Can the public do the sums?

With every policy being chucked out by every party, all the others claim the figures don't add up. I recall an article over the last few days that stated none of the parties figures add up (quelle suprise).

I'm dead good at sums so can I add them up? Who has all these figures and do I have access to them? If not, why not? Otherwise this election I'm just picking one bunch of liars over another set based on spin and preconceived ideals.

Who has all these figures and do I have access to them? If not, why not?

Read the maifesto's and you'll figure that one out for yourself.

They don't include accurate figures, some are very broad and wooley on purpose - so they can't be drawn into an argument about figures.

They won't release any numbers because they don't want anyone to do the sums and see how much BS they are trying to sell us all.

With every policy being chucked out by every party, all the others claim the figures don't add up. I recall an article over the last few days that stated none of the parties figures add up (quelle suprise).

 

I'm dead good at sums so can I add them up? Who has all these figures and do I have access to them? If not, why not? Otherwise this election I'm just picking one bunch of liars over another set based on spin and preconceived ideals.

I don't think it is that straight forward. Some actions can be related to money, but many can/will affect behavior, so it is difficult to be certain of the outcome.

For example, they might decide to double the duty on tobacco. If all the smokers carry on smoking, then income will double, and NHS costs will remain the same. If half the people give up smoking due to the increase in costs then income will stay the same, but NHS costs may come down (but by how much?). If most smokers start buying illegally imported cigarettes in order to avoid the increased duty, then the government's income will fall, but the NHS costs will stay the same - or might even rise if the illegally imported cigarettes have even higher levels of tar and carcinogens that the old legal ones.

Although analysts can try to create models to estimate the effects of any change, (and will have them for small changes in tobacco duty) they are not infallible. Also for new ideas or for doing something to a greater degree than has ever been done before, there is no model.

Also, each political party is going to employ analysts who produce results in line with the party's policies, and so will be able to rubbish the opponents' claims.

I don't think it is that straight forward. Some actions can be related to money, but many can/will affect behavior, so it is difficult to be certain of the outcome.

 

For example, they might decide to double the duty on tobacco. If all the smokers carry on smoking, then income will double, and NHS costs will remain the same. If half the people give up smoking due to the increase in costs then income will stay the same, but NHS costs may come down (but by how much?). If most smokers start buying illegally imported cigarettes in order to avoid the increased duty, then the government's income will fall, but the NHS costs will stay the same - or might even rise if the illegally imported cigarettes have even higher levels of tar and carcinogens that the old legal ones.

 

Although analysts can try to create models to estimate the effects of any change, (and will have them for small changes in tobacco duty) they are not infallible. Also for new ideas or for doing something to a greater degree than has ever been done before, there is no model.

 

Also, each political party is going to employ analysts who produce results in line with the party's policies, and so will be able to rubbish the opponents' claims.

that's fine, but what's your point?

If labour claim doing x will save xy amount

and

conservatives claim doing x will save only xz amount

why can we not see the figures that lead to the statement?

It's fine if they say doing x will lead to a saving of between xy and xz because of ab and c, but they rarely do.

 

Otherwise this election I'm just picking one bunch of liars over another set based on spin and preconceived ideals.

It was the same in 2010

But to be fair, no one knows whether the economy will grow or shrink. Inside the EU or outside.

With every policy being chucked out by every party, all the others claim the figures don't add up. I recall an article over the last few days that stated none of the parties figures add up (quelle suprise).

 

I'm dead good at sums so can I add them up? Who has all these figures and do I have access to them? If not, why not? Otherwise this election I'm just picking one bunch of liars over another set based on spin and preconceived ideals.

Actually to be fair UKIPs sums do add up. I would never vote for a bunch of racists but their maths are correct.

Worst one has to be the green party. Have a look on youtube Natalie Bennett daily politics for that car crash. They spend like there is no tomorrow but no way of recouping the money to pay for all these outlandish proposals. The only income they seem to get is from their two sensible proposals of renationalising public transport (thereby cutting subsidy we pay for them) and scrapping trident (which is one of their really good ideas). The rest are just crazy.

Open post to candidates of all political parties

• I don't want to know how bad it was under the other parties.
  
• I don't want to know how much worse the other party is on any particular policy.
  
• I don't want to know how much money the other parties will waste.
  
• I don't want to know your opinions of the other parties, I can form my own opinions, on my own, without your help, thank you.
  

In fact the second you mention any other party, that's the second I'm not interested, that's the second you start wasting both your time and my time.

I also don't want to know how good you were in the past, if it's within the last 50 odd years I can remember how good you were or weren't and there are public records available if I can't.

If it's further back than that then the question is more, "is it really that relevant now ?" and not "do you remember how good we were before you were born ?", again wasting both your and my time.

What I want to know are these two things.

• What are you intending to do, in detail, if you achieve office ?
  
• How much is it going to cost me ?
  

And that's all for the moment, if I want to know anything else, I can ask, but I want those two things first and then I want you to go away while I have a look at it

Open post to candidates of all political parties

• I don't want to know how bad it was under the other parties.
  
• I don't want to know how much worse the other party is on any particular policy.
  
• I don't want to know how much money the other parties will waste.
  
• I don't want to know your opinions of the other parties, I can form my own opinions, on my own, without your help, thank you.
  

In fact the second you mention any other party, that's the second I'm not interested, that's the second you start wasting both your time and my time.

 

I also don't want to know how good you were in the past, if it's within the last 50 odd years I can remember how good you were or weren't and there are public records available if I can't.

 

If it's further back than that then the question is more, "is it really that relevant now ?" and not "do you remember how good we were before you were born ?", again wasting both your and my time.

 

What I want to know are these two things.

 

• What are you intending to do, in detail, if you achieve office ?
  
• How much is it going to cost me ?
  

And that's all for the moment, if I want to know anything else, I can ask, but I want those two things first and then I want you to go away while I have a look at it

So you won't be voting in May then;)

So you won't be voting in May then;)

Bit academic though, as I'm in a safe labour seat I know exactly who my next MP will be, no matter who I vote for.

I admit I'm having a serious problem finding someone worth voting for.

 

Bit academic though, as I'm in a safe labour seat I know exactly who my next MP will be, no matter who I vote for.

Me too .........

A lot will have that problem. I'm leaning towards the greens - they won't get in in my very safe labour seat and there's more chance of Elvis riding shergar to a grand national win than them having any sort of power in the next decade but it won't do the government any harm to realise we have some valid environmental concerns.

And in many other European countries the greens carry a lot more sway than they do over here.