The worlds' most powerful leader marches on...

[JohnD]

If you borrow a pair of glasses, and look carefully, you will see I used Quotation marks around the quotation from the Stun, pasting it in italics, the link had already been posted.

There is a difference between

"We shall fight them on the beaches."
Winston Churchill, Collected Speeches, pub, 1947

and

Transam talks nonsense.

This is what you wrote:

Actually, capitalism is by far the best system, as long as it's tempered by a degree of socialsim, and this is where both parties go wrong. Unchecked capitalism IS greed, but unless an economy makes money, then it isn't there to support those that need it. Labour (and a lot on this site) bang on about the rich and the wealthy and how they should have their knees chopped off, but without those people striving to do better, they wouldn't be running bussiness's that employ people. Yes, there are companies like Sports Direct where the MD should be taken round the back of the offices and given a good "talking" to, but most business's play fair, pay good wages and good pensions, look after the staff, and more besides. So why is it that any company that does well for itself is considered to be bad for the economy, and should be dragged down. There'll always be those that need dealing with, but that doesn't mean to say that capitalism should be abolished.

I have highlighted where you wrote something. It's not a quote attributed to someone else, it's what you wrote. You have adduced no evidence. It's not true. So you have claimed something that isn't true.

 

[JohnD]

And here is transam making a statement. He doesn't show it as a quote. He writes it as his own opinion. But it isn't true.

And a lot on this site bang on about rich & wealthy & how they should have there legs chopped off etc etc

They all do the lottery or have done

 

[Notch7]

As I have intimated, I do think the German electoral system has some built-in benefits for the smaller parties, and for the continuity of political governance.
However, one tweak I would like to see, is for all the opposition parties to be allocated some of the advantages, perhaps on a sliding scale, according to their percentage representation in parliament.
This also holds partly for UK parliament. There are some benefits already, in UK, on a sliding scale, attributed to all opposition parties, (at least 2 MPs)

Thanks.

In a first past the post system there is never much incentive for the party that gets in power to change the system.

I suppose I have always been against the idea of PR, probably because but those against it always give examples where its a failure, such as Italy. However it does seem that there are countries where it has been a success.

Maybe a new voting system would be good for UK politics.