctoral training, along with lots of academics.
More likely it would drive the best universities to start refusing state funding and become private universities. Now, if the greens did come in to power they would have to drop many of their more extream policies, but it just shows the naivety of the party.
|
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/26 08:50:51
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Most research is private by dint of not being published until the publisher is ready, rather than any great secrecy. Most post-doc and doctoral places are advertised giving information on the research to be conducted.
Scientists are great self publishers already. However this kind of law may help correct the massive positive bias in literature, where "failed" (or negatively positive) studies are simply not reported. And there is no clause to say that journals have to publish everything simply because it is a requirement for universities and research institutions to make public the research they are doing and the results they have obtained.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/02/26 09:36:45
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle
|
Yes, it is published as part of peer review, but the problem is that they want to make it subject to FoI requests. The media may not publish it, but you can be sure every competitor would be bombarding universities with FoI requests for any data held on anything that could possibly be of interest to them long before it is ready to publish. Glaxo would be asking time and again for all of the work Welcome are doing, and Bayer would be wanting to see everything Astrazenica do, etc.
The other possibility is that they would deem it all commercially sensitive, so not subject to FoI, and actually reduce the amount of data published, whilst tying up time and money in data commissioner hearings as people challenge it.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/26 09:37:28
insaniak wrote:Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/02 21:59:42
Subject: The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Repentia Mistress
|
What do people make of the leaders themselves? Is having a media savvy and charismatic leader a must? Is the era of a Harold Wilson- type leader ( vilified by the media, not very glossy, but gets elected anyway) over? It seems like the successful parties ATM have really good leaders - Cameron, farage, salmond.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 0020/03/02 22:13:07
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie Thread- UK Edition!
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
They're all c****.
|
|
 |
 |
|