NationStates Jolt Archive

Do these seem like sensible policies for a party?

1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.

2. Free public education and healthcare.

3. Reduced military size with more of budget going to education and healthcare.

4. Less welfare (because some people live of the welfare state without ever getting jobs).

5. More civil freedoms (gay "partnerships", divorce, abortion should be allowed if the mother really wants/needs it)... Although I'm pro-life, I don't think my views should be imposed on others...

6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.

7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...

8. We will introduce stricter drug regulations in public places and ban smoking in private places as it infringes on the rights of non-smokers. In people's homes they can do as they please.

9. A system of proportional representation (Britain and the US use the First Past the Post System which is unrepresentative) will be introduced and if there is no clear majority after coalitions have been formed, then a compromise candidate will be decided on by the two parties/coalitions and given the post.

10. The monarchy will be left intact as it provides a lot of tourism for London but the civil allowance will be reduced. Rules forbidding the royal family to do certain things (ie. marry Catholics) will be removed. The monarchy will remain but will be purely a figurehead and the king/queen will have no "real" power.

If you have any questions on any other issues please ask... I might run in the next elections if there is sufficient support for me to get some seats...

I haven't decided on a name yet but your ideas WILL be taken into consideration...

Thanks guys!

I don't like 1,5,7 and 9. I probably wouldn't Vote for your party.

Not that I could. Not a UK citizen.

It might run in the NS election but I based the principles on UK politics...

Everyone wants to be a leader today

No.

Everyone wants to be a leader today

Wouldn't everyone like to be a leader any day? And yes this is slightly inspired because of Seripindal or whatever he's called "Fascist-like" party which I don't agree with...

Wouldn't everyone like to be a leader any day? And yes this is slightly inspired because of Seripindal or whatever he's called "Fascist-like" party which I don't agree with...

Fascist? Silly Europeans. >_<

Is this supposed to real life, or NS? If it's real...

What country is this party supposed to be running in, the UK or the US? I assume UK because you talk about the monarchy, but Affirmative Action is from the US, we already have free education and healthcare and we have all the civil freedoms you mentioned.

And don't get me started on a flat-tax rate! Jeez...how did this idea manage to come into the mainstream?

the idea is for ns but i wrote about issues i feel strongly about in the uk. or at least ones i think are important.

It certainly would be an improvement on the policies in most existing states. Seems to be a compromise between the existing policies and classic liberalism though.

Do these seem like sensible policies for a party?

1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.

2. Free public education and healthcare.

3. Reduced military size with more of budget going to education and healthcare.

4. Less welfare (because some people live of the welfare state without ever getting jobs).

5. More civil freedoms (gay "partnerships", divorce, abortion should be allowed if the mother really wants/needs it)... Although I'm pro-life, I don't think my views should be imposed on others...

6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.

7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...

8. We will introduce stricter drug regulations in public places and ban smoking in private places as it infringes on the rights of non-smokers. In people's homes they can do as they please.

9. A system of proportional representation (Britain and the US use the First Past the Post System which is unrepresentative) will be introduced and if there is no clear majority after coalitions have been formed, then a compromise candidate will be decided on by the two parties/coalitions and given the post.

10. The monarchy will be left intact as it provides a lot of tourism for London but the civil allowance will be reduced. Rules forbidding the royal family to do certain things (ie. marry Catholics) will be removed. The monarchy will remain but will be purely a figurehead and the king/queen will have no "real" power.

If you have any questions on any other issues please ask... I might run in the next elections if there is sufficient support for me to get some seats...

I haven't decided on a name yet but your ideas WILL be taken into consideration...

Thanks guys!


1. Nay. I don't like the personal allowance.

2. Education, yes. Healthcare, NO!!!!

3. NO! I don't want any of my money going to healthcare. Education, maybe, but not healthcare.

4. I like it.

5. I'm fine with Gay Marraige, but I'm against abortion.

6. I think you're a little too strict on immigration...

7. I like it.

8. How can you ban smoking in private places? I'm against that strongly.

9. Meh. I don't care.

10. Huh?

Unfortunately, I will not be voting for you.

So you want to slash taxes while boosting spending on health and education? I guess you're going by the completely unproven assumption that reducing taxes boosts the economy so much that tax revenues increase. You're dreaming...

And Serapindal, why are you for free education but against free healthcare? I don't get it.

Mostly pretty good, a decent system. Just thought you might like to here my views :D:

1) Quite a minor point - 18% is pretty low, and if the tax rate is that low then the ability of the government to fund healthcare and education systems for free etc is gonna be pretty limited. I'm not saying we should squeeze every last drop out of people, but perhaps a bit higher - 25% maybe, something like that.

2) Definitely. I absolutely agree - healthcare and education should be free. Which I suppose they are now anyway (in the UK at least) but what d'you think about private education/healthcare?

3) Again definitely - be honest, is there really any need for a huge military? Other than to illigitemately invade less priviledged, but relatively inoffensice, countries at the whim of George Bush? ;)

4) Hmm, debatable - depends on how far you mean to go wiht dropping the welfare system. There should definitely be some, but as you say, some people just sponge - perhaps there should be like welfare inspectors who go and make sure peopel are at least trying to get a job?

5) Again, most definitely. Civil freedoms are the key to a decent society.

6) a) Yeah, I should think that would be an obvious one lol - imagine it at customs 'Are you planning to blow up a major town centre?' b) Is that entirely necessary? Surely you don't plan on rejecting them because they don't know much about England - what if they're fleeing an oppressive government on the other side of the world, and tereofre haven't had much chance to learn about us? I mean, our immigration policies today are pretty harsh.

7) Although I don't know what Affirmative Action is, from what I gather from the point I agree - university places should be about what you know, not who you are.

8) Agree prettty much - and I expect you meant 'ban smoking in public places' surely - private places pretty much are people's homes right? ANd ont hat note, what d'you think about banning smoking altogether? Should we let people pay to destroy themselves? Sure you can say it's their choice, but shouldn't we try to protect them from making the wrong decisions? Just a thought...

9) Unfortunately I have no idea what this means lol, so I'll keep quiet on this one - unless anyone would care to explain it to me :)

10) I'm glad you said 'reduced' not 'removed' - seriously can people not afford the 69p it costs to support them each year? But yeah, reduced maybe, I mean do they really need to fly First Class everywhere? As to the not marrying Catholics - I know that's just an example, but let me run with it for a bit - I kind of agree, I mean i know the Queen is meant to be the head of the Church of England, but rules ike that aren't going very far towards promoting ecumenism and unity are they? And I do think the Royals should be cut some slack - why should they have to be so perfect eh? And btw, the Queen doesn't really ahve any power anyway - she is basically just a figurehead as it is.


There's my toughts - hope you enjoyed them. And if it was a choice between you and say Labour and Conservative, I definitely vote for you... but as it is, well, I'm pretty much Lib Dem. But then a lot of your policies are quite similar, so it's all a-OK.

I think that instead of just stating "less welfare", a good policy would take steps to reduce long-term welfare. In most healthy welfare systems (which I've heard does not include the US), long-term welfare users are a very small minority while most users are temporarily out of work or are supplementing low incomes. Unfortunately most people seem to focus far too much on the minority that abuse the system. Personally I think that in the long term they should only receive the bare minimum to survive on but I can understand that some people would be less sympathetic and want their welfare cut off completely.

1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.

Better still: nationalise big industries and use a negative income tax to protect the poor. Flat tax only helps the rich, although I agree that the poor should not have to pay tax.

2. Free public education and healthcare.

Yay! *Round of applause and vulgar gesticulations at Blair*

3. Reduced military size with more of budget going to education and healthcare.

Yay!#2!, although to reduce I think we'd have to withdraw from the EU, but don't quote me on that.

4. Less welfare (because some people live of the welfare state without ever getting jobs).

We have one of the lowest, if not the lowest, unemployment rate in Europe. There are some that do bugger all, but there are many who need it as a lifeline. Our welfare state is poorly executed (As I student I see exactly who gets the EMA, and it's not exactly who needs it, and what those who do spend it on, since it's £30 given free to 16 year olds. (Rant over))

5. More civil freedoms (gay "partnerships", divorce, abortion should be allowed if the mother really wants/needs it)... Although I'm pro-life, I don't think my views should be imposed on others...

Yay!#3! When i'm PM, you can be my minister for liberalism) ;)

6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.

Although I am wary of nationalism and anti-immigrationism, I feel that the current policy of no-integration is why we have XYZ-ish ghettoes developing, encouraging people not to mix. Faith schools are the biggest problem, but Labour is weak, and can't challenge anything with his Big Pal.

7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...

I agree. We need a meritocracy, where ability defines where you go in that kind of thing. And this I apply to the monarchy too.

8. We will introduce stricter drug regulations in public places and ban smoking in private places as it infringes on the rights of non-smokers. In people's homes they can do as they please.

Ban smoking in public places, but I would have an exemption system for some cigar clubs, or bars or whatnot, if a majority of customers want it. I'd also legalise weed too.

9. A system of proportional representation (Britain and the US use the First Past the Post System which is unrepresentative) will be introduced and if there is no clear majority after coalitions have been formed, then a compromise candidate will be decided on by the two parties/coalitions and given the post.

Yay!#4! Up with the Single Transferable Vote! Ballot boxes of the world, unite!

10. The monarchy will be left intact as it provides a lot of tourism for London but the civil allowance will be reduced. Rules forbidding the royal family to do certain things (ie. marry Catholics) will be removed. The monarchy will remain but will be purely a figurehead and the king/queen will have no "real" power.

Ugh, NO! We can do better to define British culture and society than them. The Queen's a Bitch and charles is up his own arse. They do wonderful work for charity, and I commend them for that, BUT I don't want my taxes to go to rich bastards. Poor bastards yes, rich NO. We can still change the guard and whatnot without them. Versailles earns more than Buckingham/Windsor combined, and France has been a republic since 1871.

And since when did the royal family obey any laws they didn't like anyway?

So economically no, but socially broadly yes.

"9) Unfortunately I have no idea what this means lol, so I'll keep quiet on this one - unless anyone would care to explain it to me :)"

Basically:

We have a system called single-member plurality or first-past-the-post, which means that the most popular member in each constituency gets a seat, but leaves parliament with a huge majority in favour of an unpopular party.

Basically Blair got 35% of the votes and a 66 seat majority, making him able to put any crap through parliament he likes.

Under PR Blair would have got 35% of the seats. Simple. Plus, it wastes less votes (i.e. my parents voted Liberal in the Election, but a tory won. They may as well have not voted and not effected the outcome of the election, thus wasted vote)

The UK is the only country that uses FPTP in Europe I believe, and the only nations that use it are those that are/were in the UK sphere of influence. If you want PR propaganda, look at the electoral reform society's website. I think thay want PR, but it might be to reform the house of lords, but I think it's PR.

"9) Unfortunately I have no idea what this means lol, so I'll keep quiet on this one - unless anyone would care to explain it to me :)"

Basically:

We have a system called single-member plurality or first-past-the-post, which means that the most popular member in each constituency gets a seat, but leaves parliament with a huge majority in favour of an unpopular party.

Basically Blair got 35% of the votes and a 66 seat majority, making him able to put any crap through parliament he likes.

Under PR Blair would have got 35% of the seats. Simple. Plus, it wastes less votes (i.e. my parents voted Liberal in the Election, but a tory won. They may as well have not voted and not effected the outcome of the election, thus wasted vote)

The UK is the only country that uses FPTP in Europe I believe, and the only nations that use it are those that are/were in the UK sphere of influence. If you want PR propaganda, look at the electoral reform society's website. I think thay want PR, but it might be to reform the house of lords, but I think it's PR.

I agree with this. FPTP is unrepresentative and thats why my new party will advocate representative, parliamentary democracy.

Ban smoking in public places, my ass. If you really think smoking in public infringes on the rights of others - presumably the right to live - hey guess what? So do cars. Yeah. Cars. They pollute the air too, and infringe on my right to live by forcing me to breathe in toxic fumes if I want to happen to go near a street or a city.

Oh... but "we need cars." So apparently right to live is conditional! It's okay to kill people by poisoning the air if YOU think its for a necessary thing. But it's not okay if you don't think its necessary. Nice to know by the way, so many people can tell the difference between a nonsmoker who dies from breathing smoke from cigarettes in a public park or street, and a nonsmoker who dies from breathing auto pollution in a public park or street. Its amazing how many anti-smokers are psychic forensic experts who can tell when to blame the cigarette smokers (always) and when to blame people for their general pollution (never).

Blah! Ban cars! They infringe on my rights! Let people drive in their own homes, if they really need to.

If this was passed, I would move to britain.

1) income tax is used to slow down the rich increase in wealth that has been increasing faster than the poor so a flat tax will just lead us back into the class system

3) didn’t you hear about are troops having to share body armour and get food of the Americans

4) so you think the poor just can’t be bothered to work? So you think the pittance they get goes far!

6) how can an immigrant be more loyal to Britain than there motherland I think your forgetting that many immigrants are forced out of there country

7) we use Affirmative action? (of course not since we don’t have a racial gap like America)

8) so the non-smoker can’t just leave?

9) isn’t that one of the reasons the Nazi’s got to power?

10) we must preserve the traditions of the monarchy or it will just become any other family

Provisional Manifesto for the next elections:

ECONOMY

1. We will introduce a flat tax of 25% but increase the personal allowance to £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor. We aim to introduce this slowly so as to cause minimal disruption.

2. We will endeavour to allocate as much of the budget as possible to public education and healthcare spending.

3. We will reduce the amount of spending going to the armed forces and attempt to find peaceful solutions to disagreements WHERE POSSIBLE.

4. We will try to introduce cleaner sources of energy over the next 10-15 years.

5. Education will be compulsory and free until the age of 16 at which age education becomes optional. Education will remain free until 18. Then students can go to university, however this will not be paid for by the government. In certain circumstances, grants/scholarships may be granted to clever children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

6. We will leave the trade unions as they are. We will not give them any more powers.

7. We will try to support free and fair trade between nations.

SOCIAL ISSUES

1. We will strive for equal rights for people of all walks of life and all differing origins. However, we will aim to stamp out affirmative action as this is unfair discrimination against the majority.

2. We will ban all smoking and drug use IN PUBLIC PLACES as this infringes on the right of non-smokers/non-drug-users to walk around without inhaling said fumes.

3. Complete freedom of speech and expression will be allowed but we will not tolerate hate-crimes/ prejudiced remarks.

4. Religious Studies will be taught from an unbiased viewpoint until the age of 18 and studies should cover all major religions.

5. We recognise the right for women to have abortions up until 15 weeks(although we strongly discourage it) and we also strive for equality for all genderqueer and homosexual people. We also wish for greater integration between the black and white communities.

OTHER ISSUES

1. We will advocate free, liberal and representative democracy. As such we will not tolerate any censorship of the media at all.


Ok then guys. That's what I'll be standing for in the next election. I'll probably make a new official thread but just sign up below if you want to join...

1. not specific enough. is this tax on imports or personal finances? who is managing the personal allowance? how is this 'allowance' distributed?

2. as long as the economy is proficient enough to support the educators and prevent the teachers/students by some degree of educational apathy, sure.
as for health care, you could look at the pros/cons Canada's centralized healthcare and see if, well, it is worth it.

3. all fine and dandy towards cultural and socio-economic development until there is a war and finances begin to get sucked out of previously health/education based plans in order to support the military (whether defensive or offensive) would probably have a similar effect as the depression. As a general rule, citizens don't like having rights/money they took for granted taken away. (for example, Mercantilism's Salutary Neglect versus taxation as it applied to the American Revolution)

4. again, too generalized. wellfare money will be taken away from the unemployed in general? or also the artists? what about special clauses for the mentally disabled? etc etc

5. yes, i agree with civil freedoms.

6. as for immigration, how would you possibly completely be able to test whether a person isnt a terrorist? it depends on how you define terrorism yourself as an individual, and that differs from person to person. you could say an immigrant who hated america but found it an economic nessecity to immigrate was a terrorist, even if they had no intention of violence. secondly, yes, it is probably essential to know english as a language at least, but unless you are a historian, is there any real need in society to know the past? there are uneducated peoples living in our country who are not immigrants who are historically ignorant. i am not saying this is acceptible, in fact, i would suggest that it be a requirement that the offspring of such immigrants go through the (at least public) school system, while the first generation immigrants focus on economic support for their family. and as for c... i'm assuming you live in england, (i don't.) but might i suggest that loyalty not be a necessity also. millions of citizens of whatever country might be looking out for their own personal gain as opposed to that of their country and the country will still function. In fact, like 'terrorism', how would you even measure 'loyalty'? It is completely objective to the individual.

7. I agree, and this should be more applicable to the american college process... i am so sick of 'quotas' that cut out the lesser qualified for the need to politically appease a minority.

8. also vague... are you talking about illegal or legal drugs? And also outlawing smoking in all 'private places' except for homes? what are you talking about then? resteraunts, parks, carnivals?

9. unable to comment upon as I am unfamiliar with the documents you speak of... or just the wording is a bit unclear

10. Again, I am not a citizen of the UK.. but I agree, on some levels.

Overall, decent, but my main criticism is the unspecifity of some ideas you seemed to glaze over. Less generality, please.

1. not specific enough. is this tax on imports or personal finances? who is managing the personal allowance? how is this 'allowance' distributed?

2. as long as the economy is proficient enough to support the educators and prevent the teachers/students by some degree of educational apathy, sure.
as for health care, you could look at the pros/cons Canada's centralized healthcare and see if, well, it is worth it.

3. all fine and dandy towards cultural and socio-economic development until there is a war and finances begin to get sucked out of previously health/education based plans in order to support the military (whether defensive or offensive) would probably have a similar effect as the depression. As a general rule, citizens don't like having rights/money they took for granted taken away. (for example, Mercantilism's Salutary Neglect versus taxation as it applied to the American Revolution)

4. again, too generalized. wellfare money will be taken away from the unemployed in general? or also the artists? what about special clauses for the mentally disabled? etc etc

5. yes, i agree with civil freedoms.

6. as for immigration, how would you possibly completely be able to test whether a person isnt a terrorist? it depends on how you define terrorism yourself as an individual, and that differs from person to person. you could say an immigrant who hated america but found it an economic nessecity to immigrate was a terrorist, even if they had no intention of violence. secondly, yes, it is probably essential to know english as a language at least, but unless you are a historian, is there any real need in society to know the past? there are uneducated peoples living in our country who are not immigrants who are historically ignorant. i am not saying this is acceptible, in fact, i would suggest that it be a requirement that the offspring of such immigrants go through the (at least public) school system, while the first generation immigrants focus on economic support for their family. and as for c... i'm assuming you live in england, (i don't.) but might i suggest that loyalty not be a necessity also. millions of citizens of whatever country might be looking out for their own personal gain as opposed to that of their country and the country will still function. In fact, like 'terrorism', how would you even measure 'loyalty'? It is completely objective to the individual.

7. I agree, and this should be more applicable to the american college process... i am so sick of 'quotas' that cut out the lesser qualified for the need to politically appease a minority.

8. also vague... are you talking about illegal or legal drugs? And also outlawing smoking in all 'private places' except for homes? what are you talking about then? resteraunts, parks, carnivals?

9. unable to comment upon as I am unfamiliar with the documents you speak of... or just the wording is a bit unclear

10. Again, I am not a citizen of the UK.. but I agree, on some levels.

Overall, decent, but my main criticism is the unspecifity of some ideas you seemed to glaze over. Less generality, please.

OK, do you want to post a better version? To show me what you mean... ;)

Does anyone else like the sound of my policies? See the provisional manifesto above.

A full review, and the changes i would make....

Do these seem like sensible policies for a party?

1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.

Flat Taxes only really benefit the poor. I fail to see how a higher tax rate on higher income acts as a disincentive to earn more. They still get more money, just less of it that they would if they were earning less, but they still have more money anyway, so what is the problem??? It's just propoganda to excuse greed.

I propose this -

Personal allowance of £10k
20% tax to £20k
30% tax to £40k
40% tax to £70k
50% to £100k
75% to £1million
100% tax or alternatively, forced donation to charity of anything earned over £1 million (Ok, so there's a disincentive there, but what are you going to do with that amount of money???)


2. Free public education and healthcare.

Yes. Where healthcare includes Dentistry and prescription charges

OH, and free public transport, home electricity and water to those earning <£15K

3. Reduced military size with more of budget going to education and healthcare

Good

4. Less welfare (because some people live of the welfare state without ever getting jobs).

No, but I would consider that anyone who is in receipt of benefits who is able to work should be liable to do some community service work, or have entitlement to a better rate of benefit in return for such service.

5. More civil freedoms (gay "partnerships", divorce, abortion should be allowed if the mother really wants/needs it)

Hear, hear!

6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.

Because all terrorists go around with a big "I'm a terrorist sign". Think of the logisitics!

Totally disagree with you on this point. One of my friends is originally from a former state of the USSR and when she became a British citizen, she had to swear allegiance to the queen....I was disgusted when I discovered this because I wouldn't dream of swearing allegiance to the queen or to the British State.

I propose -

1) More consideration of Human Rights in immigration
2) Free English classes to all Immigrants.

7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...

Only "Affirmative Action" in industries//areas where there is clearly a lack of opportunity/bias against a certain class of people

I also think that it is justified to favour people from poor backgrounds over those from private schools who have similar grades as generally the person in the private school will have had conditions more conducive to learning and thus, will have achieved more than they would have done had they been in the same position as the poorer student.

8. We will introduce stricter drug regulations in public places and ban smoking in private places as it infringes on the rights of non-smokers. In people's homes they can do as they please.

I would agree with you on the point about banning smoking in public places but I think that drugs should be legalised and regulated, being available only on the NHS, thus removing the criminal element. This would allow less money to be spent on policing the drug problem and more control over weaning users off of the habit.

9. A system of proportional representation (Britain and the US use the First Past the Post System which is unrepresentative) will be introduced and if there is no clear majority after coalitions have been formed, then a compromise candidate will be decided on by the two parties/coalitions and given the post.

Without a doubt.

10. The monarchy will be left intact as it provides a lot of tourism for London but the civil allowance will be reduced. Rules forbidding the royal family to do certain things (ie. marry Catholics) will be removed. The monarchy will remain but will be purely a figurehead and the king/queen will have no "real" power.


The monarchy adds nothing to our society. We should remove them, continue to spend money on the upkeep of the properties to encourage tourism, but removing the costs of their extravagent lifestyles. The State should become a republic, and the ridiculous Royal Prerogatives changed into functional, modern, controlled powers for the government.

There should be no room for heredity in a modern democracy.

Do these seem like sensible policies for a party?

Keep in mind that I'm from the U.S...answers may not coincide in any way with what you would like. :p

1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.

Meh, I'm for a national sales tax myself.

2. Free public education and healthcare.

I agree, but does this mean the end of privatization in these areas? I'd prefer options in regards to both.

3. Reduced military size with more of budget going to education and healthcare.

I would mostly agree. I would prefer a strictly defensive stance with the U.S. military (elminiation of foreign bases mostly), although the UK has a different situation.

4. Less welfare (because some people live of the welfare state without ever getting jobs).

I would basically scrap welfare and offer subsidies and tax breaks to unaffiliated charitable organizations.

5. More civil freedoms (gay "partnerships", divorce, abortion should be allowed if the mother really wants/needs it)... Although I'm pro-life, I don't think my views should be imposed on others...

No arguments here

6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.

Other than the fact that I don't see how someone who just got "here" is supposed to be instantly loyal to the country, this is basically my stance

7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...

No opinion...I won't touch Affirmative Action in any sort of conversation or debate.

8. We will introduce stricter drug regulations in public places and ban smoking in private places as it infringes on the rights of non-smokers. In people's homes they can do as they please.

Firmly opposed to this one.

9. A system of proportional representation (Britain and the US use the First Past the Post System which is unrepresentative) will be introduced and if there is no clear majority after coalitions have been formed, then a compromise candidate will be decided on by the two parties/coalitions and given the post.

In my own opinion, the absolute BEST thing the U.S. could do for itself right now would be to introduce proportional representation.

I would think the UK could use it too...don't they already have proportional representation in Northern Ireland?

10. The monarchy will be left intact as it provides a lot of tourism for London but the civil allowance will be reduced. Rules forbidding the royal family to do certain things (ie. marry Catholics) will be removed. The monarchy will remain but will be purely a figurehead and the king/queen will have no "real" power.

You Brits and your Monarchy... :p

Firmly opposed to this one.



Everyone seems to be against the smoking ban... So I might scrap that idea...

no just no

no just no

What? Please explain...

Some good policies. However, the immigraton one is just stupid, and I'm not the biggest fan of PR, as that can lead to lots of little parties like what happened in Wiemar Germany.

Some good policies. However, the immigraton one is just stupid, and I'm not the biggest fan of PR, as that can lead to lots of little parties like what happened in Wiemar Germany.

I think I'll have to make the immigration one a bit less stringent then...

Second draft of the manifesto:

ECONOMY

1. We will introduce a flat income tax system of 25% but we will allow everyone to have a personal allowance of £15,000 ($25,000) which will be untaxable.

Example:

If someone earns £30,000 they will pay

0% on the £15,000
and 25% on the other £15,000

Thus making £3,750 over the course of the year as income tax for this person.

We aim to introduce this slowly so as to cause minimal disruption.

2. We will endeavour to allocate as much of the budget as possible to public education and healthcare spending.

3. We will reduce the amount of spending going to the armed forces and attempt to find peaceful solutions to disagreements WHERE POSSIBLE.

4. We will try to introduce cleaner sources of energy over the next 10-15 years.

5. Education will be compulsory and free until the age of 16 at which age education becomes optional. Education will remain free until 18. Then students can go to university, however this will not be paid for by the government. In certain circumstances, grants/scholarships may be granted to clever children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

6. We will leave the trade unions as they are. We will not give them any more powers.

7. We will try to support free and fair trade between nations.

SOCIAL ISSUES

1. We will strive for equal rights for people of all walks of life and all differing origins. However, we will aim to stamp out affirmative action as this is unfair discrimination against the majority.

2. Complete freedom of speech and expression will be allowed but we will not tolerate hate-crimes/ prejudiced remarks.

4. We recognise the right for women to have abortions up until 15 weeks(although we strongly discourage it) and we also strive for equality for all genderqueer and homosexual people. We also wish for greater integration between the black and white communities.

OTHER ISSUES

1. We will advocate free, liberal and representative democracy. As such we will not tolerate any censorship of the media at all.

Only a couple of minor changes to the manifesto.


By the way, I was considering two names:

The Liberation Front
or
The Liberty and Justice Party

anyone like either of these two?

I'm a US citizen, but I agree with everything except 1 and 5.

1. Tax systems should be simple, but a flat tax hurts the lower income folks, even with the high allowances.

5. I'm Pro-life. I've never understood those who say they are pro-life but don't believe in legislating it. Maybe you are pro-life for different reasons. If so please explain. I, like most pro-lifers I know, think the unborn is fully human (has a soul/is worth protection). So killing him/her would be murder. I'm guessing you don't think this otherwise you are making the argument that you support murder because it's not your right to impose morality on others.

I have reservations about 4. Sort of depends on how you reform welfare. A lot of people claim they are only cutting it in ways to stop those who abuse the system, but sometimes end up hurting those who need it, or the children of those who abuse it.

Everyone seems to be against the smoking ban... So I might scrap that idea...

No, I'm strongly in favor of it. I believe in personal freedom as long as it doesn't negatively affect others. Other people's smoke damages my lungs. So they should be baned in public. Though you could allow businesses to build smoking sections that were sealed off and ventilated differently (not simply a different part of the same room).

No, I'm strongly in favor of it. I believe in personal freedom as long as it doesn't negatively affect others. Other people's smoke damages my lungs. So they should be baned in public. Though you could allow businesses to build smoking sections that were sealed off and ventilated differently (not simply a different part of the same room).

So, you would also be for an automobile ban, for the same reasons? Other people's auto emissions damages your lungs.

Doesn't sound very practical.


2. Free public education and healthcare.


...


1. A flat tax of 18% to stimulate the economy but with a large personal allowance of £15,000 ($20,000) to protect the poor.


HA! I fail to see how those are compatible. It's very nice to say "low flat taxes" but "free education and healthcare" and just slap a "world-class" label in front of that, but I don't see it as even plausible.


6. Immigrants should be tested to check they are a) not terrorists b) that they know enough about English language, history and culture and c) that they are loyal to the British country.


Very idealistic. You want more civil freedoms, yes? How are you going to check if immigrants are terrorits? Not by asking them! #6 makes this verification process so simple, when it isn't, even comprehensive and concerted national efforts can fail. Loyalty, and pretty much anything in the mind, can not be accurately checked.


7. Affirmative action will be stopped. University places stc. should be awarded purely on academic and personal merit not on ethnic background/ school they went to...


And so civil rights organizations will get ALL OVER your ass, making #5 look ugly in the public eye.

Sorry if I sounded exceedingly critical. All my points can probably be refuted anyway, but they might give you something to think about.

Thanks for the responses guys. Will take everything into consideration... :)