EU Referendum

[Ethan]

In your rather paranoid opinion.

You express your opinion robustly and without qualification. I guess, like UKIP and other boot boy authoritarians, you don't like others expressing theirs, especially when you have no coherent arguments and must resort to attacks.

So please explain why my opinion was paranoid. Feel free to use words of more than two syllables even if most UKIP supporters won't understand.

Meantime I will muse on whether your use of the world paranoid was, coming from a UKIP supporter, the ultimate lack of insight (another psych term) or irony. I assume it was the former, in which case, bizarrely it is also the latter, because the UKIP platform is built entirely on paranoia. It should have the slogan 'These foreigners really are all out to get you!".

 

[jp5]

because the UKIP platform is built entirely on paranoia

That's a little disingenuous, isn't it?

As far as I can tell, UKIP are the only party willing to address the topic of immigration. Dave promised a lot in "reducing immigration to 10,000s" and then went and did the opposite. So it's no wonder that UKIP attract a lot of support, and they'd have a lot more MPs in parliament if we had anything like a representational electoral system.

If you're going to admit 300,000+ people into the country a year then it is incumbent to ensure public services and infrastructure mirror that increase in demand. Anything else is going to lead to issues.

 

[Ethan]

That's a little disingenuous, isn't it?

As far as I can tell, UKIP are the only party willing to address the topic of immigration. Dave promised a lot in "reducing immigration to 10,000s" and then went and did the opposite. So it's no wonder that UKIP attract a lot of support, and they'd have a lot more MPs in parliament if we had anything like a representational electoral system.

If you're going to admit 300,000+ people into the country a year then it is incumbent to ensure public services and infrastructure mirror that increase in demand. Anything else is going to lead to issues.

UKIP were against immigration before rates went up. They are a bunch of people who are either just narrow minded xenophobes and/or are angry with their lot in life and are looking to blame someone, and immigrants are a traditional scapegoat. This stuff about pressure on public services is massively exaggerated. The odious Sun recently apologised for some of its comments about health tourists. We do not have a health tourism problem.

 

[SocketRocket]

You express your opinion robustly and without qualification. I guess, like UKIP and other boot boy authoritarians, you don't like others expressing theirs, especially when you have no coherent arguments and must resort to attacks.

So please explain why my opinion was paranoid. Feel free to use words of more than two syllables even if most UKIP supporters won't understand.

Meantime I will muse on whether your use of the world paranoid was, coming from a UKIP supporter, the ultimate lack of insight (another psych term) or irony. I assume it was the former, in which case, bizarrely it is also the latter, because the UKIP platform is built entirely on paranoia. It should have the slogan 'These foreigners really are all out to get you!".

Me thinks you protesteth too much!

 

[jp5]

UKIP were against immigration before rates went up. They are a bunch of people who are either just narrow minded xenophobes and/or are angry with their lot in life and are looking to blame someone, and immigrants are a traditional scapegoat. This stuff about pressure on public services is massively exaggerated. The odious Sun recently apologised for some of its comments about health tourists. We do not have a health tourism problem.

I don't think anyone who identifies as a UKIP supporter is any less narrow minded than those that seek to denounce them all as xenophobes or scapegoaters.

It's perfectly pragmatic to wonder if admitting 300,000+ people every year, at times of 'austerity' and cutbacks, is a good idea. Especially when those coming to our country tend to be the higher skilled and thus limiting their country of origin of their potential to grow.

 

[SocketRocket]

I don't think anyone who identifies as a UKIP supporter is any less narrow minded than those that seek to denounce them all as xenophobes or scapegoaters.

It's perfectly pragmatic to wonder if admitting 300,000+ people every year, at times of 'austerity' and cutbacks, is a good idea. Especially when those coming to our country tend to be the higher skilled and thus limiting their country of origin of their potential to grow.

I have asked the question to those decrying anyone who even mentions immigration what they think is acceptable but never seem to get an answer.

 

[SocketRocket]

UKIP were against immigration before rates went up. They are a bunch of people who are either just narrow minded xenophobes and/or are angry with their lot in life and are looking to blame someone, and immigrants are a traditional scapegoat. This stuff about pressure on public services is massively exaggerated. The odious Sun recently apologised for some of its comments about health tourists. We do not have a health tourism problem.

Your post seems rather narrow minded and xenophobic as if you are angry with your lot in life and looking to blame someone and UKIP are a traditional scapegoat. Heal yourself physician.

 

[jp5]

I have asked the question to those decrying anyone who even mentions immigration what they think is acceptable but never seem to get an answer.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or another, it just narks me when people (on either side) come out with sweeping blanket statements.

I think it's a genuine question as whether it's beneficial for our country, and the countries losing their skilled workers, to run a net migration policy of hundreds of thousands.

 

[SocketRocket]

I don't have a strong opinion one way or another, it just narks me when people (on either side) come out with sweeping blanket statements.

I think it's a genuine question as whether it's beneficial for our country, and the countries losing their skilled workers, to run a net migration policy of hundreds of thousands.

The best solution must be a points based system that allows entry to those with the skills the country requires, similar to Australia and New Zealand. This would be fairer as it would not give EU migrants an advantage over people from the rest of the world.

Of course there also needs to be consideration to helping with humanitarian crisis situations.

 

[jp5]

The best solution must be a points based system that allows entry to those with the skills the country requires, similar to Australia and New Zealand. This would be fairer as it would not give EU migrants an advantage over people from the rest of the world.

Of course there also needs to be consideration to helping with humanitarian crisis situations.

A points system does seem the sensible policy - to treat everyone equally regardless of where they are from.

I'd also like to see us to take in a greater number refugees - and there may be more appetite to do so if our immigration levels weren't already running at record highs.

 

[Ethan]

Your post seems rather narrow minded and xenophobic as if you are angry with your lot in life and looking to blame someone and UKIP are a traditional scapegoat. Heal yourself physician.

Avoiding the question. Again. Full of piss and vinegar but no actual logic or rational thought. How UKIP of you. You were the one throwing around 'paranoid' yet you are incapable of even defending your puerile insults.

Not worried about UKIP in the slightest, they are a apolitical irrelevance, just one MP and even he hates the leader. Nor blaming them for anything because they don't do anything except get racists and the gullible all excited. After the EU referendum they may disappear altogether.

So if you are capable of stringing together something coherent to persuade me differently, have at it. I expect not, though.

 

[Ethan]

That's a little disingenuous, isn't it?

As far as I can tell, UKIP are the only party willing to address the topic of immigration. Dave promised a lot in "reducing immigration to 10,000s" and then went and did the opposite. So it's no wonder that UKIP attract a lot of support, and they'd have a lot more MPs in parliament if we had anything like a representational electoral system.

If you're going to admit 300,000+ people into the country a year then it is incumbent to ensure public services and infrastructure mirror that increase in demand. Anything else is going to lead to issues.

UKIP have whipped up fears about immigration. They have stated large numbers of health tourists, criminals and welfare recipients. They have been wrong on all of those. They have gone on about the proportion of legislation passed by Brussels. Also a lie. They have even complained about traffic on the M4 being due to immigrants clogging up the roads. It is wonder they don't blame the flooding in Cumbria on them too. That fear and hatred is paranoia.

The country needs highly skilled immigrants. There are plenty of jobs from doctors, scientists, engineers and others which cannot be filled right now, and when filled, will create more tax revenue and money circulating in the economy. But I thought UKIP argued it was all feckless welfare recipients coming here? Which is is - welfare recipients or highly skilled?

 

[Hobbit]

UKIP have whipped up fears about immigration. They have stated large numbers of health tourists, criminals and welfare recipients. They have been wrong on all of those. They have gone on about the proportion of legislation passed by Brussels. Also a lie. They have even complained about traffic on the M4 being due to immigrants clogging up the roads. It is wonder they don't blame the flooding in Cumbria on them too. That fear and hatred is paranoia.

The country needs highly skilled immigrants. There are plenty of jobs from doctors, scientists, engineers and others which cannot be filled right now, and when filled, will create more tax revenue and money circulating in the economy. But I thought UKIP argued it was all feckless welfare recipients coming here? Which is is - welfare recipients or highly skilled?

So what does the NHS say it costs for health tourism? Is it £2mill, or £2bill or...?

if, for example, it was £2mill, how big would the waiting lists be if the UK didn't have people coming here solely for medical care?

 

[delc]

UKIP have whipped up fears about immigration. They have stated large numbers of health tourists, criminals and welfare recipients. They have been wrong on all of those. They have gone on about the proportion of legislation passed by Brussels. Also a lie. They have even complained about traffic on the M4 being due to immigrants clogging up the roads. It is wonder they don't blame the flooding in Cumbria on them too. That fear and hatred is paranoia.

The country needs highly skilled immigrants. There are plenty of jobs from doctors, scientists, engineers and others which cannot be filled right now, and when filled, will create more tax revenue and money circulating in the economy. But I thought UKIP argued it was all feckless welfare recipients coming here? Which is is - welfare recipients or highly skilled?

So why do we need to poach other countries' skilled workers, when we should be educating and training our own people to do these jobs. Probably doesn't say a lot for New Labour's dumbed down, target driven, box ticking education system a few years ago. Apparently standards of basic literacy and numeracy are not great among our young people, compared with many other countries, but this is down to a poor education system rather than any innate lack of ability!

 

[SocketRocket]

Avoiding the question. Again. Full of piss and vinegar but no actual logic or rational thought. How UKIP of you. You were the one throwing around 'paranoid' yet you are incapable of even defending your puerile insults.

Not worried about UKIP in the slightest, they are a apolitical irrelevance, just one MP and even he hates the leader. Nor blaming them for anything because they don't do anything except get racists and the gullible all excited. After the EU referendum they may disappear altogether.

So if you are capable of stringing together something coherent to persuade me differently, have at it. I expect not, though.

I havent the slightest interest in persuading you of anything. Try reading my posts, there is plenty in them that explains my views on current affairs but your arrogance seems to make you blind to anyone else's opinions. I care not a piff what your opinion of UKIP is due to you being incapable of seeing anything worthwhile that does not fit your personal agenda.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

If UKIP have as much support within the UK as they seem to have on this forum why do they only have one MP ?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

If UKIP have as much support within the UK as they seem to have on this forum why do they only have one MP ?

Because they didn't have enough people vote for their members under the way the MPs are electedd

 

[jp5]

UKIP have whipped up fears about immigration. They have stated large numbers of health tourists, criminals and welfare recipients. They have been wrong on all of those. They have gone on about the proportion of legislation passed by Brussels. Also a lie. They have even complained about traffic on the M4 being due to immigrants clogging up the roads. It is wonder they don't blame the flooding in Cumbria on them too. That fear and hatred is paranoia.

The country needs highly skilled immigrants. There are plenty of jobs from doctors, scientists, engineers and others which cannot be filled right now, and when filled, will create more tax revenue and money circulating in the economy. But I thought UKIP argued it was all feckless welfare recipients coming here? Which is is - welfare recipients or highly skilled?

I'm not particularly interested in UKIP, not sure why you keep bringing it back to that.

All I'm saying is such a high level of migration, at times of austerity, must put pressure on public services and infrastructure.

I'm also concerned for the countries of which we are depriving their best and brightest (and will likely have contributed towards their training).

 

[jp5]

If UKIP have as much support within the UK as they seem to have on this forum why do they only have one MP ?

They got much more than twice as many votes as the SNP did!

 

[SocketRocket]

If UKIP have as much support within the UK as they seem to have on this forum why do they only have one MP ?

They had rather a lot of votes in the GE and won the UK EU election.