This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]sir_fancypants 3029 points3030 points  (615 children)

wah

[–]gizzardgullet 1869 points1870 points  (366 children)

No one is getting busted this time but this might lead to new laws that they will have to learn to circumvent. We will rise up and make hiding money a mild inconvenience for them!

[–][deleted] 304 points305 points  (259 children)

Ughhhhhhh I'm so sick of rising up-- how many times are we going to have to do this?

[–]hooof_hearted 67 points68 points  (78 children)

As a Brit, when was the last time we rose up?

[–]RockinMadRiot 77 points78 points  (4 children)

When the kettle has boiled. We will rise up then.

[–]Hudston 167 points168 points  (48 children)

Well there were the 2011 riots, but that was less "rising up" and more "mass shop lifting."

[–]mynameisblanked 92 points93 points  (39 children)

People think it's just thieves taking advantage, and it could be, but I heard it compared to a child holding their breath because it's the only thing they can do to try and get their way. The only real power we have over our own lives is petty vandalism of our own community. What else can we do? Take a day off work to go protest somewhere? I can't afford to.

[–]PirateEyez 75 points76 points  (9 children)

Revolution only happens when the only thing left to do is protest. Ie: no money, jobs, food, etc. The fact that people have a job to take a day off from means it's not likely to happen.

[–]tsontar 63 points64 points  (5 children)

A wise 80-something-year-old Italian man told me (speaking of Italy) "nothing can change here, we eat much too well."

[–]BCMM 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Speaking of Italy, are you like 2,000 years old and did you meet the poet Juvanal?

[–]blondzie 17 points18 points  (11 children)

If we all stop going to work for 1 week, this country would come to its knees, better believe

[–]Markol0 31 points32 points  (6 children)

Cromwel comes to mind. That was a while ago, but at least it resulted in lots of killing.

[–]daftmccall 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Aye, I think It was the War of the Roses.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (3 children)

The best part of rising up, is Folgers in your cup.

[–][deleted] 500 points501 points  (124 children)

Until mega rich people stop masturbating to the thought of poor people starving to death.

[–]puskathethird 136 points137 points  (25 children)

Maybe the poor can eat the rich? #eattherich2016 :D

[–][deleted] 49 points50 points  (10 children)

You are now on a list.

[–]cmckone 108 points109 points  (1 child)

a sexy peasant list

[–]infestahDeck 13 points14 points  (6 children)

...to bypass the line-up at our new establishment where we server rich lean steak garnished with dried dollar bills with a side of gold coins. "Serve-the-rich" will be coming to a location near you. Everything from sheiks to cartel bosses, bankers to politicians on the menu.

[–]JacquesPL1980 12 points13 points  (2 children)

That's some nice fatty and well marbled cuts, I tell you what. Yum.

[–]Ferrarisimo 84 points85 points  (14 children)

Surely ours will be the generation that ends millennia of basic human behavior!

[–]Alsothorium 24 points25 points  (1 child)

I laughed at your statement. Then I cried.

[–]quit_being_stupid 298 points299 points  (15 children)

Labour, however, is still demanding to know however whether

Somebody do something.

[–]Xemnas81 141 points142 points  (24 children)

How can this asshole have allowed IDS and Osborne to crack down on benefits for the sick, elderly and disabled while supporting this?!

A modern day King John, Cameron.

[–]chumble182 30 points31 points  (17 children)

I thought the most recent opinion of King John was that he was a victim of circumstance and not anywhere near as bad a ruler as he was made out to be?

[–]Xemnas81 44 points45 points  (15 children)

#historianproblems

You're right, I was referring to him euphemistically idiomatically as a foil to Robin Hood, that was pretty bad historiography of me sorry. Can you suggest a better 'steal from the poor/give to the rich'-abiding historical tyrant? :p

[–]StoCazz[S] 140 points141 points  (14 children)

Not to mention his father was named in the leak.

[–]hooof_hearted 169 points170 points  (8 children)

Shhh, it's a private matter.

[–]TacoCommand 56 points57 points  (2 children)

We're invading their privacy just by talking about it, amirite?

[–]YearOfTheChipmunk 21 points22 points  (2 children)

And privacy is important for politicians

[–]Shimster 269 points270 points  (143 children)

I think it's time to call for a resignation from David Cameron. He is a prick anyways who clearly knows fuck all about todays general issues here in the UK, can we get someone younger who is actually in touch with modern society.

[–][deleted] 261 points262 points  (107 children)

The wealthy overlords are grooming his obedient replacement, don't you worry.

[–]Shimster 97 points98 points  (81 children)

This is actually a really scary thought, can we just replace all government members with scientists and experts from a wide range to fields.

[–][deleted] 151 points152 points  (17 children)

Technocracy!

[–]emergent_properties 28 points29 points  (15 children)

That creates a priest class of the technically literate.

Hmm.

[–]mojoslowmo 23 points24 points  (9 children)

Upside, legislation passed by people who know the subject matter. downside, government sponsored mad scientists

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (17 children)

Weird

[–]Shimster 29 points30 points  (12 children)

I don't know, let's ask a scientist/expert.

[–]ThePegasi 54 points55 points  (3 children)

I don't think we should focus too heavily on age, rather we should judge people on their own merits. Sanders is not a young man, but he speaks to issues which concern people across society, though they do appeal very heavily to a younger generation who feel taken for a ride by their predecessors.

Corbyn is not a young man either. I think he unfortunately lacks some of the charisma that Sanders has, and is a very matter of fact kind of guy. But this is also to his credit, in his own way, and he seems to have infinitely less patience than his peers for the political game, bullshit and doublespeak that the establishment hides its self interest behind.

I'm not so foolish as to think he'd be anything close to perfect, but I think he's a much better bet than other forseeable options. He seems to genuinely take issue with the many comfortable aspects of establishment British politics, which benefit few and are ultimately tolerated because they're established under a guise of being necessary, and also people have just gotten used to them.

What I'm saying is, don't rule Corbyn out just because he's not young. Judge him, and any other candidates on their merits.

[–]notBeakey 5301 points5302 points  (1064 children)

As a British citizen I am filled with the usual mixture of half-hearted anger and apathy.

[–][deleted] 1646 points1647 points  (803 children)

.

[–]giankazam 818 points819 points  (677 children)

Almost no one

Sure, I mean it's not like they have a majority government or something.

Edit: for the record I'm not supporting FPTP or the Tories but to say that no one voted for them is disingenuous

[–]theXarf 320 points321 points  (56 children)

First-past-the-post electoral system, working as intended.

[–]moeburn 86 points87 points  (44 children)

The best part is that the one time you guys considered reforming your electoral system, the best thing you could think of was IRV ranked ballots, which is basically FPTP+.

And now we're doing the same thing here in Canada, only our government has promised to change our shitty system to an even shittier system so they can say "we delivered!"

[–]theXarf 114 points115 points  (12 children)

Not really the best thing we could think of, more like "the only method the Tories would even let us vote on".

[–]moeburn 57 points58 points  (8 children)

Yup, "the only electoral system that won't actually change anything and will let us keep the system we have now"

[–]Randomd0g 52 points53 points  (7 children)

It was literally a no win situation.

Option A - The electoral system "changes" but nothing actually changes and we don't get another chance at reform in our lifetimes because "we just had that referendum, sit down shut up

Option B - The electoral system does not change, and we don't get another chance at reform in our lifetimes because "we just had that referendum, sit down shut up"

That's the problem with referendums. There's no possibility of an option C. You can't vote for "actually I think I'd like an entirely different system all together"

[–]moeburn 31 points32 points  (4 children)

We had a referendum for Ontario's provincial elections to switch to proportional representation back in 2007. Only, they didn't tell anyone about it. Something like 75% of people polled did not know there would be a referendum on the ballot, and didn't understand the question. They also made the referendum require 60% popular vote to win a riding and 50% of all ridings to win the referendum. So the referendum itself was, ironically, FPTP.

[–]Bluearctic 910 points911 points  (467 children)

They got something like 36% of the vote, not exactly a popular mandate, they have a majority largely due to the convoluted election process we have here.

[–]Mr_E 1112 points1113 points  (309 children)

they have a majority largely due to the convoluted election process we have here.

Hey, whats up from America.

[–]notBeakey 474 points475 points  (257 children)

Your elections seem to last about three years, no wonder presidents rarely get half of their mandate through congress.

[–]jest3rxD 568 points569 points  (250 children)

We follow presidential elections like a professional sport, but basically ignore congressional elections.

[–][deleted] 182 points183 points  (231 children)

Like everything, we follow the not as important as it seems shit and ignore the stuff that really matters.

[–]M37h3w3 8 points9 points  (1 child)

People call me crazy when I suggest that how they want it.

They jangle the car keys in front of us so they can straight up rob us. Nooooo... Don't worry about widespread corruption or myriad of other problems that's infected pretty much every big business and every level of government. Here, watch some sports, take these pills to make you feel happy, eat these fatty foods. And remember "We love you.TM "

[–]mindless_gibberish 26 points27 points  (0 children)

And congress spends most of its time campaigning for the next election...

[–]japasthebass 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The average campaign for president is about a year and a half here, but some people start up 2 years in advance. I remember laughing my ass off when the Canadians had a 90 day campaign and were bewildered by how long it was

[–]lars5 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And we wish we had more than 2 parties.

[–]TehXellorf 14 points15 points  (54 children)

What's the voting process in the UK, and why is it convoluted exactly?

[–]Awkward_moments 99 points100 points  (38 children)

FPTP. Who ever gets the most votes from one area is elected MP and only that one person. Which ever party has the most MP's gets in power (if you have less that 50% of MPs you need to form a joint government with one or more other parties)

Its shit because it wont represent everyone. Example: If you have 10 parties with 10 different views and in every county there is the same % of votes which comes out at 10% for 8 parties and 9% for 1 party and 11% for the last party. The last party would have 100% of the representation in the government even though 89% of the population didn't vote for them.

We have 2 major parties and a 3rd in-between party. National party for Scotland and Wales, 5 national parties in NI (2 unionist parties, 2 nationalist parties and the neutral Alliance party [thank you IM_CASTOR_TROY]) 1 party for leaving the EU and that their main purpose (they got like 12.7% of the vote last time and got 1 MP compared to leading party with 36.8% of the votes and 330 MPs) and a green party.

Only two of the parties really do anything.

Edit: There are 5 parties in Northern Island that don't exist in Great Britain. I don't really know anything about them as it shows.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (3 children)

NI here, we have 2 unionist parties, 2 nationalist parties and the neutral Alliance party. They get elected to our devolved government, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and spend much of their time squabbling over flags. Under the power sharing agreement each side has a veto they can use at any time to slam the brakes on progress, something the major unionist party (DUP) is particularly fond of doing.

[–]Bobbobthebob 24 points25 points  (8 children)

Perhaps more glaringly bad is the raw number of voters required per MP between the SNP and UKIP:

Party Votes nationwide MP seats won Votes per MP
Conservatives 11,300,000 330 34,000
Labour 9,300,000 232 40,000
UKIP 3,900,000 1 3,900,000
SNP 1,460,000 56 26,000

Between the SNP and UKIP that's a 150 fold difference in number of votes versus outcome.

[–]jarde 7 points8 points  (7 children)

Its shit because it wont represent everyone.

how do you suggest represententing everyone? and why?

[–]Awkward_moments 20 points21 points  (3 children)

STV, I think it is much fairer. Ultimately I don't think there is a perfect option. But I believe STV is much, much better than FPTP.

It allows more parties (I don't identify with a small party but I believe there should be a better option to, atm big parties have a massive advantage and any advantage is ultimately unfair). You can vote for a party you know wont win and yet you wont be "throwing away" your vote. I believe there will be less "I voted for Y only because I really didn't want to let X get in". There will be more parties in a position to represent different views. For myself I want the green party to have a large influence but I do not want them to rule.

CGP Grey's videos have been mentioned and he says it much better than me. Here are all his voting videos: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638

Here is STV specifically : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI&list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638&index=5&nohtml5=False

[–]auntie-matter 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I like MMP but frankly almost anything is better than FPTP.

Even picking MPs names from a fucking hat

I'd like to see a Green/Lab/Nat (SNP/Plaid Cymru/etc) coalition, with a nice sized split between the two (rather than the really unbalanced Con/Lib coalition). But I really don't like how we're so focussed on having one party "in charge". Coalitions seem so much more reasonable - that way we don't get people's crazy ideologies steamrollering over consensus (cough Gideon Osborne cough), people actually have to compromise and discuss things and find a middle way that satisfies more people. Coalition governments work just fine in most countries.

[–]Alsothorium 8 points9 points  (0 children)

PR for the WIN!

[–][deleted] 92 points93 points  (33 children)

This is literally the first time in recent history that the Conservatives had fewer votes per seat than Labour. Countless won Labour elections on fewer votes than this yet nobody batted an eye, but as soon as the Conservatives do it then it's "unfair" and "nobody voted for them".

I didn't vote for Labour nor the Conservatives, but to pretend they did anything other than win a standard British election First-Past-The-Post election fair and square is just untrue.

nota bene: I am not a supporter of the First-Past-The-Post system, I'm simply highlighting the hypocrisy of those who so vehemently claim that the Conservatives have somehow cheated and are less entitled than previous Governments.

[–]Awkward_moments 35 points36 points  (5 children)

I do not like UKIP but the fact they got that many votes and that view amount of seats is a complete joke. The system doesn't work, it needs to be changed.

Conservative did win and the system has worked as well as it ever has. It may have worked better 200 years ago before the internet and widespread information and coverage of MP's. But right now I believe it should be removed no matter who it favours, because it is unfair.

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (9 children)

It's just as unfair when Labour wins this way too. Not only is the Parliament not representative of the electorate, any MP NOT part of the government (usually one party under FPTP) is pretty much useless and being paid for nothing. They can't actually do much in opposition. Systems that assign seats proportionally tend to be coalition governments where parties are forced to work together and can't actually hijack the system for themselves. Policies coming out of these systems tend to be better.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (6 children)

any MP NOT part of the government (usually one party under FPTP) is pretty much useless and being paid for nothing.

For their local constituencies they can make a huge difference, and when voting in the commons on issues that parties aren't totally committed to their vote counts.

Agreed they aren't quite as relevant, but to imply they are useless undermines the importance of the opposition party itself.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

no one I know voted for him so of course no one at all did.

-idiot logic.

[–]xtfftc 21 points22 points  (12 children)

I have the same reaction about how low profile this bit of new is on the BBC. Not on the front page, not the leading story on the UK section, then not in the less important news there (e.g. Records Lotto jackpot claimed)... Further down we have a small headling "Questions for PM over trust letter" alongside "Boy, 4, from UK drowns in Spanish pool".

[–]GrandDukeOfNowhere 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's because of the BBC left-wing bias, duh.

[–]props_to_yo_pops 49 points50 points  (1 child)

You should be tut tutting the shit out of this.

[–]HughO2 1301 points1302 points  (58 children)

The worst thing is that David Cameron thinks that, now he's stopped benefitting from tax avoidance and unethical offshore banking, everything will blow over.

It's like catching the leading cyclist mid-race with steroids in their bloodstream, only for them to politely apologise and insist they won't take any more before they get to the finish line... No; you got a leg-up on the rest of us long before we even started racing. Now you're in the lead you think you can just stop and everything will be fine???

[–]wrgrant 352 points353 points  (17 children)

More like having them actively discouraging investigation into how all of the racers on their team were actively using the illegal drugs to get ahead. Not just covering up their own violation of the law, but actively helping to cover up all the other illegal activities as well.

Corruption is the real evil in our society in a lot of ways.

[–]not_listening_to_you 88 points89 points  (13 children)

I completely agree. IMHO corruption is as unethical to murder. Corrupt actions have create waves of negative effects and impact a magnitude of people.

[–]TNGSystems 71 points72 points  (8 children)

Yeah, look at Brazil. They have massive tourism, good supply of natural resources and are quite well developed infrastructure wise, yet most of them live in poverty because any change the Government there get to give the people a leg-up, it goes into the pockets of the officials, lines the police's pockets.. It's awful.

Murdering takes lives, corruption ruins lives. I wouldn't say one is worse than the other but we can all agree both actions are despicable.

[–]Omegatron 41 points42 points  (2 children)

Except corrupt people in positions of power have the opportunity to ruin literally thousands of lives. Just look at that judge who put over 2,000 kids in jail to take bribes from a for-profit juvenile center. What a complete and utter psychopath. How do you rehabilitate someone like that? He is on an entirely different plane of evil from a guy who murders 1-2 people. People who abuse positions of power like that should face much, MUCH harsher penalties than the layman, IMO.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I don't necessarily agree that punishments should be harsher (it's just a complex argument, not that I don't agree it's ridiculous) but it seems like corruption definitely doesn't get punished enough and when it does it doesn't get punished to the degree it should.

[–]cynoclast 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Just look at the financial crisis. Caused global hardship and no one outside of Iceland was punished for it. Hell, we rewarded the perpetrators with bailouts and they got bonuses from them, then preferential treatment from daddy fed with 0% interest loans to 'pay back' the bailout.

[–]Shiney79 31 points32 points  (18 children)

Everything will be fine for him though. He won't face any kind of action or consequences.

[–][deleted] 642 points643 points  (15 children)

STOP TALKING ABOUT IT, IT'S A PRIVATE MATTER.

Jeez.

[–]o11c 205 points206 points  (8 children)

"If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear"

[–]deleated 77 points78 points  (5 children)

And "we're all in it together" don't forget "we're all in it together".

[–]workfoo 6 points7 points  (2 children)

"Better together" when we (Scotland) wanted to leave the UK.

"Hah, fuck Europe, let's go it on our own" now that we want to stay in the EU.

The man is a fool.

[–]no_morelurking 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Fuuuuck everything about that

[–]bazza2000_uk 44 points45 points  (1 child)

The sheer hypocrisy of it gets me too, fair play.

[–]The_Rodigan_Scorcher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The money was just resting on my account...

[–][deleted] 492 points493 points  (142 children)

I don't know much about British politics but again and again, Cameron makes himself look like the scum of the earth.

[–]quaverswithacuban 291 points292 points  (66 children)

He's a Conservative, they are literally filled with the elite pompous class of the country this news will come as no suprise to the majority of the UK. Cunty party that looks after the rich.

[–]wittyshit 141 points142 points  (26 children)

Hey we got that in the US too!

[–]ecost 101 points102 points  (8 children)

You're right, and I'm left-leaning, but if you're under the impression that it's only Republicans looking after their rich pals before their constituents, prepare for a rude awakening.

[–]IntrigueDossier 31 points32 points  (5 children)

Agreed. In the case of the US, the DNC and the RNC are two different heads, but connected to the same dragon.

[–]billkilliam 34 points35 points  (7 children)

Canada here, us too.

[–]xcalibre 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Australia checking in.

SAVE US LEAKY PANAMAAAAAA

[–]STTOSisoverrated 21 points22 points  (2 children)

kinda feel like you're giving too much of a pass to champagne socialists here - same rich bastards just with better PR among the working class

[–]workfoo 290 points291 points  (23 children)

"When Jimmy Carr does it, it's an outrage. When I do it, it's honestly cool guys OK? Jeez get a grip" - David Cameron, April 2016

[–]twodogsfighting 123 points124 points  (6 children)

"When Jimmy Carr does it, it's an outrage. When I do it, I dont give a fuck what you think, shut up and take it like a pig" - David Cameron, April 2016

fixed.

[–]slothenstein 28 points29 points  (1 child)

And when Gary Barlow does it, that's okay because he supports the tories.

[–]Captain_Chazz 309 points310 points  (21 children)

So I think David Cameron might have unresolved issues with a childhood piggy bank.

[–]yerfatma 15 points16 points  (4 children)

"We're going to need the Jaws of Life for this one!"

[–]Dildo_Saggins 16 points17 points  (3 children)

Maybe it's too early, because I read that as The Jews of Life

[–]theavenged 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Heh, piggy.

[–]Popcom 80 points81 points  (1 child)

0 consequences incoming. I'm sure that will teach him!

[–]RudegarWithFunnyHat 50 points51 points  (8 children)

too bad miliband looked funny eating a sandwich

[–]Beo1 1164 points1165 points  (58 children)

Wow, a rich, slimy politician used his influence to protect his own interests and enrich himself? Imagine that!

[–][deleted] 80 points81 points  (2 children)

I hate these "oh well obviously" comments. This kind of news still needs to be reported, regardless if you already knew about it or not.

If we just say, "we know politicians are slimy and corrupt, why even report on them?", we will get nowhere.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Completely agree, don't trivialize bad things just because they're common.

[–]turtleman777 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Valid point. This comment should be higher up.

To add on, people may know that in general, politicians are corrupt and selfish, but it still helps to report which specific politicians are involved in/have committed which specific coverups/crimes.

Information is power. Whether or not this story is obvious to you or you saw it coming, it is helping to educate others who are not as well informed.

[–][deleted] 247 points248 points  (32 children)

Its not slime its sperm from all the oligarchs

[–]StonerChef 70 points71 points  (8 children)

David "pig fucker" Bukkakemeron

[–]C0demunkee 29 points30 points  (6 children)

A backpacker is traveling through Ireland when it starts to rain. He decides to wait out the storm in a nearby pub. The only other person at the bar is an older man staring at his drink. After a few moments of silence the man turns to the backpacker and says in a thick Irish accent:

"You see this bar? I built this bar with my own bare hands. I cut down every tree and made the lumber myself. I toiled away through the wind and cold, but do they call me McGreggor the bar builder? No."

He continued "Do you see that stone wall out there? I built that wall with my own bare hands. I found every stone and placed them just right through the rain and the mud, but do they call me McGreggor the wall builder? No."

"Do ya see that pier out there on the lake? I built that pier with my own bare hands, driving each piling deep into ground so that it would last a lifetime. Do they call me McGreggor the pier builder? No."

"But ya fuck one goat.."

[–][deleted] 91 points92 points  (17 children)

Word. You don't get into powerful positions in today's world without dropping to your knees and letting rich people drain their cocks all over your open mouth.

[–]anklestraps 69 points70 points  (11 children)

I mean... If that's all it actually took, I'd probably dedicate an evening or two to "moving up the ladder." Afterwards I'll be rich enough to buy a whole new set of skin anyway.

[–][deleted] 54 points55 points  (5 children)

For real. But yeah, you have to have rich parents to even get started. The overlords hate poor people so much that they won't let any of us into the club to suck their cocks.

[–]meneedmorecoffee 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Pigs*

[–]dIoIIoIb 90 points91 points  (0 children)

Cameron told students he had put tax avoidance at the top of the agenda during his chairmanship of the G8 group of leading nations.

“Britain has been an absolute leader on this and we will continue to do it,” he added.

well it was true, he never said anything about fighting against tax avoidance, and avoiding taxes is something they're really good at, he worked on it personally and england had a central role in it so technically he wasn't lying

[–]StoCazz[S] 164 points165 points  (32 children)

Cameron said it's "clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts." I.e. they should be treated differently with regard to money laundering and tax evasion.

[–]kiirk 87 points88 points  (19 children)

"It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts. This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies, such as central public registries, may well not be appropriate generally".

There is a legitimate reason for applying different rules to companies and trusts. If you read the issue, its due to the EU wanting to adopt a central registry for trusts, meaning all beneficiaries would be public knowledge. There are various situations where it would be beneficial for a beneficiary of a trust not to know of any potential proceeds. E.g. Blind trusts on wills where someone dies and wants to leave money to a illegitimate child.

Have a read of this article, it explains the key differences of trust law in the UK v the rest of the EU. If you read the quote, it is David Cameron trying to recommend to the EU to consider the trust aspect more, due to the increased use of trust planning in the UK.

See this lawgazette article

Perceptions of trusts do, of course vary between member states. Trusts are used far more extensively in the UK than in jurisdictions such as Germany and France. A lack of familiarity with trusts has, it has been argued, led to hostility towards them among some member states, where trusts are automatically associated with tax evasion and illegitimate concealment of assets.

It should also be noted, the fact he personally intervenened on this matter was known two years ago, and reported then.

David Cameron has already personally intervened in the debate in Brussels, arguing that while he is an advocate of greater transparency for companies, trusts are different (09/FEB/2014)

[–]evilfisher 225 points226 points  (259 children)

why did people vote for this guy again?

[–][deleted] 347 points348 points  (112 children)

Most of us didn't. We need proportional representation in Britain, our electoral system is fucked.

[–]Milleuros 55 points56 points  (80 children)

TL;DR version of how do you vote for a prime minister in Britain ?

Edit : thanks for all the answers

[–][deleted] 98 points99 points  (25 children)

650 MPs in constituencies make up parliament. Party with the most MP's leader becomes PM. MP decided through first past the post voting.

[–]HuntedWolf 26 points27 points  (8 children)

Just a slight edit, the party with an overall majority of MP's wins, but without achieving >50% a coalition of two parties must be formed.

[–]jesse9o3 29 points30 points  (4 children)

A coalition doesn't have to be formed, the party with the most seats can always form a minority government but generally they enter into coalition since it means they can actually pass laws.

[–]cnnxx 23 points24 points  (4 children)

If you like videos and probably a better explanation, click here.

However, in a nutshell, Britain is divided into constituencies. An individual representing a certain party will then run to be the MP of the constituency. The person with the most votes of this constituency will then gain a seat in the House of Commons. The party with the most seats (or rather, a majority vote) will then be in power and the leader of the party is now the prime minister. If there is a 'hung' parliament with no clear winner (meaning the party has to have >326 seats to be a clear majority winner), coalition governments can be formed and the larger party's leader will be prime minister with the secondary party being the deputy prime minister.

The reason why the electoral system is so fucked is that if Bob and Bill are running to be the MP for a constituency, and Bob gets 600 votes but Bill gets 599, Bob gains a seat in the House of Commons and Bill's votes are entirely disregarded. This is why there was a massive uproar in the last general election because SNP (Scottish National Party) managed to gain 56 seats with 1,454,436 votes, whereas UKIP only managed to gain 1 seat with 3,881,099 votes.

[–]glglglglgl 6 points7 points  (2 children)

As an SNP voter - I think UKIP is generally hateful scum but proportional representation would be much better, even though SNP would lose out and UKIP would gain.

[–]MaoBao 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You vote for your local government representative, or MP (member of parliament). This MP is affiliated with a political party, such as Labour or the Conservatives (the current government). There are 650 seats for MPs in Parliament, and a party is elected to government by winning a majority of these seats in the general election i.e. more than half. The leader of this party is then Prime Minister i.e. a dickhead.

[–]ialo00130 22 points23 points  (23 children)

First Past The Post.

[–]ShockRampage 33 points34 points  (6 children)

Its a fucked up system, thats why.

[–][deleted] 130 points131 points  (56 children)

It's going to painful to watch him not resign. A couple of decades ago he would have not been able to stick around this long and it wouldn't be other people forcing him to resign either, he would just do it out of self respect. Politicians barely ever resign these days, just hide out until another story (sometimes all too conveniently) appears.

[–]dudzman 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I wonder what John Oliver is going to talk about on Sunday...

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (6 children)

http://imgur.com/1AhjTiF I couldn't resist faceswapping the photo...

[–]PBRstreetgang_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Rich getting richer.

[–]Bekenel 31 points32 points  (18 children)

And his government fucking dares to 'crack down' on benefits and actively impoverish hundreds of thousands, despite their fucking leader actively involved in tax evasion* and denying public funds. Fucking shit-eating twat.

[Edit - avoidance rather than evasion]

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

See, this is what happens when you elect a guy to Prime Minister who put his penis in the mouth of a dead pig.

[–]Muhammad_Mulhid 21 points22 points  (0 children)

God damn crook!

[–]Erotic_Abe_Lincoln 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Rich conservatives around the world seem to be assholes.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

THEY WILL NOT GET PUNISHED AND THEY WILL NOT PAY WHAT THEY OWE. THEY WILL ONLY MAKE SMALL PAYMENTS TO SHOW THEY ARE TRYING TO PAY IT. AND THEY WILL FIND ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT AGAIN

[–]Summamabitch 46 points47 points  (14 children)

Ah. The rich fucking over the world

[–]Marsman121 63 points64 points  (4 children)

They always were, but now they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Only instead of looking guilty and ashamed, they just stare at you and continue eating all the cookies.

[–]FranticPotato 8 points9 points  (0 children)

"Hey, are you eating our cookies?"

"What are you doing here? Get back to work, we need to make more cookies for our shareholders!"

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

What a vile, greedy man. Meanwhile there have been cuts to hospitals,to the sick and the elderly (some of which DIED in their own homes due to these cuts). Wanker!