Decision time for the United Kingdom tomorrow.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

The evil me wants trump to win just to see the resulting chaos. 

[DariusAPB 6,925]

The evil me wants trump to win just to see the resulting chaos. 

Schadenfreude?

 

Man I'm not able to keep up with the political mess the UK is in.

[Bojanglez 2,158]

The evil me wants trump to win just to see the resulting chaos.

Schadenfreude?

 

Man I'm not able to keep up with the political mess the UK is in.

I have never seen a nation in freefall like this. Crazy stuff. Can't believe that's where I grew up.

[Cununculus 661]

So basically the three main players left the nation to itself.

One referendum, zero plans for the future of the UK.

Cowardism at its 'best'...

[Dagonet 7,246]

Well, to be fair, Johnson only left on account of medical reasons. A sudden onset of knife-in-back syndrome, also known as Gove's disease.

[Robin Graves 6,054]

The UK should just call it off at this point. Even at best it was only 52% in favour. Ripping your entire country from the EU should have required a 2/3 majority to begin with. They should declare the referendum "not binding" and tell the first bastard to complain to sodd off.

Edited July 4, 2016 by Robin Graves

[Dagonet 7,246]

Too far gone now, the fight for Euro clearing is already happening, the financials will already probably leave. No matter what the UK will pay, staying will just relegate them to an inconsequential status, maybe even forced into the Eurozone.

Better to go the full distance.

[mazz0 2,910]

Too far gone now, the fight for Euro clearing is already happening, the financials will already probably leave. No matter what the UK will pay, staying will just relegate them to an inconsequential status, maybe even forced into the Eurozone.

Better to go the full distance.

I hope we do end up having to join the Euro now, would serve us right! Right after all the banks and internationals level but immigration stays the same.

More seriously, with us involved there might be a little more impetus to acrtually make it work.

[Drasnighta 26,832]

Meanwhile, quietly, in other political screwups....

 

 

Australia goes to a Double Dissolution Election, called by the Conservative Prime Minister, so he can clear the 6 or so independants giving him trouble out of the Senate...

 

 

What happens?

 

Well, we're currently at 67 / 68 seats a piece between the two major parties, with 76 Seats needed for a Majority, and some 80% Counted...

Oh, and those 6 or so indies ruling the senate are now 12 or so Indies....

 

 

The story, at least in Australia is this:

People - the citizens (who, unlike most of the world, are required to vote) - don't care for either major party anymore.....

[Dagonet 7,246]

Then start more parties,why stop with two? We have about 15 in parliament now, twenty or more during elections.

Then again, put three Dutchmen together and you'll end up with two political parties and a journalist.

[Drasnighta 26,832]

Because we already have over 500 registered parties?

Its just the two main ones that get all the attention.

[Robin Graves 6,054]

Then start more parties,why stop with two? We have about 15 in parliament now, twenty or more during elections.

Then again, put three Dutchmen together and you'll end up with two political parties and a journalist.

 

Except for trading companies, then they band together. VOC FTW!

[thespaceinvader 17,568]

The UK should just call it off at this point. Even at best it was only 52% in favour. Ripping your entire country from the EU should have required a 2/3 majority to begin with. They should declare the referendum "not binding" and tell the first bastard to complain to sodd off.

 

It was never binding in the first place.  Referenda in the UK are not binding (with the exception of the AV referendum which had an accomapnying Act of Parliament triggered from it had it been successful).

 

But they would really, really struggle to ignore it, politically.

 

Both from the Scottish perspective - IndyRef was just as close, but Scotland didn't get a rerun and is already talking about another - and from the 'enraging the far right' perspective which is already scary enough.  The Tories can't ignore it without their backbenchers going apeshit.

 

So it's not formally binding, but if they try to get out of it, they're screwed.

 

(On the Australian thing, god I wish we had mandatory voting, the UK is in desperate need of voting reform.  Mandatory voting (with a formal 'none of the above'/'draw a dong on the ballot paper' option to allow for formal abstention) plus a PR system would be brilliant right now)

[Robin Graves 6,054]

I would go for it. The guys who have won are quitting left and right. Might aswell resign over pissing off your own backbenchers. And if you piss off extreme right (hey, bonus!) they might just get so mad they overdo it and you can label them terrorists  It honestly seems easier than trying to figure out all the minutae of rules, restrictions, legislation and hollabaloo of extracting the UK with/or without Scotland, NIreland and Wales (No plans for an independant Wales yet?)

 

Belgium has mandatory voting. It's still no good if you all vote "Party A" who prommises to do "B", and then flat out refuses to do what they prommise. (It usually takes a few months or years before that becomes apparent. Not like farrage going "nope!" the very next day.)

Edited July 5, 2016 by Robin Graves

[mazz0 2,910]

 

The UK should just call it off at this point. Even at best it was only 52% in favour. Ripping your entire country from the EU should have required a 2/3 majority to begin with. They should declare the referendum "not binding" and tell the first bastard to complain to sodd off.

 

It was never binding in the first place.  Referenda in the UK are not binding (with the exception of the AV referendum which had an accomapnying Act of Parliament triggered from it had it been successful).

 

But they would really, really struggle to ignore it, politically.

 

Both from the Scottish perspective - IndyRef was just as close, but Scotland didn't get a rerun and is already talking about another - and from the 'enraging the far right' perspective which is already scary enough.  The Tories can't ignore it without their backbenchers going apeshit.

 

So it's not formally binding, but if they try to get out of it, they're screwed.

 

(On the Australian thing, god I wish we had mandatory voting, the UK is in desperate need of voting reform.  Mandatory voting (with a formal 'none of the above'/'draw a dong on the ballot paper' option to allow for formal abstention) plus a PR system would be brilliant right now)

 

Yes, but what's going to happen if they do take us out?  They either piss off big bankers and people running the supporting industries (finance, law, etc), ie chief Tories' best friends, or they maintain free mvoement of labour and piss off the vast majority of the people who voted out, or very likely both.  There's no good option for a Tory wanting to leave the EU.

Edited July 5, 2016 by mazz0

[Hobojebus 11,341]

The evil me wants trump to win just to see the resulting chaos.

Schadenfreude?

 

Man I'm not able to keep up with the political mess the UK is in.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.

Or smoulder, I could settle for smoldering.

[EastCoast 1,349]

ask and ye shall receive.

 

[Velvetelvis 3,739]

Required to vote?

****. I'm sorry dude.

Being a non voter is one of life's little pleasures. Do you have to actually take it seriously or can you at least write in fictional characters and whatnot?

Edited July 6, 2016 by Velvetelvis

[Bojanglez 2,158]

It's required in a bunch of places.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting?wprov=sfsi1

Whilst I support your right to not vote, not taking part in the process - and thereby, according to the adage, being part of the problem - does nothing to promote change. Sure, corrupt system, blah blah, but the only real change and barrels of guns notwithstanding, there is no other way to affect change.

[Velvetelvis 3,739]

Meh.

[Robin Graves 6,054]

Required to vote?

****. I'm sorry dude.

Being a non voter is one of life's little pleasures. Do you have to actually take it seriously or can you at least write in fictional characters and whatnot?

 

Taking it seriously isn't the problem. It's having to trot over to the local voting place to stick a card in a computer and push a few buttons (Most of Belgium votes electronically) every time. UGH! Waste of tiiiiime!

 

Sadly no. No voting for Donald Duck in my country

 

You can vote blank, but that just maintains the status quo, So I just vote for the smallest party (thats not actually made up of goofballs/inefectual rightwing nutjobs) I can find.

 

 

Sadly our selection is a bit off at the moment: We can pick from:

 

• Inefectual rightwing nutjobs who are on every other party's "ignore list".
• Clueless hippies who (I assume) will make littering a capital offense if ever elected.
• The communists who aren't very communist right now.
• The capitalists who'll screw the poor people while denying that's what they are doing.
• The capitalists who gone rightwing nutjob and like to screw everybody.
• The christians who are just as bad as the capitalists these days.
• Some small party from the bush leagues no one has heard of yet.

 

Oh and that's just the Flemish part of the list. (the one I get to vote on) On the side of Walonia it's much the same really, just the names are different.

 

Oh yes Belgium (one of the smallest countries in the world btw) has two, well actually three, governements: two local and one federal! So We get to, no wait, HAVE to vote twice! Isn't that fun?

 

Ok political rant done.

What where we on about again? Oh yeah Britain!

Edited July 6, 2016 by Robin Graves

[mazz0 2,910]

It's required in a bunch of places.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting?wprov=sfsi1

Whilst I support your right to not vote, not taking part in the process - and thereby, according to the adage, being part of the problem - does nothing to promote change. Sure, corrupt system, blah blah, but the only real change and barrels of guns notwithstanding, there is no other way to affect change.

 

You mean "effect change".  Affect means to alter, effect (verb) means to cause.

[Cununculus 661]

 

Required to vote?

****. I'm sorry dude.

Being a non voter is one of life's little pleasures. Do you have to actually take it seriously or can you at least write in fictional characters and whatnot?

 

Taking it seriously isn't the problem. It's having to trot over to the local voting place to stick a card in a computer and push a few buttons (Most of Belgium votes electronically) every time. UGH! Waste of tiiiiime!

 

Sadly no. No voting for Donald Duck in my country

 

You can vote blank, but that just maintains the status quo, So I just vote for the smallest party (thats not actually made up of goofballs/inefectual rightwing nutjobs) I can find.

 

 

Sadly our selection is a bit off at the moment: We can pick from:

 

• Inefectual rightwing nutjobs who are on every other party's "ignore list".
• Clueless hippies who (I assume) will make littering a capital offense if ever elected.
• The communists who aren't very communist right now.
• The capitalists who'll screw the poor people while denying that's what they are doing.
• The capitalists who gone rightwing nutjob and like to screw everybody.
• The christians who are just as bad as the capitalists these days.
• Some small party from the bush leagues no one has heard of yet.

 

Oh and that's just the Flemish part of the list. (the one I get to vote on) On the side of Walonia it's much the same really, just the names are different.

 

Oh yes Belgium (one of the smallest countries in the world btw) has two, well actually three, governements: two local and one federal! So We get to, no wait, HAVE to vote twice! Isn't that fun?

 

Ok political rant done.

What where we on about again? Oh yeah Britain!

My friend, I am sorry to inform you, but the number of governments in Belgium is actually six...

Two of which you are allowed to vote for, the other four you are not.

 

There is the Federal Government in which are seated a combination of Flemish and Walloon (French-speaking aka Francophone) political parties. As a Belgian citizin registered in Flanders Mr. Graves can only vote for the Flemish parties in this Government.

 

One tier down are the regional governments of Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels. Bringing the total to four.

You have to be registered in a region to be allowed to vote, you can not be registered in two.

Normally you can not vote on Francophone political parties in Flanders, however there are complicated laws which allow the inhabitants of 6 counties around Brussels (but in Flanders) to vote on Francophone parties. By Flemish nationalists this is seen as the first step of the Francophone part of the country to take these counties away from Flanders.

 

Then there are the community governments in this case the governments of the Francophone community and the government of the German-speaking community.

The first handles matters for Francophones in Wallonia and the French-speaking part of Brussels.

Many positions in this government are shared with the Walloon regional government, therefore the Prime-minister of Wallonia is also the prime-minister of the Francophone community government.

In Flanders has been decided another level of government was unnecessary, therefore all matters for a government for the Flemish-speaking community (Flanders+the Flemish speaking part of Brussels) are handled by the Flemish Regional government.

The German speaking community have fought (figuritively) for their own community government as further they fall under authority of the Federal and Walloon regional government. Their community government enables them to keep up education in German among other things. To get from under the wings of the Wallonian government they would need to have their community government upgraded to a regional one. But with barely 75.000 German-speaking Belgians that seems to be unlikely to happen anytime soon.

 

You all have been able to follow this? Add to this a layer of European regulations which, depending to which type of government the subject has been delegated will be implemented in various ways among the layers of Belgian, Wallonian, Flemish, and Bruxellian administration.

 

 

TLdR: Belgium is a smaller version of the EU

[Admiral Deathrain 5,232]

I really would love some fries now...

[Bojanglez 2,158]

 

It's required in a bunch of places.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting?wprov=sfsi1

Whilst I support your right to not vote, not taking part in the process - and thereby, according to the adage, being part of the problem - does nothing to promote change. Sure, corrupt system, blah blah, but the only real change and barrels of guns notwithstanding, there is no other way to affect change.

 

You mean "effect change".  Affect means to alter, effect (verb) means to cause.

 

 

Unless I was using it as a noun meaning "it would have an effect on change rather than to bring about change"

 

You are actually spot on in my incorrect usage, although I meant it in both ways - to effect immediate change (as in, who are you voting for) but also to affect long-term thinking on how the system runs.  If VelvetElvis wants to be in the "this system sucks so I won't take part" camp, he's impacting the ability to change the broken system long-term as much as he is impacting the ability to choose local/national leadership.