Is voting for UKIP wrong?

What’s the current level of the deficit again?

jambalaya – Member

Does North Borneo have different laws to the rest of Malaysia – how does that work ?

The piece said it was a local law, so yes it seems they do. Plenty of countries have different regional/local laws and certainly different interpretations/implementations. Easy to imagine Borneo could have different laws than mainland Malaysia, plus then you have the majority Indonesian part of the Island plus Brunei[/quote]

The Sharia law is only applicable to Muslim only I am afraid regardless of what they say. However, they are slowly encroaching/eroding others’ rights by trying to impose such law. In fact there are many transgender people employ by non-Muslim businesses. You will find that the Indonesia might be more tolerant than M’sia since their country is so diverse. Brunei is different story as the country is ruled by the King i.e. absolute monarchy therefore the King can do as he wishes. His country so do as he likes. In other part of SE Asia like Thailand, Philippines, Laos, Vietnam etc transgender is not a big deal. It is only the countries that proclaim themselves to be Is-lam that have such draconian law against their own transgender population. Therefore, by trying to export Human Rights law to those embracing Sharia law might actually be counter productive. Unless you have Sharia Law or other draconian law in EU that infringes on gender issue I do not see the added value of Human Rights which current law has already covered.

it basically says the UK born population doesn’t sustain itself and we are reliant on immigrants to balance the books ?

To balance the population yes, which in turn will pay for our state pensions….

To balance the population yes, which in turn will pay for our state pensions….

It’s my view that a very large number of the migrants come here to earn money which they send home. They pay very little tax if any and spent the absolute minimum here.

Relying on someone else to pay our pensions is madness.

jambalaya – Member

@allthepies – that chart can’t possibly make sense, it basically says the UK born population doesn’t sustain itself and we are reliant on immigrants to balance the books ?

The non-working British born section of the population is a huge burden. As footflaps says:

footflaps – Member
Immigration has added to the strain a bit, but not as much as demographic changes which have happened in the UK, mainly smaller house holds, mass migration from rural areas to cities and economic migration to the SE. These have put enormous pressure on the housing market in certain areas and we’ve had successive governments who have no real interest in building new houses and are quite happy to let a housing bubble concentrate wealth in an elite few (those born before 1970). Even without migration we’d still have these problems.

Ridiculously optimistic/unsustainable pension rights, granted decades ago are heaping pressure onto our ageing demographic.

footflaps – Member
You could blame immigration, but economic policy since 1979 has been focussed on enriching those that already have wealth (esp housing assets) at the expense of those that don’t.

Inflation, it’s a real **** for those who are not in a position to invest. Now that most western governments are addicted to and entrenched in zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) it will only continue.

The number of Bulgarians and Romanians who applied for National Insurance Numbers rose 576% last year from 27,700 to 187,300

link

deleted

jambalaya – Member

@allthepies – that chart can’t possibly make sense, it basically says the UK born population doesn’t sustain itself and we are reliant on immigrants to balance the books ?

Nah, it’s just too simplistic, similiar to the point I made up the page it only looks at tax paid by the individual, as if that’s the sum economic contribution of a person. It’s somewhat useful as a comparison between different groups of taxpayers but that’s all.

hands up who has had their opinion changed by this thread and is now going to/not going to vote UKIP 😀

Not that anyone new is going to come to this thread, nor that most people are going to bother….

…but here’s an interesting interview with The Messiah Nige, that doesnt tear into him quite has harshly as most.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/im-taking-on-the-establishment-and-they-hate-me-for-it/16758#.VP3aeFUgiiz

Now you know Stoner, he’s not the Messiah, he’s a very….

I’m following this thread. I’m not very politically well read or knowledgeable so wouldn’t comment as such, but I’m trying to learn. I did the “vote for policies” form and it gave me exactly 50/50 con/lib dem, which was a bit of a relief in a way, 0% UKIP. I do find “the usual suspects” posts interesting and admire some of your knowledge.

The frightening thing about UKIP is that they are able to make otherwise intelligent people swallow BS on immigration. It is cheap, nasty and poor politics but unsurprisingly works!

Immigration in a minor issue. If anything it has a mild positive impact in UK and other developed EU economies but he impact is as small as the issue itself. There are far more important issues that need to be addressed that do not rely on the hidden (or not so hidden) veil of xenophobia/mild racism or basic deceit.

The Idea that UKIP or any of the other fringe parties would have a dramatic impact on how things work in the UK is equally absurd as a quick tour of EU states today will show.

nor that most people are going to bother….

I made an effort because you recommended it Stoner but I gave up after about 6 paragraphs.

It didn’t start off too good imo with this :

‘I judge everybody by two simple criteria. Number one: would I employ them? And number two: would I want to have a drink with them? To pass the Farage Test, you only have to pass one of those.

Obviously he doesn’t mean that nonsense but it’s a measure of what a muppet he is that he should apparently offer it as a serious example of one of his personal tenets.

Farage for all his self-created man of the people image is very much a product of his affluent class upbringing. The fact that he knows and is willing to exploit the fears, insecurity, and prejudices, of less well educated people does not diminish that.

He is “anti-establishment”, if you believe that, not in the sense of fighting existing wealth and privilege but anti-establishment in the sense that the US Tea Party Republicans are anti-establishment, ie, they were created, by people with great power and wealth – despite their allegedly grassroot character, to take on the official Republican Party “establishment”. And by doing so strengthen and guarantee the neoliberal free-market fundamentalist direction of the Republican Party.

The entire philosophy behind both UKIP and the Tea Party Republicans depends on turkeys voting for Christmas.

BTW not long ago I found myself in close proximity to Nigel Farage as we both shared the same bus from Bromely to Biggin Hill, however unlike the punters in your article the only thing which I felt a strong urge to shake him by was his throat, not his hand. Despite the obvious appeal of having an altercation with a posh public school educated toff on an omnibus I resisted such temptations.

I do fairly regularly cycle pass his house though, so the opportunity to shake him warmly might still present itself again.

Well he obviously lacks your compassion and humanity blacknose.

teamhurtmore – Member

The frightening thing about UKIP is that they are able to make otherwise intelligent people swallow BS on immigration. It is cheap, nasty and poor politics but unsurprisingly works!

I am afraid not all people agree with open door “welcome” immigration policy by the way.

Can you survive a plan crash? He is a lucky chap looking at that photo.

ernie_lynch – Member

… however unlike the punters in your article the only thing which I felt a strong urge to shake him by was his throat, not his hand.

Do you dare do the same to a known hate preacher if you are in the bus with that person?

🙄

I am afraid not all people agree with open door “welcome” immigration policy by the way. [/quote]

Are you attempting to prove that you’re otherwise intelligent?

aracer – Member
Are you attempting to prove that you’re otherwise intelligent?

That is an interesting response. 😆

I think we are on the same boat if I can understand you correctly regarding intelligence so move on otherwise we would be going in circle challenging each others’ “intelligent” right down to being anal counting and comparing each others’ IQ or EQ etc … 😆

My reply was simply saying that some people just do not like open door policy. I was not trying to twist words etc …

Yes, I might be stating the obvious but I was just saying that because I know my reason but I do not know others’ reason(s) for rejecting the open door policy. All we can do is to speculate that they are racists.

What say you?

🙄

The frightening thing about UKIP is that they are able to make otherwise intelligent people swallow BS on immigration. It is cheap, nasty and poor politics but unsurprisingly works!

@tmh UKIP are simply addressing an issue many people are concerned about and mirroring back to those sample people their concerns. It’s not cheap or nasty, it is simple and exists in the vacuum the main parties created by not confronting the issue. UKIPs messaging is much more powerful than we see from the other parties, it can easily counter accusations of racism by pointing out they want the same immigration policy as exists in the US or Australia.

All of that is ONLY true if you support a curb on immigration or blame immigration. Otherwise they are banging a drum, chanting half truths and appealing to baser human emotions in order to garner support.
As for easily deny racism it would be much easier if their own members and their own elected representatives stopped saying racist things on the tv.
It is certainly not a message that is universally accpeted a splenty on here consider them to be racist.

Personally I think the party is jingoistic and it attracts racists rather than it is an out an out racist party like the BNP. Basically its the place for little englanders who want to keep johnny foreigner at bay.

Despite the obvious appeal of having an altercation with a posh public school educated toff on an omnibus I resisted such temptations.

You’re just not the radical you once were, Ernie. For shame! 🙂

I’m glad you read (some) of the article. As you emphasised, I think unintentionally, one of the points of the article:

Obviously he doesn’t mean that nonsense but it’s a measure of what a muppet he is that he should apparently offer it as a serious example of one of his personal tenets.

Namely, that it doesnt necessarily matter what the politics are, but the inability of the political body to communicate comfortable, natively, with the electorate is one of the major problems for democracy today in the UK.

Yes, we can argue about what policies we all favour (or not – and we are surely going to differ here) but those of us who come into these threads arent the ones that are going to choose the next government (or the car crash of a coalition anyway), we are (for better or worse) politically literate. A massive majority of the electorate would vote for a monkey in a tie…OR someone appealing to them on a much more personal basis.

Think of Nige as comparable to the (late, great, nay massive) Bob Crow. A political animal that talks to the people who want to hear him.

I quite like the man. Obviously.

I dont like most of his policies: I’m a free for all, labour and goods free trade mishmash junky myself.
But he wouldnt exist if there wasnt a lot, really a lot, of people who look at Milliband and Cameron and go “**** no”.

vote as you see fit. That’s how voting works (in theory at least) i have much more respect for someone voting Ukip than I do for the average Joe who will only vote tactically. Lab just to keep call me Dave out or visa versa. Cutting off ones nose to spite the face?

Having said that, while I respect Nigel as a bloke, I really reckon he’s an ok bloke probably, the daily mail comments section makes me think I would rather cut out my eyes than vote for his party. That man who shouts at “bloody cyclists”, he votes Ukip, no doubt.

Vote Green please.

“Obviously he doesn’t mean that nonsense but it’s a measure of what a muppet he is that he should apparently offer it as a serious example of one of his personal tenets”

Namely, that it doesnt necessarily matter what the politics are, but the inability of the political body to communicate comfortable, natively, with the electorate is one of the major problems for democracy today in the UK.

But let’s remind ourselves what the according to him the “Farage Test” is :

‘I judge everybody by two simple criteria. Number one: would I employ them? And number two: would I want to have a drink with them? To pass the Farage Test, you only have to pass one of those.

OK the “would I want to have a drink with them” fulfills the communicating comfortably with people but where does the or “would I employ them” come in? Politicians should talk to the electorate as if they employ them?

As a general rule it’s stupid idea to judge people full stop. It’s even more stupid to strictly judge people on the basis of two arbitrary requirements. He couldn’t have been serious – so why did he even mention it?

A massive majority of the electorate would vote for a monkey in a tie…OR someone appealing to them on a much more personal basis.

I don’t know whether it is a massive majority of the electorate but I do know that it isn’t a good thing. And I am also of the opinion that it shouldn’t be encouraged – the dumbing down of politics to the level of a game show/reality TV/beauty contest and putting personalities before policies.

And so for those reasons alone, politics aside, I certainly wouldn’t applaud Farage.

Having said all that seeing Farage get on a bus on his own did get him a very slight twinge of respect from me, despite my urge to shake him warmly by the throat. It’s pretty much the only thing he’s ever done to vaguely impress me. And tbf Ken Livingstone used to get the tube regularly so he’s hardly the first easily recognizable politician to use public transport.

Perfect choice for some on here then.

Having said that, while I respect Nigel as a bloke, I really reckon he’s an ok bloke probably,

It’s good of you to give him the benefit of the doubt there as he seems to project complete tosser at every opportunity.
http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/ten-other-things-nigel-farage-has-tried-to-blame-on-immigration–ey8RKw_kFg

And I am also of the opinion that it shouldn’t be encouraged – the dumbing down of politics to the level of a game show/reality TV/beauty contest and putting personalities before policies.

Oh I agree.

But then that would have ruled out the Bob Crows as much as the Nigels, and what a loss that would have been.

I think an Idea I read somewhere else (Below the line, not a pretty place usually) would work well to fix that – a statutory obligation to put to parliament every policy in a winning government’s party manifesto (with, obviously a 3 line). A technocratic approach to policy is surely a cracking way of ripping the personality (and the woolly, floppy obfuscation) out of politics, no?

[bedtime, catch you tomorrow Ernie]

chewkw – Member
I am afraid not all people agree with open door “welcome” immigration policy by the way.

Good job we don’t have one then isn’t it?

Many seem to love an open door policy as long as it only swings one way – xenophobia combined with hypocrisy?

chewkw – Member
………

Anyway,in a democratic society (yes, democracy) aren’t people entitled to vote for any party of their choice? Isn’t it better than not voting at all then complain later? I mean I will accept whoever come into power etc.

The trouble is whilst we are in the EU, we are not in a democratic society. When we vote this May, unless something dramatic happens all we will decide is who will the next Prime Manager (not Minister) will be.
Gordon Brown’s use of the costly PFI’s were (in my opinion) because he complied with the Maastricht Treaty that set out the terms for entry/convergience for the Euro. He announced his (or was it the EU’s) Golden rule and PFI’s were a way of not technically adding to the Deficit or the Debt.

I have seen in previous posts people saying that the UK still has control of immigration from outside the EU. Please tell me why that every EU national who comes to work in the UK has the right bring up to seven generations of family dependents,that is Great-Grandparents to Great-Grandchildren, from anywhere in the world to the UK, yet a UK national does not have this right.

Also have a look at this video of EU leaders such as Martin Shultz planning to take control of immigration from outside the EU off nation states.

all we will decide is who will the next Prime Manager (not Minister) will be.

We dont decide who the PM is nor do we even get to vote on it.

Browns tests were clearly set so we could not enter the Euro.

every EU national who comes to work in the UK has the right bring up to seven generations of family dependents

never heard of that one any credible source please? To take advantage for 7 generations even at 16 for each child that is 96 years old for the eldest and 0 for the youngest. Impressive breeding there

But then that would have ruled out the Bob Crows as much as the Nigels, and what a loss that would have been.

Oh come on Stoner, politics, very specific and easily identifiable politics, was at the very heart of Bob Crow’s success. You are really short changing the RMT membership if you are suggesting that the huge support Bob Crow enjoyed was down to him being “a bit of a character” who knew how to hold a pint of beer.

The support he enjoyed, and the huge increase in membership the RMT experienced under his leadership, was down to the fact that he was highly successful in achieving real and tangible benefits for the RMT membership.

Obviously having the right personality and skills to achieve those goals was a vital requirement. But Bob Crow’s success wasn’t simply down to the fact that he was an affable guy who knew how to smile and hold a pint whilst his photo was being taken.

I reckon it was all those extra days off he negotiated them ernie, who wouldn’t want an extra weeks (unpaid) holiday a year 😉

Junkyard – lazarus

all we will decide is who will the next Prime Manager (not Minister) will be.

We dont decide who the PM is nor do we even get to vote on it.

The next Prime Manager will be Miliband or Cameron and how we vote will decide which one. Unless something dramatic happens.

Browns tests were clearly set so we could not enter the Euro.

I disagree Brown’s tests were what was was needed in his mind in the back of a cab to gain entry. His Golden rule was based on Maastricht treaty 104C.

every EU national who comes to work in the UK has the right bring up to seven generations of family dependents
never heard of that one any credible source please? To take advantage for 7 generations even at 16 for each child that is 96 years old for the eldest and 0 for the youngest. Impressive breeding there

Credible source null[/url]

“Dependents

An EU national also has the right to have their non-EEA family members join them in the UK. ‘Family members’ can include spouses, children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren aged under 21. If the children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren are aged 21 or over, dependency on the EU national must be established. This right can also relate to dependent parents, grand parents or great-grandparents. Other family members (e.g. siblings) can also be admitted to the UK but this is on a discretionary basis.”

The odds of anyone bringing great grandkids and great grandparents are pretty damn slim 😆

Apologies if already posted, I have not read the previous 6 pages properly…

“Why the media are wrong about UKIP…”
UKIP Party Conference Report

The next Prime Manager will be Miliband or Cameron and how we vote will decide which one. Unless something dramatic happens.

that is the outlook, however you vote for MP’s, the party who forms government is able to choose their leader. That Leader will be the PM. There is no guarantee that the Leader at the election will be the PM for the term.

every EU national who comes to work in the UK has the right bring up to seven generations of family dependents

from what you quoted

can include spouses, children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren aged under 21. If the children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren are aged 21 or over, dependency on the EU national must be established. This right can also relate to dependent parents, grand parents or great-grandparents. Other family members (e.g. siblings) can also be admitted to the UK but this is on a discretionary basis.”

Right to bring Children, Grand kids and GG Kids – 3 extra generations.
Discretionary as to bringing Parents, GP & GGP.
In total an EU migrant can bring in 6 generations, though only 3 are allowed by default and the older ones can be refused so it’s not a right to bring 7 generations into the country. This only applies to non EEA family members as the EU members can travel here freely anyway just as you can go and live in their countries.

EDIT: I really should not have got distracted there as i just repeated what he said [ though I had not read his comments] so safe yourself some reading time.

The next Prime Manager will be Miliband or Cameron and how we vote will decide which one

That is not what you said originally – moving the goalposts.

Brown’s tests were what was was needed in his mind in the back of a cab to gain entry

No one agrees with this not the right wing nor the left wing. He was canny enough to have made a set of tests we would have passed or failed. Read them some of them were literally impossible for a new currency to pass.

Interesting re the third point news to me but there are a number of caveats there not least showing dependency and as NW notes it would be hard to manage 7 generations, Any idea what the record number is as it wont be 7.

Oh and proof a UK national cannot do this as we are EU nationals again out of interest

mikewsmith – Member

The next Prime Manager will be Miliband or Cameron and how we vote will decide which one. Unless something dramatic happens.

that is the outlook, however you vote for MP’s, the party who forms government is able to choose their leader. That Leader will be the PM. There is no guarantee that the Leader at the election will be the PM for the term.

My original post said that all we choose is the next Prime Manager (unless something dramatic happens) if he gets ousted later on like Maggie Thatcher did, it still does not invalidate my statement.

every EU national who comes to work in the UK has the right bring up to seven generations of family dependents

from what you quoted

can include spouses, children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren aged under 21. If the children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren are aged 21 or over, dependency on the EU national must be established. This right can also relate to dependent parents, grand parents or great-grandparents. Other family members (e.g. siblings) can also be admitted to the UK but this is on a discretionary basis.”

Right to bring Children, Grand kids and GG Kids – 3 extra generations.
Discretionary as to bringing Parents, GP & GGP.
In total an EU migrant can bring in 6 generations, though only 3 are allowed by default and the older ones can be refused so it’s not a right to bring 7 generations into the country. This only applies to non EEA family members as the EU members can travel here freely anyway just as you can go and live in their countries.

Something went wrong with my previous post. The credible source is Credible Source[/url]

You appear to have missed the “Spouse” generation. This makes seven.

All though unlikely, legally 7 generations of DEPENDENT relatives from anywhere in the WORLD can live here. The point I am making is that (NON UK) EU nationals have this right but UK citizens do not have this right.

it still does not invalidate my statement.

Its does as this is still not true

When we vote this May, unless something dramatic happens all we will decide is who will the next Prime Manager (not Minister) will be.

We are not having a presidential election we are voting for MPs not a PM. Its a technicality but it still invalidates your point.

The point I am making is that (NON UK) EU nationals have this right but UK citizens do not have this right.

you have not established the second part as true and the poster questioned the first part as it is can not does that is used. Either way your maths is wrong as you can only bring 6 as you are the 7 th. You have posted no evidence to show i cannot do this – personally I will be amazed if anyone posting here has 3 generations either side of them and all are non EU citizens.it wont have ever been exercised so you are getting worked up about somethign that wont ever happen.

Spouse is the same generation as the migrant.
The other key part is dependant, proving over 21’s as dependent is going to be hard. Anyone of working age is likely to be declared as not dependent. Siblings is discretionary and to ship over your grand parents will be tough.

So is this another case of reading the rules and making a completely worst possible case situation to highlight the problem when in fact the chances of somebody bringing 30 relatives with them is slim? (they have to have got to the EU first while all their dependents survived without them)

How many people have brought in 5 or more generations? 4 or more?

Just had a UKIP flyer through the door. On it’s way to the recycling bin I had a browse through their policies.

Leaving the immigration/racist issues aside, they propose to repeal the Climate Change Act, re-develop British fossil fueled power stations, and stop subsidies for wind/solar. Green taxes will be abolished. It seems on these points they propose to ignore the scientific community despite their policies being pro-science, medicine, technology, engineering and maths degrees (removal of tuition fees for just those subjects).

Two Government departments would be abolished – Culture Media and Sport, and Energy and Climate Change.

They also propose to bring back smoking in pubs, and oppose plain paper packaging in tobacco.

Not hard to think who the main financial contributers to this party are?

Just a few of the salient points that make voting for them wrong. Kind of goes against everything I stand for, before we even get to the immigration and discrimination debate. So I’m afraid I’m out.