Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Voted Green. Didn't recognise "Britain First", but assume they are UKIP-esque. The Bold BNP still on the ballet.
Zond wrote: I was going to vote but I realised there's not one party or candidate I could vote for to make things better. I think every option would either make no difference or make things actively worse.
Flashman wrote:
Hilariously long ballot paper though - took me a few minutes to read it
I too was surprised by this, lots of people I've never even heard of.
Medium of Death wrote:Everybody who voted UKIP: Why?
I thought long and hard between Ukip and blank ballot, and came to the following conclusion: it doesn't look like we're getting out of the EU at any time soon, so I figure the next best thing is to at least have a party willing to look out for British interests. The European parliament is not a system I like us being a part of, but at least Ukip claim to offer some willingness to contradict it where necessary; the Tories are happy thing things as they are, and I don't think Labour have the guts to challenge it really. I'll never vote lib dem (because they're sellouts) or BNP (as they're idiots) and hadn't heard of the rest/didn't think they'd manage anything meaningful. Green lose my vote with the anti-nuclear nonsense. So Ukip it was.
Flashman wrote: Voted for the Peace Party, because war is bad and stuff.
Hilariously long ballot paper though - took me a few minutes to read it
If there's a Peace party, is there a "War Party" that one could vote for, if they felt so inclined?
Regrettably not
As I stated earlier, I would have UKIPed my ballot paper as I think the EU is a nonsensical undemocratic establishment that hoovers up money for no good purpose, but given that I'm very pro open borders, their anti-immigration polemic doesn't mesh very well with my world view.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 19:57:20
Today, we got invited to a birthday party on Sunday, starting with a morning-get-together. Might not be going to vote after all then - or go vote being drunk
This was the first time I've been able to vote and I was quite disappointed about how little parties did to inform you about their policies, the only thing I had heard anything about was homosexual marriage and abortion.
I gave the greens my 4th vote though, just so I could say I done my part for the environment.
Well, that was my second ever crack at voting, and managed to surprise the two people in charge of the station by actually telling the truth about what my number was. They couldn't find it for ages, so assumed I was telling a porky.
Mandorallen turned back toward the insolently sneering baron. 'My Lord,' The great knight said distantly, 'I find thy face apelike and thy form misshapen. Thy beard, moreover, is an offence against decency, resembling more closely the scabrous fur which doth decorate the hinder portion of a mongrel dog than a proper adornment for a human face. Is it possibly that thy mother, seized by some wild lechery, did dally at some time past with a randy goat?' - Mimbrate Knight Protector Mandorallen.
Excerpt from "Seeress of Kell", Book Five of The Malloreon series by David Eddings.
"You need not fear us, unless you are a dark heart, a vile one who preys on the innocent; I promise, you can’t hide forever in the empty darkness, for we will hunt you down like the animals you are, and pull you into the very bowels of hell." Iron - Within Temptation
Sienisoturi wrote: It gave me FPÖ as the most recommended party out of all EU. Can anybody Austrian tell me what are they kind?
As far as this election is concerned, I'll try to sum up their positions as fairly as I can manage:
Main slogan is "Time to show the government, time to show the EU!"
Speech buzzphrase is "Europe of Fatherlands instead of unified state/state of uniformity" ("Einheitsstaat" can take both meanings)
They are for strengthening the principle of legal subsidiarity; for a return to an EFTA-like system while keeping the Euro *if* the "no bail-out" clause gets reinstituted; for leaving the Union if the aforementioned goals aren't achievable; for denial of welfare to non-Austrian citizens.
They are against free trade outside of Europe; against a harmonization of refugee politics; against any further steps of European integration; against freedom of movement for workers; against ever admitting Turkey into the Union.
Andreas Mölzer, the former front runner, was forced by his party to retract his candidature after comparing the EU with the Third Reich and calling it a "negro conglomerate" for good measure. The new front runner, Harald Vilimsky, is counted amongst the "pro-Europeans" of the party and personally does not view leaving the Union as a viable alternative to reforms. Vilimsky calls Russia an "important partner" and opposes sanctions against her that would, and I paraphrase: "make us the henchmen of the US in the pursuit of their hegemonic interests".
Oaka wrote: It's getting to the point where if I see Marneus Calgar and the Swarmlord in the same unit as a Riptide, I probably won't question its legality.
Medium of Death wrote: I thought this election was a simple one vote for a single party, rather than the ranking system that we've got for general elections?
It certainly was just the choice of one party up here anyway.
Same here, the sentence "put a cross in one box" - or something to that effect - was handily bolded and the word 'one' put in caps.
Mandorallen turned back toward the insolently sneering baron. 'My Lord,' The great knight said distantly, 'I find thy face apelike and thy form misshapen. Thy beard, moreover, is an offence against decency, resembling more closely the scabrous fur which doth decorate the hinder portion of a mongrel dog than a proper adornment for a human face. Is it possibly that thy mother, seized by some wild lechery, did dally at some time past with a randy goat?' - Mimbrate Knight Protector Mandorallen.
Excerpt from "Seeress of Kell", Book Five of The Malloreon series by David Eddings.
"You need not fear us, unless you are a dark heart, a vile one who preys on the innocent; I promise, you can’t hide forever in the empty darkness, for we will hunt you down like the animals you are, and pull you into the very bowels of hell." Iron - Within Temptation
I didn't vote (at all), mainly because 1. There isn't a single politician that is worth voting for, and 2. I'm not allowed to register my opinion by popping out a pinecone in the ballot box.
But I can see why people are voting UKIP.
UKIP are basically the only party that have bothered to actively do anything to secure votes. In the past fortnight I have binned:
4 'vote for ukip' flyers shoved through my door
1 'vote for conservative' flyer
and that's it, considering 7 parties run for EU in wales, that's a pretty lax approach to trying to win my vote, in fact, I didn't even know which parties were running until the results came out.
Elections aren't won by sensible policies and political agendas, they are won by the party that shouts louder, for longer, than the others.
Labour, Lib dems, and the conservatives have sat back in their offices, relying on their own inertia to carry them through without actually bothering to try and convice a by-and-large disillusioned public to continue voting for them. All the while, UKIP has been wandering around town with a bell and a megaphone shouting 'vote for me! vote for me!'
It doesn't matter about UKIPs policies, I think people are largely voting for UKIP simply because UKIP seem to be the only ones who gave a pinecone about winning.
And that is why you hear people yelling FOR THE EMPEROR rather than FOR LOGICAL AND QUANTIFIABLE BASED DECISIONS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE MAJORITY!
Phototoxin wrote:Kids go in , they waste tonnes of money on marnus calgar and his landraider, the slaneshi-like GW revel at this lust and short term profit margin pleasure. Meanwhile father time and cunning lord tzeentch whisper 'our games are better AND cheaper' and then players leave for mantic and warmahordes.
daveNYC wrote:The Craftworld guys, who are such stick-in-the-muds that they manage to make the Ultramarines look like an Ibiza nightclub that spiked its Red Bull with LSD.
Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote: Britain First are basically the BNP from what I've seen with some extra xenophobia added just in case
Indeed, they're a splinter faction.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Medium of Death wrote: I thought this election was a simple one vote for a single party, rather than the ranking system that we've got for general elections?
It certainly was just the choice of one party up here anyway.
Same here, the sentence "put a cross in one box" - or something to that effect - was handily bolded and the word 'one' put in caps.
In Northern Ireland we have the ranking system for all of our elections.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
I don't think Farage himself is an out and out racist in the 'white people are superior to black people' sense, he's just a spot xenophobic. He doesn't approve of large amounts of foreigners in 'his' country. It's not that he dislikes foreigners on racial/ethnic grounds, he just doesn't think they should be here.
Which, at the end of the day, is a perfectly valid viewpoint I suppose. The world would be a boring place if everyone thought the same. Just because I regard the view is illogical and pointless doesn't mean he should be shouted down for having it, any more than people who believe in a big bearded guy in the sky should be.
No, the worrying thing about UKIP is the number of ex-BNP members who seem to have infiltrated the UKIP ranks over the last few years, and who are trying to use it as a vehicle to express their actual racism (as opposed to that general xenophobia which was the founding tenet of UKIP). The result being that people who are of the same mind as Farage vote UKIP, and end up pushing those more unsavoury BNP types into actual positions of authority on council seats and whatnot.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 14:24:19
Because they are the only party that currently even comes close to representing my views.
Because I view LibLabCon as a corrupt, out of touch clique lead by a bureaucratic elite.
Because a UKIP surge acts as a kick up the arse to LibLabCon, and increases the likelihood that they'll begin to pay attention and change their ways.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ketara wrote: I don't think Farage himself is an out and out racist in the 'white people are superior to black people' sense, he's just a spot xenophobic. He doesn't approve of large amounts of foreigners in 'his' country. It's not that he dislikes foreigners on racial/ethnic grounds, he just doesn't think they should be here.
Thats bollocks.
UKIP is not against foreigners, and immigration in general. Its against uncontrolled Mass Immigration. UKIP wants a points system for immigration, that grades potential immigrants based on Britain's current needs and what they can offer Britain.
Are you an unskilled poorly educated white European from eastern Europe? Then you're a low priority.
Are you a well educated scientist or engineer with a degree and PHD from India or China? Then you're a high priority.
And vice versa.
Which, at the end of the day, is a perfectly valid viewpoint I suppose. The world would be a boring place if everyone thought the same. Just because I regard the view is illogical and pointless doesn't mean he should be shouted down for having it, any more than people who believe in a big bearded guy in the sky should be.
I agree. Freedom of Speech includes the freedom to say unpleasant things, and the correct response is to excercise your own Freedom of Speech. If someone says something that you dislike and regard as wrong, then say so. Disagree with them, publicly criticize them, explain why you think they are wrong. Nobody should have the right or the power to silence others for expressing views that you dislike.
No, the worrying thing about UKIP is the number of ex-BNP members who seem to have infiltrated the UKIP ranks over the last few years, and who are trying to use it as a vehicle to express their actual racism (as opposed to that general xenophobia which was the founding tenet of UKIP). The result being that people who are of the same mind as Farage vote UKIP, and end up pushing those more unsavoury BNP types into actual positions of authority on council seats and whatnot.
As I understand it, UKIP has placed a blanket ban on former members and associates of Far Right organizations like the BNP and EDL joining UKIP. They've also expelled several members in recent years for making racist, homophobic and sexist remarks. So IMO UKIP is just as concerned as you and are taking steps to address that.
This sums up my view on LibLabCon and UKIP quite well.
Rejoice! But Not Too Much - a first response to the elections
I think that by Sunday night it will be even clearer that the discredited old parties of British politics are in serious trouble. They are paying for nearly 50 years of treachery and lies.
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
I have been saying all these things for years, and derided for it by the 'mainstream opinion' which is now utterly puzzled by an unprecedented bvoters' revolt. They maunder about what the existing parties can do to head this off, or contain it, or defeat it, not realizing that the whole point of it is that these parties have themsleves been rejected by legions who once supported them. and in many cases will never do so again.
They see the voters' revolt as a problem to be managed not a reason for change. They are too used to lying, and they lie too instinctively, to turn for honesty when it is the only possible remedy.
As so often I am reminded of Rudyard Kipling’s bitter jibe in another circumstance, summarising the secret motto of the politician as
‘I would not dig, I dared not rob - and so I lied to please the mob’.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities.
On Friday morning they floundered to explain the UKIP vote, which they had all hoped to destroy with a tornado of smears. Well, the smears failed. The collusion between media and political parties failed. The BBC’s blatant bias failed. If they can fail once, can they fail again? Will they keep on failing? That is one of the things I am not sure of.
Listen. Millions of people really are sick of the unwanted changes forced on them by European Union government. They are tired above all of the mass immigration which they were never asked about and which has changed their lives.
Will this now turn into a real political change? That is very doubtful. The major parties still have huge resources, especially access to millionaire donors, to state aid and to the special treatment which the BBC gives them under broadcasting rules (not to mention the even more special, but less helpful, treatment it gives UKIP).
And UKIP itself is a formless thing, a mixture of exiled Thatcherites, golf-club nostalgists and now of Labour defectors who might not feel much in common with their fellow-voters. It has no coherent position beyond departure from the EU, no real answer to the Left’s cultural and moral revolution, only one significant or persuasive figure (and dozens of very unpersuasive ones).
The Conservative Party, which ought years ago to have been closed down for multiple fraud, may yet survive, especially if David Cameron’s luck holds and Scotland votes to leave the United Kingdom. That would give him the real chance of a Westminster majority, an aim which would otherwise be laughable.
So today I delight in the discomfiture of the enemies of Britain, and in the defeat of a nauseating and inexcusable alliance between politicians and media against the people.
But I still see no clear way out of the deep steep-sided pit into which this country has been led by its political class. All that is happened is that we now know that we are *in* such a pit.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 15:12:32
So if people plan to vote this way for the general election, god help us...
Lets leave Europe and see the workforce exploited by a UKIP/Conservative alliance.
They will destroy the welfare state or reduce it to the point that it will be privatised. Completely tearing the heart of what was this Country's proudest accomplishment.
UKIP is not against foreigners, and immigration in general. Its against uncontrolled Mass Immigration. UKIP wants a points system for immigration, that grades potential immigrants based on Britain's current needs and what they can offer Britain.
Are you an unskilled poorly educated white European from eastern Europe? Then you're a low priority.
Are you a well educated scientist or engineer with a degree and PHD from India or China? Then you're a high priority.
And vice versa.
I believe there was a quote a few days back by Farage about Romanians moving in next door? Whilst the media blew it all out of proportion and context, the fact remains that even in context and proportion, it was still xenophobic. It was basically him saying that anyone with Romanians moving in next door would be worried, because a lot of criminals are Romanian, and therefore, most people would suspect Romanians of being criminals. Which is nice, if you're Romanian and y'know, not a criminal.
I didn't see him mentioning postscript that Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers were totally excluded from that unfair generalisation about every single Romanian. Like most things Farage says, there's a grain of truth in it, but his viewpoint is tainted by a fear of foreigners/outsiders. And frankly, I don't believe it's a viewpoint based on logic or fact, more on the innately psychological fear of people who aren't 'us' that everyone has.
As I understand it, UKIP has placed a blanket ban on former members and associates of Far Right organizations like the BNP and EDL joining UKIP. They've also expelled several members in recent years for making racist, homophobic and sexist remarks. So IMO UKIP is just as concerned as you and are taking steps to address that.
Farage is terrified because he's finally looking at trying to get an MP or two into Parliament, and he knows he needs to appeal to a wider audience to achieve that. All those ex-BNP members drag him down by association, and relegate him to the radical right corner, which he's struggling to break out of. If he can't expunge them, they'll ruin his chances for Westminster. It's a completely selfish and thoroughly understandable motive.
His problem is that UKIP doesn't yet have a large reserve stock of non-racist/non-xenophobic people who are prepared to run, so for him to contest so many council seats/parliamentary seats, he's having to rely on unknowns, or people with less than salubrious views. Because he actually has nobody else as of yet.
UKIP are very small fish in a very big pond despite all the media attention. Farage might amount to something in ten years if he plays the game right, and actually develops some policies beyond generalised xenophobia. But not in this round of elections.
Because they are the only party that currently even comes close to representing my views.
Which views? Do you support raising income tax on the poorest 88% so that the richest 12% get a tax cut? Cutting education spending to increase military spending? Making it legal for a husband to rape his wife? Cancelling paid maternity and holiday pay? Privatising the NHS? Abolishing all human rights?
Because I view LibLabCon as a corrupt, out of touch clique lead by a bureaucratic elite.
If you want corrupt then look no further than Farage taking £2m a year of taxpayers money to fund his own political party. If you want out of touch then look no further than the likes of Godfrey Bloom or the donor Demetri Marchessini, both of whom would have been behind the times half a century ago.
I agree. Freedom of Speech includes the freedom to say unpleasant things, and the correct response is to excercise your own Freedom of Speech. If someone says something that you dislike and regard as wrong, then say so. Disagree with them, publicly criticize them, explain why you think they are wrong. Nobody should have the right or the power to silence others for expressing views that you dislike.
So why do UKIP feel it necessary to send the police around to a blogger who hadn't broken the law, but had simply documented their less savoury policies? Or send the police round to someone who put a 14 second film on youtube of themselves laughing at a UKIP sign?
A lot of people in the UK are naturally upset because if you are not part of the golden 5% you are worse off than five years ago. "Furriners" are an easy target to blame. It has happened many times in many countries.
UKIP are using legitimate concern about the lack of democratic accountability in the EU government processes to put a respectable mask on top of what is basically a xenophobic agenda that appeals to the anti-furriner feeling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/23 15:30:09
I believe there was a quote a few days back by Farage about Romanians moving in next door? Whilst the media blew it all out of proportion and context, the fact remains that even in context and proportion, it was still xenophobic. It was basically him saying that anyone with Romanians moving in next door would be worried, because a lot of criminals are Romanian, and therefore, most people would suspect Romanians of being criminals. Which is nice, if you're Romanian and y'know, not a criminal.
I didn't see him mentioning postscript that Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers were totally excluded from that unfair generalisation about every single Romanian. Like most things Farage says, there's a grain of truth in it, but his viewpoint is tainted by a fear of foreigners/outsiders. And frankly, I don't believe it's a viewpoint based on logic or fact, more on the innately psychological fear of people who aren't 'us' that everyone has.
Under a points based immigration policy educated Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers would (or should) be prioritized over unskilled and uneducated Romanians, and thus wouldn't be treated unfairly.
I doubt Farage was saying that he'd be worried if Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers moved next door to him. He was referring more to Romanian pickpockets and criminals, given that the Metropolitan Police statistics that he cited indicate that Romanian immigrants are responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime. (is that true? I haven't seen those statistics first hand, other than what I've heard reported by the media etc).
Presumably, once Farage/people got to know their Romanian neighbors and are reassured that they're not pickpockets and other criminals then they would no longer be worried.
The only Romanians I know personally are fantastic people - two families who attend my parents' church. One of the families are close friends with my parents. The dad is an electrician/painter/plasterer etc and a damn good one - hes been redecorating my parents bedroom and fixing our electrics throughout the house. Hes done a better job than the last electrician we had in. His eldest daughter is a university student (I don't recall the course). They all speak perfect English, except for the mom.
However, my neighbors in my third year of Uni (when I rented a private house off campus with some friends) were altogether different (though I don't know what their nationality was). They drank in the streets, they fought, they vandalized cars and banged on peoples windows (my bedroom was converted from a ground floor lounge, with massive bay windows facing directly onto the street - I had to sleep with ear plugs). The kids were truants, playing on the street in the middle of the day during school terms. The Police were frequently called to my street.
Hopefully under a points based immigration system, the former (skilled and educated people, e.g. electricians, university students) would be prioritized over the latter.
UKIP are very small fish in a very big pond despite all the media attention. Farage might amount to something in ten years if he plays the game right, and actually develops some policies beyond generalised xenophobia. But not in this round of elections.
I agree. UKIP is an embryonic party. Currently they're gaffe-prone amateurs, but all political parties need to start somewhere.
I voted for them because they're the only party that even comes close to representing my views - not all of my views however - they're not as Libertarian as I'd like but they're at the least crap option. If a UKIP surge gets the attention of mainstream parties and forces them to reconsider their own policies and priorities especially on the EU, then great, I'll switch my vote to Labour or the Conservatives.
Under a points based immigration policy educated Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers would (or should) be prioritized over unskilled and uneducated Romanians, and thus wouldn't be treated unfairly.
I doubt Farage was saying that he'd be worried if Romanian nurses/doctors/academics/researchers moved next door to him. He was referring more to Romanian pickpockets and criminals, given that the Metropolitan Police statistics that he cited indicate that Romanian immigrants are responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime. (is that true? I haven't seen those statistics first hand, other than what I've heard reported by the media etc).
Presumably, once Farage/people got to know their Romanian neighbors and are reassured that they're not pickpockets and other criminals then they would no longer be worried.
But this is the thing. I don't look at French neighbours and worry. I don't look at German, or Spanish, or American people, and feel threatened. I don't need to 'get to know them' in order to reassure myself that they're not criminals. Because I'm not daft enough to look at the nationality of someone, and assume that because they come from a certain part of the world, they're going to be criminals.
Farage disagrees with that view. He would be worried by the fact that those foreign Romanians have moved in. His supposed justification for that generalised suspicion of his, is that there are more Romanian crime gangs in Britain than there are Polish ones or French ones. But logically, that doesn't hold water. You don't automatically assume that all black neighbours are going to be members of gangs, just because the majority of inner city gangs are made up of black youths. You don't assume that all Muslims are members of Al Qaeda, just because Al Qaeda is made up primarily of Muslims.
The only thing it ultimately comes down to, is xenophobia. 'They are not like us'.
With regards to immigration policy, his viewpoints again fall down when faced with scrutiny. Farage says that we should leave the EU because all these foreigners come over under the EU's freedom of movement. But roughly half of the immigration into Britain last year came from outside the EU boundaries.
Farage and UKIP would respond then that we should make it harder to get into the country altogether to bring numbers down. But what part should we squeeze? The quota for legitimate refugees, fleeing from war, and persecution? That would be inhumane. The fact this country refused to take in the Holocaust survivors seventy years ago is a black mark on this country's history as far as I'm concerned. I accept that we can't take everyone, but bringing down those numbers is not the morally right thing to do (*YMMV).
So. We institute a points based system? It already exists. It's been instituted. This isn't a new idea or policy.
So what's the new policy Farage is bringing to the table? Raising the number of points needed? TBH, if you're filling that form in, and you're getting in that way now, the odds are pretty strong that already are someone we want here. If we need 6,000 nurses, what's the point in lowering the number we let in to 4,000?
The only thing you really could do to bring down immigration, is to seriously beef up funding for the border police to stop illegal immigration, or leave the EU. Toughening up the points system is a red herring.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 16:25:29
Because they are the only party that currently even comes close to representing my views.
Which views?
Leaving the EU.
Reducing taxes for EVERYONE.
Lower Council tax.
Cutting the absurdly high salaries for senior Council staff that exceed the Prime Minister's own salary.
Shutting down government Quangos, and stop funding the government funded 'Fake' Charities that use taxpayers money to bully taxpayers.
Reducing wasteful public spending.
No more dodgy illegal wars and interfering in foreign sovereign countries. Iraq. Afghanistan. Syria. Libya. Ukraine.
Controlled Immigration, capped to levels that we can accommodate without increasing the strain on housing, welfare, education, NHS, and other public services; and
Prioritizing immigrants based on their skills and expertise, depending on what Britain needs. We have a huge oversupply of unskilled labour - which increases unemployment and depresses wages. Scientists and engineers from India or China for instance should be prioritised over unskilled poorly educated immigrants from eastern europe.
Do you support raising income tax on the poorest 88% so that the richest 12% get a tax cut?
No. Neither does UKIP apparently. I can't find any mention of that in their 2014 manifesto. In fact, it claims that they're in favour of cuts to council tax.
Besides, didn't Gordon Brown abolish the 10p tax rate?
Cutting education spending to increase military spending?
Again, I can't find any mention of that in their manifesto. It does mention "Reduce bureaucracy in the education system". Is that what you're referring to?
I can't find any mention of increased military spending. But given the mainstream LibLabCon habit of launching illegal unprovoked wars of aggression in countries and regions where we have no business sticking our nose in, we probably need more military spending. If a country is frequently going to war and helping America police the world,
Making it legal for a husband to rape his wife?
Que?
Cancelling paid maternity and holiday pay?
Que?
Privatising the NHS?
You mean like Labour did, with all its PFI's and local authority contracts?
The NHS has been getting more and more privatized over the last decade without any input from UKIP. I suggest you read The Private Eye sometime.
Abolishing all human rights?
Que?
I think it needs to be reformed - Human Rights law is far too imbalanced in favour of criminals, with the human rights of victims of crime being poorly protected. I think the ultimate court responsible for Human Rights law in the UK should be our own Supreme Court, not the European Court.
You're going to have to provide sources for all of that, because I don't have a clue what you're talking about and the 2014 manifesto doesn't mention any of that.
And besides, I said that UKIP is the only party that comes close to representing my views. That doesn't mean I agree with all of their policies. When LibLabCon reconsider their own priorities and policies, and stop interfering in people's private lives (I'm libertarian) then I'll consider voting for a mainstream party.
Because I view LibLabCon as a corrupt, out of touch clique lead by a bureaucratic elite.
If you want corrupt then look no further than Farage taking £2m a year of taxpayers money to fund his own political party. If you want out of touch then look no further than the likes of Godfrey Bloom or the donor Demetri Marchessini, both of whom would have been behind the times half a century ago.
Considering the €13.8bn that we contribute to the EU, and the fact that I want the UK to withdraw from the EU - and UKIP is the only party that is promising this, I'd say thats money well spent. Better than the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats using their expenses to fund their parties, anyway.
So why do UKIP feel it necessary to send the police around to a blogger who hadn't broken the law, but had simply documented their less savoury policies? Or send the police round to someone who put a 14 second film on youtube of themselves laughing at a UKIP sign?
I've not heard about that. Please elaborate?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ketara wrote: With regards to immigration policy, his viewpoints again fall down when faced with scrutiny. Farage says that we should leave the EU because all these foreigners come over under the EU's freedom of movement. But roughly half of the immigration into Britain last year came from outside the EU boundaries.
As you say yourself, they have to apply through a points based immigration system.
But the other half of immigrants do not have to do that, because as EU citizens they have an absolute right to immigrate.
Farage and UKIP would respond then that we should make it harder to get into the country altogether to bring numbers down. But what part should we squeeze? The quota for legitimate refugees, fleeing from war, and persecution? That would be inhumane. The fact this country refused to take in the Holocaust survivors seventy years ago is a black mark on this country's history as far as I'm concerned. I accept that we can't take everyone, but bringing down those numbers is not the morally right thing to do (*YMMV).
Absolutely. That was sickening. But I didn't advocate that, and neither did Farage so that is a Strawman. You're conflating economic migration and asylum seekers/refugees.
In fact a while back Farage called for the UK government to take in more Syrian refugees, and took flak for it from elements within his own party. I agree with that - we should be providing more humanitarian aid and sanctuary for Syrian refugees - not bombing the Syrian Military like the US Government wanted to with their "Limited Strike" that fizzled out when Obama failed to convince Congress to support him.
So. We institute a points based system? It already exists. It's been instituted. This isn't a new idea or policy.
From that link...this is the problem. Does this points system apply to EU citizens? I'm under the impression that it does not, which is the whole point of the Schengen Agreement on borders and immigration. So your remark is a red herring, because you scoff that "we already have a points based immigration policy" whilst omitting that it does not apply to half of the immigrants who come to this country.
f you are a national of a country from within the European Economic Area (EEA) you do not need to apply to work in the UK.
So what's the new policy Farage is bringing to the table? Raising the number of points needed? TBH, if you're filling that form in, and you're getting in that way now, the odds are pretty strong that already are someone we want here. If we need 6,000 nurses, what's the point in lowering the number we let in to 4,000?
You're forgetting the most important UKIP policy - leaving the EU and having that point system immigration policy apply to everyone. None of the three mainstream parties are offering that, but UKIP is. So thats the policy that Farage is bringing to the table.
If we already have all the nurses we need, why are we increasing that oversupply of labour by importing thousands more nurses, driving up unemployment and driving down wages?
The only thing you really could do to bring down immigration, is to seriously beef up funding for the border police to stop illegal immigration, or leave the EU. Toughening up the points system is a red herring.
No, its not a red herring because I think we should leave the EU, and have that points system apply to everyone, whether you're European, African, Asian, or American.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 17:19:29
No, its not a red herring because I think we should leave the EU, and have that points system apply to everyone, whether you're European, African, Asian, or American.
Okay. But generally, you accept the reasoning I gave before, which is:
Ketara wrote:The only thing you really could do to bring down immigration, is to seriously beef up funding for the border police to stop illegal immigration, or leave the EU.
The question one truly has to grapple with after coming to that conclusion, is why is immigration a problem? And secondly, If it is a bad thing, is it a problem of such a large magnitude so as to be worth causing massive diplomatic and economic upheaval which leaving the EU would cause?
