UKIP

[BigJimLittleJim]

Labour is the party to vote for if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits or wages from a state sector job.

For the tax paying working class Labour are useless, so why not give UKIP a try?

I think I know the answer to this, is it because it's a wasted vote on a one trick pony that only panders to small minded xenophobes?

 

[The perfect fumble]

I do think many UKIP voters will revert back to the Tories when they realise that voting UKIP could let Labour in. And that the Tories represent their only realistic chance for an EU referendum.

UKIP consider a referendum as a means to an end, our departure from the EU. But of course it can go another way, if a referendum takes place which leads to us staying in the EU that will settle the question for a generation! UKIP will do everything possible to stop that, any referendum organised by Cameron will be at a time of his choosing with him clutching a piece of paper, fresh off the plane screaming "A piece of the Common Agricultural Policy budget in our time!". The BBC will be lined up as will friends in the press, there'll be terrible predictions of life outside the cosy waters of the EU and bingo! We stay in.

Farage then goes off to do ads for Paddy Power.

 

[cibaman]

I do think many UKIP voters will revert back to the Tories when they realise that voting UKIP could let Labour in. And that the Tories represent their only realistic chance for an EU referendum.

UKIP consider a referendum as a means to an end, our departure from the EU. But of course it can go another way, if a referendum takes place which leads to us staying in the EU that will settle the question for a generation! UKIP will do everything possible to stop that, any referendum organised by Cameron will be at a time of his choosing with him clutching a piece of paper, fresh off the plane screaming "A piece of the Common Agricultural Policy budget in our time!". The BBC will be lined up as will friends in the press, there'll be terrible predictions of life outside the cosy waters of the EU and bingo! We stay in.

Farage then goes off to do ads for Paddy Power.

An EU referendum will be the mirror image of the Scottish referendum, with Trade replacing Currency as the biggest single issue.

The outers will claim, Salmond-esquely, that they will negotiate a favourable trade deal such that we can enjoy all of the benefits of membership without the bureaucracy and immigrants. Followed by a queue of European leaders saying that they would veto any such deal. And a queue of business leaders threatening to relocate across the channel in the event of an out vote.

And if the vote looks tight Merkel will announce plans to scale back the free movement of labour.

 

[BrianW]

I think there ought to be an EU referendum as the issue is poisoning politics. And I've no doubt at all that the outcome of the vote will be that we stay in.

 

[adrian99]

Labour is the party to vote for if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits or wages from a state sector job.

For the tax paying working class Labour are useless, so why not give UKIP a try?

Whilst I obviously agree with you on voting UKIP, the comment "if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits " is based on a tory lie. The benefits bill is £220bn, of this job seekers is ONLY £5.2bn, the state pension figure is 80bn and disabled benefits cost £55bn, job seekers is a very small part of the £220bn figure, less than 5%. Housing benefit often quoted as another benefit of the unemployed is today claimed by over one million WORKING families, 20% of the total number, is this how the tories support hard working families?

That's why I support an increased minimum wage and am arguing for a higher figure for businesses that can easily afford it, the supermarkets and banks for example. Let's also not forget that EU migrants are claiming £5bn in tax credits annually, a figure equal to the total cost of jobseekers for all our unemployed.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10999434/Migrants-working-in-Britain-claim-5-billion-a-year-in-tax-credits-figures-show.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -show.html</a>

Re those working in the public sector I would worry if you are a manager administrating in the NHS, but the NHS is safe with UKIP, we support front line staff.

UKIP are fighting for working men and women because it is working men and women who are most affected by large scale immigration created by Labour, who allowed 4 million immigrants to come to Britain whilst in government and continued under the tories where net immigration has averaged 200,00 every year since they came to power, this year the net immigration figure is 243,000. Add the 200,000 babies born to mothers born overseas each year and that's 400,000 new immigrants every year, the very reason wages are depressed by over supply of labour and why our hospitals and school places are struggling to cope with demand.

Only UKIP can reduce immigration to 10's of thousands, the tories have proven they can't and Labour never will because immigration suits their cause.

Labour has betrayed working men and women in this country and the tories simply don't care about us, UKIP care are fighting for their interests that is why working men and women should vote UKIP.

 

[adrian99]

Labour is the party to vote for if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits or wages from a state sector job.

For the tax paying working class Labour are useless, so why not give UKIP a try?

I think I know the answer to this, is it because it's a wasted vote on a one trick pony that only panders to small minded xenophobes?

Please explain this ludicrous observation.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Labour is the party to vote for if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits or wages from a state sector job.

For the tax paying working class Labour are useless, so why not give UKIP a try?

Whilst I obviously agree with you on voting UKIP, the comment "if you are a net recipient of other peoples money in the form of benefits " is based on a tory lie. The benefits bill is £220bn, of this job seekers is ONLY £5.2bn, the state pension figure is 80bn and disabled benefits cost £55bn, job seekers is a very small part of the £220bn figure, less than 5%. Housing benefit often quoted as another benefit of the unemployed is today claimed by over one million WORKING families, 20% of the total number, is this how the tories support hard working families?

That's why I support an increased minimum wage and am arguing for a higher figure for businesses that can easily afford it, the supermarkets and banks for example. Let's also not forget that EU migrants are claiming £5bn in tax credits annually, a figure equal to the total cost of jobseekers for all our unemployed.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10999434/Migrants-working-in-Britain-claim-5-billion-a-year-in-tax-credits-figures-show.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -show.html</a>

Re those working in the public sector I would worry if you are a manager administrating in the NHS, but the NHS is safe with UKIP, we support front line staff.

UKIP are fighting for working men and women because it is working men and women who are most affected by large scale immigration created by Labour, who allowed 4 million immigrants to come to Britain whilst in government and continued under the tories where net immigration has averaged 200,00 every year since they came to power, this year the net immigration figure is 243,000. Add the 200,000 babies born to mothers born overseas each year and that's 400,000 new immigrants every year, the very reason wages are depressed by over supply of labour and why our hospitals and school places are struggling to cope with demand.

Only UKIP can reduce immigration to 10's of thousands, the tories have proven they can't and Labour never will because immigration suits their cause.

Labour has betrayed working men and women in this country and the tories simply don't care about us, UKIP care are fighting for their interests that is why working men and women should vote UKIP.

I seem to see the river Irwell foaming with much blood

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/29/10-good-reasons-not-vote-ukip-nigel-farage-europe

10 good reasons not to vote for Ukip

Nigel Farage may seem genial but his party is anything but. The polls tell us that many voters are tempted to vote Ukip at the next election, while others dismiss them as a joke – but the prospect of them gaining more power in Europe is no laughing matter

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ukip-party-bigots-lets-look-evidence

Is Ukip a party of bigots? Let's look at the evidence

 

[adrian99]

"Nigel Farage may seem genial but his party is anything but. The polls tell us that many voters are tempted to vote Ukip at the next election, while others dismiss them as a joke – but the prospect of them gaining more power in Europe is no laughing matter"

Forget Europe we are coming to Westminster, that's where the battle is now. Keep slinging the mud, it didn't work at the Euro elections and it won't work in May either.

 

[roaminblue]

THe problem I have with all of this immigration commentary (well, one of the problems) is that no one seems to tackle the thorny issue that our governments liabilities are, and will continue, to grow at an exponential rate. Due in no small part to lower birth rates and greater medical care.

The proportion of people aged 65 and above will grow a YoY, thats a simple fact.

THis puts pressure on health care, pressure on hospitals, pressure on state owned care homes, and not least of all, huge pressure on the cost of public pensions.

Now, how is this counteracted? Increase birth rates? Increase immigration? How do we offset the required outgoings with required incomes (afterall, every party is screaming about the deficit and has been doing for years).

The other solution I can see is greater political union within the EU, a Supra-national European tax rather than sovereign, and redistribution where neccessary in terms of healthcare (etc). Of courses that is not desirable to a lot of people, so can't see that happening.

So where does that leave us? unfortunately we need immigration. We don't breed enough to balance our assets and our liabilities.

For savvy investors with a more long-term horizon, theres probably an opportunity, though.

 

[hilts]

THe problem I have with all of this immigration commentary (well, one of the problems) is that no one seems to tackle the thorny issue that our governments liabilities are, and will continue, to grow at an exponential rate. Due in no small part to lower birth rates and greater medical care.

The proportion of people aged 65 and above will grow a YoY, thats a simple fact.

THis puts pressure on health care, pressure on hospitals, pressure on state owned care homes, and not least of all, huge pressure on the cost of public pensions.

Now, how is this counteracted? Increase birth rates? Increase immigration? How do we offset the required outgoings with required incomes (afterall, every party is screaming about the deficit and has been doing for years).

The other solution I can see is greater political union within the EU, a Supra-national European tax rather than sovereign, and redistribution where neccessary in terms of healthcare (etc). Of courses that is not desirable to a lot of people, so can't see that happening.

So where does that leave us? unfortunately we need immigration. We don't breed enough to balance our assets and our liabilities.

For savvy investors with a more long-term horizon, theres probably an opportunity, though.

It is a vicious circle though, we have had the argument before that mass immigration is required as we have an ageing population and immigration in itself leads to ecomomic growth, put immigrants age and require pensions and obviously nhs schools housing needs much more funding

Do the worlds highest populated countries cope better than the others? i wouldn't have said so