Quote:
Originally Posted by
HCZ_Reborn
But again you miss the point, no one is obligated to consider the impact their vote has on other people nor should they be. It’s a matter of personal preference.
I'm not "missing the point" because you are now makings a completely different point. Previously you said or certainly implied that a person's vote doesn't have consequence for others - which I disagree with, of course it does. Now you're saying people are not obligated to consider the impact their vote has on others. I do agree with that - I mean, it would be nice if people did but ultimately everyone should have a choice and people are generally quite self centred so vote for their own interests.
Quote:
And to compare what is a direct consequence of poor behaviour like poor driving which has a far higher risk of directly negative consequences is foolish.
Lucky I didn't do that then.
You can compare two things to establish a principle without claiming they are equivalent.
Quote:
Plus with most votes, whether it’s Brexit or even election votes the impact it has on other people is unforseeable (the referendum didn’t decide which manner of post Brexit deal was agreed with the EU)
Some details of what impact Brexit would have were impossible to foresee because no deal was on the table at the time of the vote. Some of the consequences of Brexit were definitely foreseeable though because of what being in the EU means, and what not being in it means. In a general election the parties publish manifestos which outline what they're planning on doing. It's an exercise for the reader to determine the consequences of those things but it's not guesswork.
Quote:
The NHS argument doesn’t work because there’s no evidence of a lack of funding for that public service
https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-c...he-past-decade
We don't spend as much on our health service as in many other countries.
Quote:
It is absolutely relevant if you’re making the statement we are not informed enough
It really isn't. I've explained why. Whether the UK population are well informed and how that level compares with other countries are separate things.
Quote:
this is not a statement I believe you’ve even sufficiently evidence apart from vox pops and google searches
Searching Google for evidence or data is not cheating. And in other posts you have outlined steps you'd take to help the population become more informed. You seem to be arguing with me about something we agree about.
Quote:
Your argument comes from the belief that if there is any percentage of uninformed people voting that’s not acceptable but at the same time you seemingly agree that there’s no way to make 100% of the population sufficiently informed.
I don't think it's acceptable that any people vote without having the first clue what any of the parties are promising. But I acknowledge it's not possible to prevent that - well, I've suggested one way, but agree it's problematic.
In my work I manage IT systems, we work in an Agile way and one principle is making incremental improvements. Any measure which would improve things would be a good thing. It doesn't have to fix everything and it probably can't, but if we can improve things then we should.
Quote:
The point is you can firewall the system as much as you like. You have to accept that other people having the same freedoms you do, comes with risk.
Sure. But I see no down side in having a better informed, more engaged public.