Reddit reviews Direct Democracy: An Agenda for a New Model Party
We found 6 Reddit comments about Direct Democracy: An Agenda for a New Model Party. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
> it's not something Jeremy Hunt made up on a spot.
Well, it's not as if he co-authored a book on privatising the NHS.... wait what?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801
The same Jeremy Hunt who co-authored an instruction guide on privatising the NHS?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801
Apparently he's also a fan of homepathy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9520269/Jeremy-Hunt-is-controversial-appointment-as-Health-Secretary.html
And should we also ignore this governments attempts to piss off as many people in the employ of the NHS as possible? To sabotage the growth of our nursing staff by cutting bursaries? To continue to discourage young doctors who are desperately needed in an understaffed and overworked health service, that still costs less per capita for a higher standard of care than many other countries in the world? To continue to make real-term cuts to frontline services?
Yes although it was a book not a pamphlet.
'book'.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801
Have a look at this book and who the authors/co-authors are or were.
It's not unreasonable to assume that a majority Conservative government would move away from the NHS as we know it. Ideologically they don't believe in it. There are pros and cons to doing so, but I'm not personally convinced that the Conservatives, particularly cabinet ministers, are sufficiently honest about their position in a public fourm.
It's also not unreasonable to believe that American based firms would benefit from such a transition away from the current national health service model.
> But a number of Tories including the Jeremy Hunt advocate a denationalisation of the NHS and introducing an insurance market system. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801 I disagree with this but you can take it up with the Tories that co authored the book
shoehorn much? Irrelevant.
I do not understand what you mean by short term?
This debate has been going on since the inception of the Argentinean country and well before either of us were born. While short term is relative you are using in it in quite an unusual way.
"Spurious"
Which specific argument are you referring to here?
My suggestion undermines the social contract?
Only suggestion I made was to offer the citizens of Falkland large sums of money and a home in England in return for whatever holdings they have in the Falklands. You may have a point your trying to make but you need think it through and get it in writing.
Extend my argument.. What use is Hull...
Again see what i wrote above. But also I never advocated that it would be compulsory, you did that in your own head. However the CPOs do exist.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf
The government can take your land and compensate you for it. Happens when railways, roads, etc are built.
Public services..
Again this is an argument that you are making, not me. But a number of Tories including the Jeremy Hunt advocate a denationalisation of the NHS and introducing an insurance market system.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Direct-Democracy-Agenda-Model-Party/dp/0955059801
I disagree with this but you can take it up with the Tories that co authored the book
Defending the interests of British citizens
Unless we discuss what their interests are how can we defend them? It may well be in their interest to move to England with large sums of money. But crucially it may well be in the interests of the British citizens who live in Britain.
Bowing to diplomatic pressure
We don't really have a great deal of diplomatic pressure here so clearly I am not advocating that. What we do have is a great deal of ill will in the Americas.
It does however paint Britain as weak that we do not have the ability to end a blockade on our overseas territory. It highlights our lack of perceived strength in the USA, when we let our soldiers die for the USA, we let our image be tarnished by our unwavering support for the USA. That the USA then does not feel the need to at least support our sovereignty shows that we are not the world power we once were. Even China defies our right to sovereignty over the Falklands on paper at least, supporting the Argentinean claim.
By allowing the Falklands issue to remain unresolved we are allowing are international standing to diminish.
Have another attempt at explaining your views. This time think it through a bit more.