Do you consider UKIP good or bad? Watch

geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#781
Report 4 years ago
#781
(Original post by LeeMills77)
I find it amazing how people vote for UKIP just based on them wanting to leave the EU. They are completely ignorant about their manifesto, something I am not too familiar with.
I'm not surprised, it hasn't been published yet, unless you mean the last one. I'll let you into a little secret tho', in 1983 Labour published their election manifesto which became known as "the longest suicide note in history". After their defeat most of those policies were quietly dropped. Every party does it to one extent or another. It's your choice if you are going to hold it against UKIP alone.

(Original post by LeeMills77)
I agree with another post on here saying UKIP have all the answers - they don't!
Agree entirely with this.. no party has all the answers.

(Original post by LeeMills77)
I as well as many others, thought a Lib Dem coalition would redress the excesses of the Tory party. Instead, this hasn't happened.
The pupil premium is an example of a policy that smacks of Lib Dem. I don't think that would have happened but for them.
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#782
Report 4 years ago
#782
(Original post by Quady)
It may be, although given banks still aren't lending to business I'd suggest they'd just hoard it to improve their capital position.
Yes, judging by the offers of credit cards I get I'd think it is safe to say they are using it to increase consumption, which is a shame.

(Original post by Quady)
Banks have money on tap from funding for lending but it still isn't happening.
Which is why businesses like "Funding Circle" have grown and the government is getting in on the act there too.

(Original post by Quady)
In any case, such tangential tax returns have quite a time lag. In the short term either the deficit rises or UKIP reduces the size of the state which would counteract the tangential effects.
Agreed, but I wasn't talking about the immediate tax take there, like I said previously the need to balance this year will mean a reciprocal tax rise elsewhere such as indirect taxation or an overall cut in spending. Seeing where they lie on the spectrum, if I had to bet, I'd put my money on a reduction in government spending.
0
reply
thatgr
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#783
Report 4 years ago
#783
This video made me laugh
0
reply
paul_0_1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#784
Report 3 years ago
#784
I will be voting for UKIP.

Governed by our own country and courts, not Europe's.

Able to set our own immigration policy. We are a sink for every poor European country to send its people for jobs. Wages are down, and the ruling classes are getting richer, with cheap labour.

I am genuinely frightened by the changing culture, with many people arriving, often through marriage, from countries with very different ideas of how our society should be run.

It is not isolationist. We would still engage in trade and military alliances with European countries.
.
1
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#785
Report 3 years ago
#785
Of course it isn't isolationist. I live in a house, I tend to lock the front door but I'm not averse to letting people in from time to time, making them a brew and even providing food and entertainment.


What I wouldn't do is leave my front door open, for anyone who wishes to come in and help themselves.


However some people seem to have a problem with that concept.. the idea that "immigration is good, my grandparents came here" etc is all well and good, but those people most likely came here under the old regime, a regime where we controlled immigration. UKIP aren't proposing to stop all immigration just to control it more.
0
reply
_Chris
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#786
Report 3 years ago
#786
The irony is that it is the poor/working class, those with 'few options in life' that are the victims of uncontrolled immigration.

When the penniless Pole turns up on these shores, looking for work, it's the cheaper neigbourhoods that he heads for.

When he gets sick he goes to the local GP or local A&E, his kids go to the local school, he uses the already overcrowded local public transport... yada yada.

So, the infrastructure is failing on a local level...

However, Mr Pole is a benefit to the wealthy - he provides cheap labour for their businesses, keeps wages down and he does a damn fine job at cleaning their Merc, for a fiver.

So, Piotr Pole is nothing but good for the rich, but nothing but bad for those existing day-to-day, week-to-week.

And, let's get this straight, it's the evil rich right wingers that want to stop immigrants flooding in and the loonie lefties than want to let them keep coming !?!


Funny old game.
C
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#787
Report 3 years ago
#787
(Original post by _Chris)
Funny old game.
Not really, quite rational in fact because many immigrants vote labour and that's why labour instituted the policy of encouraging immigration towards marginal seats.

Those in the working class areas who become disgruntled might vote for somebody else but will still be far outnumbered by those who are lifelong labour.

You'd be forgiven for thinking this is a risky game until you fully understand the first past the post system and how Labour AND Conservatives game the system.
0
reply
_Chris
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#788
Report 3 years ago
#788
I think NF is amazing. Just incredible.

But, where do we think this is going?

Coalition? An agreement?

It could just let Labour in, which would be an unmitigated disaster for this country, rich and poor. The rich will see their savings, pensions and businesses demolished, the poor will be the worst hit as the country slips into depression and are forced by international investors (who fund the deficit) to slash spending - you think it's bad now, just think about the incompetent liar Balls.

The though of Ed and Ed at the controls just makes me shudder....

...and that is where NF could take us - on to the rocks!

C
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#789
Report 3 years ago
#789
(Original post by _Chris)
I think NF is amazing. Just incredible.

But, where do we think this is going?

Coalition? An agreement?

It could just let Labour in, which would be an unmitigated disaster for this country, rich and poor. The rich will see their savings, pensions and businesses demolished, the poor will be the worst hit as the country slips into depression and are forced by international investors (who fund the deficit) to slash spending - you think it's bad now, just think about the incompetent liar Balls.

The though of Ed and Ed at the controls just makes me shudder....

...and that is where NF could take us - on to the rocks!

C
NF...?

International investors fund a minority of the deficit, most of it is funded by UK creditors.
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#790
Report 3 years ago
#790
(Original post by _Chris)
Coalition? An agreement?

...and that is where NF could take us - on to the rocks!

C
In the first year of the current coalition (4 years ago??) I predicted a lib-lab pact for the next term. In one way I hope not, but that is where I have always felt it would head. However each coalition undermines the one argument that has always been used against PR.. that FPtP makes coalitions less likely.

Maybe the UK voting public has had enough and decides to kick the main two up the proverbial. If so it would be hard to argue against PR on the basis that it just leads to coalitions.

The next term we may get a referendum, though it might be on PR rather than the EU.

I wouldn't worry about Balls, he is all hot air. This was the guy who tried to force home educating parents to accept inspections and having their children interviewed outside their presence.

As for Milliband, in his recent "Education" speech he said he wanted all heads to have the same powers as those in free schools. Heads in free schools have the power to employ teachers who don't hold QTS. By definition he has just undermined everything his shadow education minister (Hunt) stands for.

So if we do get a lib-lab pact I hope it justifies a change in the electoral system while the two heads flounder hopelessly trying to pretend they know what they're doing. I'm sure the civil service won't let them break anything.
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#791
Report 3 years ago
#791
(Original post by Quady)
NF...?

International investors fund a minority of the deficit, most of it is funded by UK creditors.
NF = Nigel Farage.

While most is funded by UK creditors the single biggest of those is the BoE due to QE. If you split creditors up into the following:

Overseas, BoE, UK Pension & Insurance, other UK Banks & Building Societies.

Then of those Overseas is the biggest. When the BoE reduces QE we will be more reliant on what those foreign investors think and then we will REALLY have to cut the deficit.
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#792
Report 3 years ago
#792
(Original post by geokinkladze)
NF = Nigel Farage.

While most is funded by UK creditors the single biggest of those is the BoE due to QE. If you split creditors up into the following:

Overseas, BoE, UK Pension & Insurance, other UK Banks & Building Societies.

Then of those Overseas is the biggest. When the BoE reduces QE we will be more reliant on what those foreign investors think and then we will REALLY have to cut the deficit.
Ahhhh not National Front :P

Overseas would be the single biggest category, with 30% of gilts, but overseas is still a smaller holder than domestic, even after you strip out the BoE holding.
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#793
Report 3 years ago
#793
(Original post by geokinkladze)
As for Milliband, in his recent "Education" speech he said he wanted all heads to have the same powers as those in free schools. Heads in free schools have the power to employ teachers who don't hold QTS. By definition he has just undermined everything his shadow education minister (Hunt) stands for.
Unless the power for free schools to appoint someone without QTS as a teacher is taken away.
0
reply
_Chris
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#794
Report 3 years ago
#794
The rise in the deficit in part coincided with a shift of UK institutional money (mainly pension funds) away from equities towards bonds (IAS 19 & FRS 17) (a reverse of the Ross Goobey effect). If Labour get in power the marginal demand for gilts will in large part be funded by foreign investors chasing yields, which would certainly rise - as sterling would certainly collapse.

In any case, whoever buys all this paper will require a greater yield compensation as risk would certainly rise.

It's got death spiral written all over it.

Labour will be a terrible disaster for this country.

Getting a job in America is the only way out.

C


NB I am talking about George, not Ross (obvvy)
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#795
Report 3 years ago
#795
(Original post by _Chris)
The rise in the deficit in part coincided with a shift of UK institutional money (mainly pension funds) away from equities towards bonds (IAS 19 & FRS 17) (a reverse of the Ross Goobey effect). If Labour get in power the marginal demand for gilts will in large part be funded by foreign investors chasing yields, which would certainly rise - as sterling would certainly collapse.

In any case, whoever buys all this paper will require a greater yield compensation as risk would certainly rise.

It's got death spiral written all over it.

Labour will be a terrible disaster for this country.

Getting a job in America is the only way out.

C


NB I am talking about George, not Ross (obvvy)
Sterling and bond yields will be supported by ECB QE
0
reply
democracyforum
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#796
Report 3 years ago
#796
Stop trying to comb the mirror to change your hair.

My point is, it's the voters who are the "problem", not the parties.

People vote for them. End of story.
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#797
Report 3 years ago
#797
(Original post by Quady)
Unless the power for free schools to appoint someone without QTS as a teacher is taken away.
Good point.. in fact they may as well come out and say what they really want.. to get rid of free schools altogether. But they won't, because they know that would lose them the election.
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#798
Report 3 years ago
#798
(Original post by _Chris)
The rise in the deficit in part coincided with a shift of UK institutional money (mainly pension funds) away from equities towards bonds (IAS 19 & FRS 17) (a reverse of the Ross Goobey effect).
Pension and insurance funds have recently owned less as a proportion of UK Gilts as the total debt has risen. It is the BoE that has taken their slack. Foreign investors have predominantly maintained their proportional share.

So in other words once the BoE cut back QE that slack will have to be taken by somebody, and if it isn't the UK Pension funds and Insurance companies, and if it isn't the Banks and Building Societies, then it'll have to come from Overseas.
0
reply
democracyforum
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#799
Report 3 years ago
#799
Taking control of our own borders

Not taking orders from a foreign court

Letting the public decide our EU membership

Common sense, populist policies

Realistic alternative energy solutions

Domestic aid, not foreign aid

Putting British people first
0
reply
geokinkladze
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#800
Report 3 years ago
#800
(Original post by democracyforum)

Letting the public decide our EU membership
This.

As long as Joe Public understands that all those other things to a lesser or greater degree stem from that decision then they can make an informed choice. The current malaise stems from the fact the UK voting public doesn't get a choice and it's that reason, and that reason alone that UKIP is on the rise.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (384)
79.67%
Leave (98)
20.33%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise