Do you consider UKIP good or bad?

You are confusing climate change (which UKIP do accept) with man-made global warming (which UKIP believes is overstated).

I would be happy for my children to be taught in school that Evolution caused by Natural selection is a fact.

I wouldn't be happy for them to be taught that our species is solely responsible for global warming unless there was also a counter view that climate change happens whether we like it or not.

Well, seeing as everyone earning less than the required 36k to get into the 40% tax bracket would be being charged 31% rather than 20% I think it stands on its own. The tax free bracket is already being moved to 10,000 so the extra 3.5k of tex-free won't make up paying 50% more income tax on the next 13k. Anyone earning more than 20k therefore will be subject to increased taxes. Cba to work out the maximum earnings at which you're still losing money but I'd estimate ~40k

Tl;dr with current figure, the government would lose money, as would everyone between 20-40k pa earnings. The money is going to rich people who are having their 45% bracket reduced down to only 31%. I don't have figures for national insurance. Seeing as 31% is probably no longer accurate, I think we'll wait for UKIP to finally publish a costed manfesto- which they refuse to do atm.

Membership of the European Union does not bring in any additional trade to the UK economy; being part of the single market does, which is why we should leave and adopt a free trade agreement like Switzerland. We would then be able to have trade agreements with other countries such as India and the USA, which we currently cannot do due to the EU's protectionist and isolationist policies. Also I am not advocating UKIP's spending plans, just withdrawal of the European Union.

file:///C:/Users/Jacob/Downloads/RP10-62.pdf

First page, 6.1% of primary legislation, and 14.4% of legislation.

Got to get back to explaining how climate change works to the guy who posted a temperature graph for Europe as evidence that the Earth is not cooling...

You're just moaning rather than providing me with reasoning for your opinions.

Prisoners being able to vote or not isn't a vital issue in the UK atm. And no, Conservative.

And I found this:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm

That is not a global temperature graph and is therefore irrelevant to global warming.

Just because it has happened before doesn't mean it isn't happening now nor that we don't have a hand in it.

Climate change has become to mean man made global warming

The EU is already creating trade agreements with the USA (and Canada).

Only in the minds of the uneducated. If it were true, looking at climate change over the last 10,000 years is basically attributing a lot of change to a population of between 5m and 27m people who basically burn't wood.

Nonsense.

UKIP's position is that man has nothing to do with it.

Are you aware of the trade agreements we had to tear up 40 years ago in order to join? I'm pretty sure if we ran our own affairs we would have sorted them out a lot quicker than that.

So you're saying a video of the EU commissioner saying most national laws are made from the EU is..... not true?

So why do they advocate building nuclear power plants IN ORDER TO REDUCE CO2 EMMISIONS if they feel we have NOTHING to do with it. They feel our species influence is OVERSTATED, not zero.

There is simply no need to appeal to CO2 as an explanation for natural variation.

I'm going to stop you there.. short wavelength light emits more heat, therefore it is inaccurate to say the light is short wavelength because of it's high temperature. It is more the other way around, it emits high temperature because of it's short wavelength. That much at least I do know.



This bit I agree with, in fact it is the reason I said I accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas to some extent. The extent should be verifiable in the medium to long term, simply measure IF light at low altitude levels over time, if the heat is being caused by CO2 trapping IF light we should be able to detect this.

That bastard is 1.2 thousand pages long. Why am I sceptical? Besides, just to humour you I decided to check out the introduction. The reality of man-made climate change is re-affirmed in the first bloody paragraph.

I can't even figure out what confused point you're trying to make here.

Reasons? The EU was supposed to be a trade union, not a political union.

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA):

- Doesn't require the US to pay £55 million a day- Clearly avoiding all the benefits we get (which are worth more) from this membership.
- Doesn't allow ANY Mexican to emigrate to the US to live.... We aren't capitalists like Americans. Just because the US is hostile towards other countries, doesn't mean we should too. In fact, most of the workers we get are skilled anyway- you just don't get to see them because they are working in offices rather than outside. And the ones you see, get you angry because, being a UKIP supporter, you are probably low-tempered.

So why does the EU make us pay money and allow any dirt-poor European to live in the UK?

We never had that many back then although i'm aware that we did have an agreement regarding dual nationality or something with Australia at one point.

I'm not saying we can't, i believe that we'll be fine whether we are in or out of the EU and there are even some reasons which tempt me to leave but right now the debate on both sides is abysmal. You have those who want to be 'In' suggesting that armageddon will follow if we leave and you have those who want to be 'out' saying that not a single consequence will arise if we leave. As such i'm forced to look at the facts myself and conclude that both sides are overstating the effects of leaving or staying and as such i'm far from convinced that we need to leave.

Yes, she has stated that she was referring to EU laws, 75-80% of which are made by the EP.

Only confusing if you confuse "climate change" with "man made climate change".

Data looking at "climate change" over the past 10,00 years would be pretty odd if the phrase "climate change" was replaced with "man made climate change".

Hopefully, that explains your confusion and the reason why the two should be kept separate.