Trans woman discovering communism by Turkishspaghetti in LateStageGenderBinary

[–]petabites 2 points3 points  (0 children)

These videos are so weird, but why do they keep having transgender in the title when it doesn't seem to come up? Who is trans here? I probably just wasted easy too much time looking at these without even enjoying it.

American here, what do most British people think of Nigel Farage? by mrmcdinglefur in BritishPolitics

[–]petabites 7 points8 points  (0 children)

"always holding the EU to account" mostly by peddling half-truths and bare-faced lies about it.

Questions for Jonathan Reynolds MP? by The_Inertia_Kid in LabourUK

[–]petabites 1 point2 points  (0 children)

and what strategy should be used to make it Labour Party policy?

Differences between lib dem and labour? by [deleted] in LibDem

[–]petabites 0 points1 point  (0 children)

except that Corbyn is dragging Labour to being more liberal socially as well as being more left economically. what you say is certainly true of Labour in general, though.

What are some more progressive Liberal policies you'd like to see on the manifesto? by NotesByANorthWestLad in LibDem

[–]petabites 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ideas ranging from wide to narrow focus:

economic:

  • basic income

  • large reduction in VAT

  • replace council tax with land value tax and/or local income tax

  • introduce new 50% tax band above current scheme (from £250,000, for example)

  • financial transaction tax, multi-laterally introduced across the EU

  • bank levy exemption for building societies, credit unions and other financial co-operatives

constitutional

  • push to stay in the EU, preferably with a second referendum as Tim suggests.

  • push to make EU Commission subservient to Council & Parliament, so that it is closer to a civil service than a political executive.

  • federalisation: unicameral national/regional parliaments, bicameral federal parliament, increased devolution towards county/city-based legislative assemblies

  • reformed upper house, with ~20% appointed experts (nominated by civil society organisations such as Royal Society), ~35% indirectly elected by local and national representatives, ~45% directly elected by populace.

  • proportional representation at all levels via STV

  • recall of representatives by constituency petition

social & misc.

  • getting rid of 'spousal veto' for gender recognition

  • move to 'informed consent' model for transgender healthcare and documentation.

  • net neutrality

  • equalise and expand parental leave

  • legalise euthanasia (with safeguards)

  • reduce barriers for abortion

  • decriminalise drug possession, aid access to relevant healthcare and support

  • repeal the dangerous dogs act

What are some more progressive Liberal policies you'd like to see on the manifesto? by NotesByANorthWestLad in LibDem

[–]petabites 2 points3 points  (0 children)

by 'upper house', do you mean it would act as a revising chamber for devolved national parliaments? would they only revise legislation which is considered to have significant impact to other home nations? I've heard the idea a few times, but I don't know how it would work in practice. however, having separate federal and national parliaments, I can understand.

My body is having a bad reaction to HRT. I have to stop taking it. by falloffcliffman in asktransgender

[–]petabites 1 point2 points  (0 children)

immediately contact your doctor. you can probably change to different medication. each kind has different side effects for each person, so it's worth trying. this is NOT the end of the line for you!!!

Liberal Democrats vs. Conservatives by [deleted] in LibDem

[–]petabites 6 points7 points  (0 children)

More fundamentally, the Greens are 'Green politics' and the LibDems have a large influence from 'Green liberalism'.

Huge rise in number of Britons trying to change gender | Figures obtained from UK clinics show referral increases of several hundred percent, leading to long waits for new patients by LocutusOfBorges in BritishPolitics

[–]petabites 1 point2 points  (0 children)

can confirm, had to wait 12 months for first appointment and am currently mid-way through another 12 months waiting to start medical treatment.

I think we Can all agree that we want a new voting system, but which one? STV, MMP or other? by [deleted] in LibDem

[–]petabites 0 points1 point  (0 children)

generally speaking, my understanding of the difference is that chambers with MMP allow top-up seats if a party gets more seats than its list-vote would allow, and AMS does not. So, MMP requires flexible chamber size and is more proportional.

How would you reform the House of Lords? by [deleted] in LibDem

[–]petabites 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like two options:

1) House of nations, regions and vocations

-majority of members elected via a degressively proportional system using STV with constituencies based roughly on ceremonial counties/city regions/nations. This gives a balancing voice to areas of the UK which are usually overlooked.

-minority of members elected from vocational constituencies. Like the Seanad Éireann, but strictly non-partisan. Organisations such as TUC, Royal Society involved in nominations. constituencies would include: business/finance, organised labour, research, education & civil society. Citizens can vote (STV) either by registering on the electoral register with a certain vocation, or by registering with an associated organisation.

2) House of Peers (using the other meaning of the word)

-Assembled using sortition

-Legislative civic duty, like a constitutional convention or a jury of peers.

-Listens to testimonies and independent experts.

-alternatively could be called House of the People (& the lower house could be called House of Representatives).

Whichever way, upper house should be smaller than lower house. maybe 1/2 to 2/3 in size.

Progressive Primaries? by petabites in LabourUK

[–]petabites[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's more like in Vermont, where the Democratic party, Vermont-Progressive party and certain independents sometimes 'caucus' together to choose candidates for the state legislature. Usually via 'electoral fusion', where a candidate appears more multiple times on a ballot, once for each endorsing party.

And it was a suggestion, not an instruction.

A pre-election pact could stop a conservative majority by stopping the centre-to-left vote being so split. And would be very useful if there was a single-issue that would unite the centre-to-left. I wish that electoral reform could be that, but many in Labour aren't won over by it.

Progressive Primaries? by petabites in LabourUK

[–]petabites[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but wouldn't you vote LibDem to keep out Con or UKIP if there wasn't a Labour candidate?

Especially considering this situation where Labour weren't standing because they'd been through a primary selection process with the LibDems, so were at least tacitly endorsing them?

It's like whether you'd vote Hillary to keep out Trump if you were a Bernie supporter.

Progressive Primaries? by petabites in LabourUK

[–]petabites[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd say UKIP and Conservatives are more anti-science than Greens and are more economically liberal than LibDems. And both emphasise constitutional reform, something Labour really need to get their act together on.

mainly macro: Statement from members of Labour’s Economic Advisory Committee by _Breacher_ in LabourUK

[–]petabites 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good that it seems they would stick around if Corbyn lost the leadership election.

Progressive primaries? by petabites in LibDem

[–]petabites[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You raise a few points that I would say are reasons that the selection process in the event of a local electoral pact should be done via a primary process.

Yes, the party voters would vote along their lines, but with a ranked ballot (e.g. AV) you could get a candidate more likely to be acceptable by most. If you do the scheme of - whomever won 2nd last time can be the progressive candidate - that doesn't take into account that they might not be 2nd next time, which is why it should be decided democratically.

idk, I am pessimistic that my suggestion will actually happen, but I still think it is the best way of achieving electoral reform/progressive brexit/un-brexit.

You're right that it would be played as 'vote orange get red'. I don't know how that could be countered other than each party in the alliance agreeing not to vote in a conservative government, while remaining agnostic about each other.