Comments on: Erm, Polly? http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/ It is all obvious or trivial except... Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:45:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Matt http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28218 Matt Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:25:45 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28218 But that's a feature of a constituency system David. If all constituencies were the same size then still if turnout in Labour constituencies is lower than in Tory then by definition their vote per seat will be lower. In fact it could turn out that Labour only need about 350 votes to get a majority, ie. 0.00001% (or did I miss a 0) of the vote. But that’s a feature of a constituency system David. If all constituencies were the same size then still if turnout in Labour constituencies is lower than in Tory then by definition their vote per seat will be lower. In fact it could turn out that Labour only need about 350 votes to get a majority, ie. 0.00001% (or did I miss a 0) of the vote.

]]> By: David Gillies http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28191 David Gillies Mon, 09 Mar 2009 02:17:07 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28191 Labour have already rigged the system. They can still scrape a majority with something like a 12% deficit in the polls. A priority of an incoming (non-Labour) government should be a scorched-earth reorganisation of constituencies to reverse this. And if I genuinely thought the Tories were going to implement swingeing cuts in the size of the State, it might even make me vote for them. But Osborne and Cameron are all mouth and no trousers. Labour have already rigged the system. They can still scrape a majority with something like a 12% deficit in the polls. A priority of an incoming (non-Labour) government should be a scorched-earth reorganisation of constituencies to reverse this.

And if I genuinely thought the Tories were going to implement swingeing cuts in the size of the State, it might even make me vote for them. But Osborne and Cameron are all mouth and no trousers.

]]> By: David http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28155 David Sun, 08 Mar 2009 02:01:06 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28155 " “…just when the state should expand.” Who’s going to pay for that, Polly? You..? " And also how ????? If it were a good idea(it isn´t) it is not practical. ”

“…just when the state should expand.”

Who’s going to pay for that, Polly? You..?
”
And also how ????? If it were a good idea(it isn´t) it is not practical.

]]> By: Tank http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28149 Tank Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:59:17 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28149 Christ, suddenly every pig-ignorant columnist in town is lecturing us about Keynes, as though they've been experts all their lives, and it's all so friggin' obvious. The worst example, though, was Kaletsky, that fool from The Times, who thought "applying Keynes" to solve the problem was merely a technical matter. Christ, suddenly every pig-ignorant columnist in town is lecturing us about Keynes, as though they’ve been experts all their lives, and it’s all so friggin’ obvious.

The worst example, though, was Kaletsky, that fool from The Times, who thought “applying Keynes” to solve the problem was merely a technical matter.

]]> By: Serf http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28145 Serf Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:12:49 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28145 ....... It’s Margaret Thatcher in 1980 all over again........ Well following Jim Callaghan all over again does somewhat narrow down his options. I can't remember. What was the final result of Mrs Thatcher's economic policies???? Successful wasn't it? ……. It’s Margaret Thatcher in 1980 all over again……..

Well following Jim Callaghan all over again does somewhat narrow down his options.

I can’t remember. What was the final result of Mrs Thatcher’s economic policies???? Successful wasn’t it?

]]> By: just askin' http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28144 just askin' Sat, 07 Mar 2009 13:32:41 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28144 When Polly asks us to "..vote vote vote for Labour" is that a suggestion to use the postal voting system? If so, it seems a little conservative to limit the votes to three. Should be possible to complete a couple of dozen voting papers at least. When Polly asks us to “..vote vote vote for Labour” is that a suggestion to use the postal voting system?
If so, it seems a little conservative to limit the votes to three. Should be possible to complete a couple of dozen voting papers at least.

]]> By: JuliaM http://timworstall.com/2009/03/07/erm-polly-4/comment-page-1/#comment-28140 JuliaM Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:23:19 +0000 http://timworstall.com/?p=6651#comment-28140 <i>"...just when the state should expand."</i> Who's going to pay for that, Polly? You..? “…just when the state should expand.”

Who’s going to pay for that, Polly? You..?

]]>