UKIP a change on the political horizon or not.

[Deleted member 15344]

If they never got the benefits they would probably prefer to work hard. Why do you think eastern Europeans want to be here, if they were offered similar benefits at home to what our people get here they would stay there.

Eastern Europeans want to be here to gain more money for the hard work they put in

We pay higher wages than eastern european countries

 

[Pin-seeker]

The jobs are there for British people to do

Car washing is a perfect example

Foreign nationals working day and night to get a business up and running - why didn't a UK national think of it ? Because for a lot it's too much like hard work

I believe finding a way to curb the benefit culture is needed but I would still prefer someone who actually wants to do the job and will work hard as opposed to someone going through the motions to get benefit money

I agree,too many people sponging,using the excuse that they can't find a job they like.
Instead of living in the real world & realising that work is there to pay the bills.

 

[SocketRocket]

Eastern Europeans want to be here to gain more money for the hard work they put in

We pay higher wages than eastern european countries

You're missing the point. If Eastern European Governments paid higher benefits then these people would stay at home. If we paid lower benefits to the feckless then they would go to work. What is the advantage to pay British people to stay at home and import people to work? The Lunatics are running the asylum.

 

[Pin-seeker]

If you're on benefits you shouldn't be able to afford sky tv,cigarettes,holidays or afternoons in the local working men's club.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You're missing the point. If Eastern European Governments paid higher benefits then these people would stay at home. If we paid lower benefits to the feckless then they would go to work. What is the advantage to pay British people to stay at home and import people to work? The Lunatics are running the asylum.

We aren't "importing" people to work

Eastern Europeans come to the UK to do jobs people can't be bothered to do

They are an integral part of our community just as all foreign people working in our community

As I said earlier I would rather have someone working hard to earn their money because I know they will do a good job as opposed to someone just going through the motions to get benefit money

I know you wish to see this perfect UK where it's just UK nationals doing jobs and no one on benefits but it's not going to happen

Far too many people are looking to blame immigrants for taking jobs etc when the reality is they are doing jobs that lazy Jeremy Kyle types think is below then and they are UK nationals

 

[SocketRocket]

We aren't "importing" people to work

Eastern Europeans come to the UK to do jobs people can't be bothered to do

They are an integral part of our community just as all foreign people working in our community

As I said earlier I would rather have someone working hard to earn their money because I know they will do a good job as opposed to someone just going through the motions to get benefit money

I know you wish to see this perfect UK where it's just UK nationals doing jobs and no one on benefits but it's not going to happen

Far too many people are looking to blame immigrants for taking jobs etc when the reality is they are doing jobs that lazy Jeremy Kyle types think is below then and they are UK nationals

1) I want a controlled immigration policy where people come based on skills and need.
2) It would happen if we cut off the money supply, just like Poland et al do.
3) You don't seem to know what side of the fence you are on.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

And I want an immigration policy based on people who are willing to arrive and contribute to the country by working hard whatever they do and whatever skill they have

 

[c1973]

Quite a bit of stereotyping from both sides of the argument here. Funnily enough I think both sides are correct to a degree. There are lazy feckless types who don't want to do certain types of work that hard working immigrants will do, but the flip side is there are plenty who would happily do them but can't get a start; also, there are immigrants who are here for the benefits too. A bit of a mix of both arguments imo.
Not one side is correct or completely wrong.

The thing with UKIP is that their main polices are Europe and immigration and they do seem to connect with a lot of people on them. The more they appear to succeed in gaining votes then more will join them thinking it ain't a wasted vote. The increase in support/popularity of UKIP should have led to 'serious' debate on these two issues (I feel a lot of the UK public demand it) but it hasn't, mainstream parties are scared of the issue (or of being seen to be racist, which is codswallop imo) and all of them lack a strong capable leader who could tackle it head on.

UKIP are not afraid of discussing the issue and have pretty much been void of any proper political counter arguments, loosely insinuating they are all rabid nationalists and racists does not count as debate. Until this changes, the possibility is there that they could continue to make gains.


For me the worrying thing is not UKIP as such, but the fact there appears to be a lot of people in the UK who want these issues looked at, debated and hopefully (in their opinion) changed that are being ignored and at times derided as being racist (although I sense that particular counter argument is on the wane slightly).

In short, we need a proper national debate with hard facts on the pros and cons of immigration and Europe and we need it now.

 

[SocketRocket]

Quite a bit of stereotyping from both sides of the argument here. Funnily enough I think both sides are correct to a degree. There are lazy feckless types who don't want to do certain types of work that hard working immigrants will do, but the flip side is there are plenty who would happily do them but can't get a start; also, there are immigrants who are here for the benefits too. A bit of a mix of both arguments imo.
Not one side is correct or completely wrong.

The thing with UKIP is that their main polices are Europe and immigration and they do seem to connect with a lot of people on them. The more they appear to succeed in gaining votes then more will join them thinking it ain't a wasted vote. The increase in support/popularity of UKIP should have led to 'serious' debate on these two issues (I feel a lot of the UK public demand it) but it hasn't, mainstream parties are scared of the issue (or of being seen to be racist, which is codswallop imo) and all of them lack a strong capable leader who could tackle it head on.

UKIP are not afraid of discussing the issue and have pretty much been void of any proper political counter arguments, loosely insinuating they are all rabid nationalists and racists does not count as debate. Until this changes, the possibility is there that they could continue to make gains.


For me the worrying thing is not UKIP as such, but the fact there appears to be a lot of people in the UK who want these issues looked at, debated and hopefully (in their opinion) changed that are being ignored and at times derided as being racist (although I sense that particular counter argument is on the wane slightly).

In short, we need a proper national debate with hard facts on the pros and cons of immigration and Europe and we need it now.

A very good post.

 

[Ethan]

Quite a bit of stereotyping from both sides of the argument here. Funnily enough I think both sides are correct to a degree. There are lazy feckless types who don't want to do certain types of work that hard working immigrants will do, but the flip side is there are plenty who would happily do them but can't get a start; also, there are immigrants who are here for the benefits too. A bit of a mix of both arguments imo.
Not one side is correct or completely wrong.

The thing with UKIP is that their main polices are Europe and immigration and they do seem to connect with a lot of people on them. The more they appear to succeed in gaining votes then more will join them thinking it ain't a wasted vote. The increase in support/popularity of UKIP should have led to 'serious' debate on these two issues (I feel a lot of the UK public demand it) but it hasn't, mainstream parties are scared of the issue (or of being seen to be racist, which is codswallop imo) and all of them lack a strong capable leader who could tackle it head on.

UKIP are not afraid of discussing the issue and have pretty much been void of any proper political counter arguments, loosely insinuating they are all rabid nationalists and racists does not count as debate. Until this changes, the possibility is there that they could continue to make gains.


For me the worrying thing is not UKIP as such, but the fact there appears to be a lot of people in the UK who want these issues looked at, debated and hopefully (in their opinion) changed that are being ignored and at times derided as being racist (although I sense that particular counter argument is on the wane slightly).

In short, we need a proper national debate with hard facts on the pros and cons of immigration and Europe and we need it now.

The alternative view is that UKIP ARE simply rabid nationalists and have created a false debate because there isn't actually an underlying problem. The fact they have got a lot of people who don't really understand what is going on in the economy all hot and bothered does not mean that the mainstream parties should all be dragged into a debate. This is the modern media model, create a false dichotomy and an appearance of a balanced debate where there really isn't one. Clacton Man may think the country is being over run with immigrants stealing our jobs and taking our welfare, but doesn't make it true. The rest of the UKIP policy platform is a mixture of wishful thinking, a return to the 1950s and voids where they haven't thought of anything yet. When sensible people examine their manifestos, most will run for the hills.

The Tories have done the same with welfare. The people that Ian Duncan Smith is attacking make little or no difference to the economy. NHS health tourism is a drop in the ocean, but there are people, idiots, who think these issues are pushing the countries economy into the toilet, so the politicians are happy to exploit that.

The trouble with facts is that many people do not want to hear facts, they just want to hear what fits their prejudice. Shame on politicians who pander to that, greater shame that almost all of them do.

 

[c1973]

The alternative view is that UKIP ARE simply rabid nationalists and have created a false debate because there isn't actually an underlying problem. The fact they have got a lot of people who don't really understand what is going on in the economy all hot and bothered does not mean that the mainstream parties should all be dragged into a debate. This is the modern media model, create a false dichotomy and an appearance of a balanced debate where there really isn't one. Clacton Man may think the country is being over run with immigrants stealing our jobs and taking our welfare, but doesn't make it true. The rest of the UKIP policy platform is a mixture of wishful thinking, a return to the 1950s and voids where they haven't thought of anything yet. When sensible people examine their manifestos, most will run for the hills.

The Tories have done the same with welfare. The people that Ian Duncan Smith is attacking make little or no difference to the economy. NHS health tourism is a drop in the ocean, but there are people, idiots, who think these issues are pushing the countries economy into the toilet, so the politicians are happy to exploit that.

The trouble with facts is that many people do not want to hear facts, they just want to hear what fits their prejudice. Shame on politicians who pander to that, greater shame that almost all of them do.

Correct, I do not disagree that there is an alternative viewpoint, that's why imo we need a proper debate.

Whether you or I agree or disagree is neither here nor there though. A lot of people do feel there is an issue and do feel they are affected, you can't ignore them.


For the avoidance of doubt, my personal belief is the problem is exaggerated at the moment, but there is an issue, and it needs to be debated seriously to ensure it does not become the problem many people think it is.

You know, it is perfectly normal and an acceptable position for both sides to be correct in certain aspects. This is an argument where I think it would apply, it's not black and white.

 

[Tashyboy]

A very good post.

And I for one will second that, it is the sort of neutral post I was thinking of when I started this blog irrespective of what others say.

i do think that immigration and benefits are linked.

benefits do have a massive part to play in this country but when this country went through a double dip recession and the country's work force suffered through loss of jobs, houses etc etc, people on benefits were untouched.

there is a large part of this country that have no intention what so ever of doing a days work knowing full well that they can get by on benefits. And don't anyone say that's hearsay coz I have a daughter who claims the lot, house furniture, the lot and it sticks in my families throat.

unscreened immigration. Who are we actually letting in. Recent events of murderers being allowed into the UK should make us shudder.

For anyone to say that immigration has no part to play in this country needs to take a step back and think. It has a massive part to play. but why are we paying someone from "abroad" to work in fields in Norfolk when there are young uns laying in bed all day playing there play stations. That is not a skilled workforce. The job centres should be saying "here is work, turn up if not end of job seekers etc"

whatever people say about UKIP, they get people discussing issues which "educated politicians" from parties whose supporters have an electorate IQ of above 3 figures don't. The latest being UKIP do not want anyone with life threatening illnesses into the country, which include TB and HIV. There are accused of being homophobic etc. but the stats show that in 2013, 40% of all new diagnosed cases of HIV were from people from overseas. Now who in the UK is benefiting from that.

it has been alleged that the supporters of UKIP are not the most educated. if that is the case, and I am sure most do not know UKIPs policies inc me. then what does it imply when an educated MP defects from the Torys to join UKIPs numpties.Furthermore if said MP was disgusted in the alleged homophobic HIV UKIP comment he would have more of an insight to HIV as his father is credited with being one of the original scientists which discovered The HIV virus. So I am sure it's not a topic which has been discussed lightly over the dinner table.

Back to my original point, UKIP change on the political Horizon? Only time will tell but one things is for sure. It has got people talking seriously about politics for the first time in years and years, and that can only be good for the UK.

 

[Ethan]

And I for one will second that, it is the sort of neutral post I was thinking of when I started this blog irrespective of what others say.

i do think that immigration and benefits are linked.

benefits do have a massive part to play in this country but when this country went through a double dip recession and the country's work force suffered through loss of jobs, houses etc etc, people on benefits were untouched.

there is a large part of this country that have no intention what so ever of doing a days work knowing full well that they can get by on benefits. And don't anyone say that's hearsay coz I have a daughter who claims the lot, house furniture, the lot and it sticks in my families throat.

unscreened immigration. Who are we actually letting in. Recent events of murderers being allowed into the UK should make us shudder.

For anyone to say that immigration has no part to play in this country needs to take a step back and think. It has a massive part to play. but why are we paying someone from "abroad" to work in fields in Norfolk when there are young uns laying in bed all day playing there play stations. That is not a skilled workforce. The job centres should be saying "here is work, turn up if not end of job seekers etc"

whatever people say about UKIP, they get people discussing issues which "educated politicians" from parties whose supporters have an electorate IQ of above 3 figures don't. The latest being UKIP do not want anyone with life threatening illnesses into the country, which include TB and HIV. There are accused of being homophobic etc. but the stats show that in 2013, 40% of all new diagnosed cases of HIV were from people from overseas. Now who in the UK is benefiting from that.

it has been alleged that the supporters of UKIP are not the most educated. if that is the case, and I am sure most do not know UKIPs policies inc me. then what does it imply when an educated MP defects from the Torys to join UKIPs numpties.Furthermore if said MP was disgusted in the alleged homophobic HIV UKIP comment he would have more of an insight to HIV as his father is credited with being one of the original scientists which discovered The HIV virus. So I am sure it's not a topic which has been discussed lightly over the dinner table.

Back to my original point, UKIP change on the political Horizon? Only time will tell but one things is for sure. It has got people talking seriously about politics for the first time in years and years, and that can only be good for the UK.

You, sir, are precisely the sort of person UKIP is targeting.

I can just see the new slogan "UKIP - the party for people whose IQ is not in three figures (not including decimal places)."

Carswell has no special insight into HIV, but he has form in homophobia.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Quite a bit of stereotyping from both sides of the argument here. Funnily enough I think both sides are correct to a degree. There are lazy feckless types who don't want to do certain types of work that hard working immigrants will do, but the flip side is there are plenty who would happily do them but can't get a start; also, there are immigrants who are here for the benefits too. A bit of a mix of both arguments imo.
Not one side is correct or completely wrong.

The thing with UKIP is that their main polices are Europe and immigration and they do seem to connect with a lot of people on them. The more they appear to succeed in gaining votes then more will join them thinking it ain't a wasted vote. The increase in support/popularity of UKIP should have led to 'serious' debate on these two issues (I feel a lot of the UK public demand it) but it hasn't, mainstream parties are scared of the issue (or of being seen to be racist, which is codswallop imo) and all of them lack a strong capable leader who could tackle it head on.

UKIP are not afraid of discussing the issue and have pretty much been void of any proper political counter arguments, loosely insinuating they are all rabid nationalists and racists does not count as debate. Until this changes, the possibility is there that they could continue to make gains.


For me the worrying thing is not UKIP as such, but the fact there appears to be a lot of people in the UK who want these issues looked at, debated and hopefully (in their opinion) changed that are being ignored and at times derided as being racist (although I sense that particular counter argument is on the wane slightly).

In short, we need a proper national debate with hard facts on the pros and cons of immigration and Europe and we need it now.

I think the chances of having an 'informed' national debate on these matters is slim to minimal. You've seen on here what happens and you would argue that golfers are supposed to be a pretty sensible traditional bunch, full of etiquette and manners. Yes there are some good points made by both sides, but there are also some really idiotic and racist comments made based on nothing much more than prejudice and propaganda. And I'm sure people could find some really left wings statements as well.

If you intensify that with even more extreme views, then finding out some hard facts becomes almost impossible and all that will happen is people will cherry pick things that back up their pretty entrenched views. Of which I am probably as guilty as anyone

 

[AmandaJR]

I've not read the posts but the title made me think of an interesting question posed to the BBC this morning..."now UKIP has the same number of seats as The Green Party will the amount of coverage given to them be similar?"

 

[jp5]

I've not read the posts but the title made me think of an interesting question posed to the BBC this morning..."now UKIP has the same number of seats as The Green Party will the amount of coverage given to them be similar?"

No because UKIP are making great progress whereas the Greens aren't

 

[Doon frae Troon]

No because UKIP are making great progress whereas the Greens aren't

The Greens have made a lot of progress in Scotland.
Much more than UKIP.

 

[jp5]

The Greens have made a lot of progress in Scotland.
Much more than UKIP.

Yes but there is a lot more to the UK than Scotland.

 

[Hobbit]

You, sir, are precisely the sort of person UKIP is targeting.

I can just see the new slogan "UKIP - the party for people whose IQ is not in three figures (not including decimal places)."

Carswell has no special insight into HIV, but he has form in homophobia.

I guess my UKIP vote and IQ of 134 are at odds with each other. So why am on the very top mark of gifted but voting UKIP?

Without going into reams about illegal wars, expense scandals, u-turns over manifesto promises, irrespective of which party, I want to give the established parties a bloody nose. I want them to be honest and trustworthy. And if giving them a bloody nose makes them sit up and listen to the people, I'm all for it.

Do I want UKIP in power? No. Do I want them in a coalition? No. They have the odd policy that makes some sense, just as all the parties do, but just like the Lib Dems have proven to be they're not good enough for office.

My UKIP vote is a protest vote because I don't trust either the Cons or Labour anymore.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I guess my UKIP vote and IQ of 134 are at odds with each other. So why am on the very top mark of gifted but voting UKIP?

Without going into reams about illegal wars, expense scandals, u-turns over manifesto promises, irrespective of which party, I want to give the established parties a bloody nose. I want them to be honest and trustworthy. And if giving them a bloody nose makes them sit up and listen to the people, I'm all for it.

Do I want UKIP in power? No. Do I want them in a coalition? No. They have the odd policy that makes some sense, just as all the parties do, but just like the Lib Dems have proven to be they're not good enough for office.

My UKIP vote is a protest vote because I don't trust either the Cons or Labour anymore.

And that mate is what i believe is happening in recent by elections etc - to try and give them main parties a kick where it hurts