[pp.int.general] Pirate Party UK Critism

[Johnathan Phan]

To answer the question on the philosophy of the fees involved to have
parties support candidates is very simple.

The mechanism was designed to support socialist ideals for the people while
not implementing socialist ideals in capital gain (economic models)

As you may be aware, this fee push's parties to have some form of party fund
to even place a candidate for the running. Never mind the large campaign
costs. This forces two main things to occur.

1>     A corporate sponsor that stands to gain from the policies changes
which tends to create new economies for Britain to grow and push its overall
GDP up.

2>     Mass support by a large member of people that share this idea which
are willing to fund it in any meager way possible.

This obviously creates some loop holes, such as individual corporations or
groups to benefit by creating monopolies they control. To counter this point
the government creates competition boards/commits formed of ex industry or
lords that try and keep fair compaition between large corporation and tries
to limit the effect money has on government policies. (Which was completely
or harmed a lot during Labors rein as a lot of regulation was removed. Not
that it would have been any better as conservatives are funded by rich lords
and individuals where labor is funded by unions)

This committee’s are not known by a lot of UK citizens. Ofcom, Ofgen and so
on.

Criticisms of the PPUK –

One criticism is the lack of individuals that know what is actually going on
in the PPUK or what the game plan is. Even with the magic of the internet,
forming a power group to push the party forward seems to be lacking.

This seems to have been mainly caused by in fighting or very emotional
people that felt it necessary to act like a drama queen within the IRC
channel. Example of this is supporters for both John and Eric were kicking
up dust in order to gain support for there opinions.


On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/10/3 Jyri Hämäläinen <wildfinn at gmail.com>:
> > My jaw just hit the floor and did not stop falling until it hit the
> > basement... Not that I ever believed in democracy of two-party systems
> but
> > that is more outrageous than I thought.
> >
>
> I just did a little light blogging, looking at the two elected
> representatives  that were up for election last november, that
> supposedly represent me
> http://wp.me/pBaeZ-B
>
> Wait til you see how much their campaigns were.
>
> Andrew
>
> > On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Eric Priezkalns
> >> <eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > How I wish we had a similar system in the UK!  You civilized
> >> > continentals
> >> > are so much more refined than we brutish Brits.  Our situation is not
> >> > nearly
> >> > as bad as the US, but the need to manage a lot of money changes the
> >> > whole
> >> > dynamic of politics.
> >>
> >> Those wondering what he means by that...
> >> in 2002, the average campaign expenditure for an open house seat (one
> >> that doesn't have someone seeking reelection) was $1.02Million for the
> >> democrats, and 1.08M for republicans. Even the incumbent spent around
> >> $800,000. The amount goes up every year, more so in a presidential
> >> election year (every 4 years to house elections every 2 years).
> >> Basically, the Us party would have to spend $1.5Million+ just to have
> >> a chance at winning a House seat for 2 years, and that's after a state
> >> party is formed, and the ballot for that state done.
> >>
> >> It's a horrendous money pit.
> >>
> >> Andrew
> >> ____________________________________________________
> >> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> >> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> >> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________
> > Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> > pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20091007/2a17c812/attachment-0001.htm>