If UKIP was in charge of UK Watch

Maker
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Smoking

Smoke anywhere, its legal.

Drinking

To be encouraged

Defence

Spend more money on more soldiers, tanks, planes and ships but keep them in doors because they are needed to defend Britain

Education

More secondary moderns, fewer comprehensives
0
reply
Kabloomybuzz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
The smoking thing is the only thing that looks all that much different to me... that and the fact that they'd be more overt about all of this (though would they if they got in, who knows)
0
reply
Torum
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
Huge increases in the prices of food.

Decreasing population.

Healthcare and care would collapse.

Just a few. But they won't get into power anytime soon.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
If UKIP where in power there would be undesirables herded into train carts and sent into FEMA camps to do manual labor.
0
reply
dean.stanston
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
I hope they do get into power, and soon. People only dislike politics because Labour/Tory has got stale.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by dean.stanston)
I hope they do get into power, and soon. People only dislike politics because Labour/Tory has got stale.
It'll be a nice changed getting lied to by people in purple ties instead of blue and red.
8
reply
tyroncs
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
Smoking

Smoke anywhere, its legal.
I quote from UKIP's policies page on their website"– UKIP will amend the smoking ban to give pubs and clubs the choice to open smoking rooms properly ventilated and separated from non-smoking areas. "

This doesn't affect any non smoker at all, does it? I am of the opinion that smoking should be discouraged, but if it doesn't harm any non smoker it should be up to the pub to decide, not the government.

Drinking

To be encouraged
Apart from the fact that Nigel Farage goes to the pub, I am confused as to what you are referring to here. Nothing to do with drinking or alcohol is mentioned in the UKIP policies page.

Defence

Spend more money on more soldiers, tanks, planes and ships but keep them in doors because they are needed to defend Britain
Increasing the funding to the military isn't such a bad thing, considering the US Secretary of Defence said that Britain would not be a full partner with the U.S.A with our current funding cuts. Extra funding can also mean being better equipped, as well as things such as better provisions for soldiers etc. It also gives economic boosts to British Companies which is an all round good thing also

Education

More secondary moderns, fewer comprehensives
The UKIP position is to bring back Grammar schools. Secondary Moderns are a thing of the past and will not be re-introduced. Very simply there will be Grammar Schools which are selective and take on a certain % of pupils and then there will be Comprehensives which are non selective. Considering 80% of 18-24 year olds agree to the idea, and 70% of the country as a whole, I am sure you will agree with me that as UKIP are the only party supporting this it is a credit to democracy?

I'd appreciate if you would actually make a response to this comment, rather than making scare posts and never materialising when someone responds like most of these sort of threads
0
reply
Anonymous263
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by tyroncs)
I quote from UKIP's policies page on their website"– UKIP will amend the smoking ban to give pubs and clubs the choice to open smoking rooms properly ventilated and separated from non-smoking areas. "

This doesn't affect any non smoker at all, does it? I am of the opinion that smoking should be discouraged, but if it doesn't harm any non smoker it should be up to the pub to decide, not the government.



Apart from the fact that Nigel Farage goes to the pub, I am confused as to what you are referring to here. Nothing to do with drinking or alcohol is mentioned in the UKIP policies page.



Increasing the funding to the military isn't such a bad thing, considering the US Secretary of Defence said that Britain would not be a full partner with the U.S.A with our current funding cuts. Extra funding can also mean being better equipped, as well as things such as better provisions for soldiers etc. It also gives economic boosts to British Companies which is an all round good thing also



The UKIP position is to bring back Grammar schools. Secondary Moderns are a thing of the past and will not be re-introduced. Very simply there will be Grammar Schools which are selective and take on a certain % of pupils and then there will be Comprehensives which are non selective. Considering 80% of 18-24 year olds agree to the idea, and 70% of the country as a whole, I am sure you will agree with me that as UKIP are the only party supporting this it is a credit to democracy?

I'd appreciate if you would actually make a response to this comment, rather than making scare posts and never materialising when someone responds like most of these sort of threads
Spending more on the military will mean more wars, more war profiteering by companies, less spent on much needed services like the NHS (which UKIP would privatise slowly anyway).
Grammar schools would just widen social inequality and the divide between the rich and the poor.
0
reply
tyroncs
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by Anonymous263)
Spending more on the military will mean more wars, more war profiteering by companies, less spent on much needed services like the NHS (which UKIP would privatise slowly anyway).
Grammar schools would just widen social inequality and the divide between the rich and the poor.
I think inevitably if we cut down our defence spending we are going to be relying on the United States for everything defence related. In a time when countries like Russia are literally invading their neighbors, we should not be cutting down on defence spending.

If we cut down our military that money would just be swallowed by the deficit, it wouldn't be put towards the NHS. Similarly if we were increasing our defence spending we wouldn't take the money from the NHS, I imagine UKIP would get it from the money taken from our EU contributions and the extra tax from simplifying the tax system.

Grammar Schools don't widen social inequality and they certainly do not increase the divide between the rich and the poor. Private schools choose children based on money, Comprehensive Schools by postcode and Grammar schools by natural talent.

Closing them has had a very clear negative effect on the UK, shown in the way that we are the only country in Europe to have the literacy and numeracy rates decline generation by generation. We can also see this in the way from 65-97 every Prime Minister attended a Grammar School, yet since then it has all been Private School kids. It is Private schools which entrench the class system and the wealth gap on our society, and without Grammar schools to be an opposition to them they have flourished.

I am quite passionate on this subject and have many many more arguments/facts/statistics etc such as the fact Ethnic Minorities and those without English as their first language are over represented in Grammar Schools and the way only 6% of Schools are Grammars yet 29% of the top 100 board of schools is
0
reply
Anonymous263
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by tyroncs)
I think inevitably if we cut down our defence spending we are going to be relying on the United States for everything defence related. In a time when countries like Russia are literally invading their neighbors, we should not be cutting down on defence spending.

If we cut down our military that money would just be swallowed by the deficit, it wouldn't be put towards the NHS. Similarly if we were increasing our defence spending we wouldn't take the money from the NHS, I imagine UKIP would get it from the money taken from our EU contributions and the extra tax from simplifying the tax system.

Grammar Schools don't widen social inequality and they certainly do not increase the divide between the rich and the poor. Private schools choose children based on money, Comprehensive Schools by postcode and Grammar schools by natural talent.

Closing them has had a very clear negative effect on the UK, shown in the way that we are the only country in Europe to have the literacy and numeracy rates decline generation by generation. We can also see this in the way from 65-97 every Prime Minister attended a Grammar School, yet since then it has all been Private School kids. It is Private schools which entrench the class system and the wealth gap on our society, and without Grammar schools to be an opposition to them they have flourished.

I am quite passionate on this subject and have many many more arguments/facts/statistics etc such as the fact Ethnic Minorities and those without English as their first language are over represented in Grammar Schools and the way only 6% of Schools are Grammars yet 29% of the top 100 board of schools is
Its too late right now to argue all the stuff that you have said here but ill just say this:
Grammar schools dont pick people on natural talent dont be silly.
the difference is people with money can afford to buy their children tutors who can guide them through the 11 plus exams, poorer families cannot afford this and are put at a disadvantage, i hope you can put 2+2 together from there. Im going to bed.
0
reply
Solemn Rain
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by Davij038)
It'll be a nice changed getting lied to by people in purple ties instead of blue and red.
What if David Cameroon isn't actually lying but the people behind him are lying to him? Is he still considered to be a liar?
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Solemn Rain)
What if David Cameroon isn't actually lying but the people behind him are lying to him? Is he still considered to be a liar?
No he's considered ineffective.
0
reply
Darthmixalot
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
It would be awful. At least labour and the tories are too middle of the road at the moment to do much. I'd prefer grudging indifference and general incompetence to the incompetence, racism and lies of UKIP. Inaction is better than swinging to the right.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Maker)
Smoking

Smoke anywhere, its legal.

Drinking

To be encouraged

Defence

Spend more money on more soldiers, tanks, planes and ships but keep them in doors because they are needed to defend Britain

Education

More secondary moderns, fewer comprehensives
These seem like the least objectionable of their policies you could choose.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by Maker)
Smoking

Smoke anywhere, its legal.

Drinking

To be encouraged

Defence

Spend more money on more soldiers, tanks, planes and ships but keep them in doors because they are needed to defend Britain

Education

More secondary moderns, fewer comprehensives
If UKIP was in charge you would find that their MPs agreed about nothing other than leaving the EU; not even about immigration as this week's events have demonstrated.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by dean.stanston)
I hope they do get into power, and soon. People only dislike politics because Labour/Tory has got stale.
SNP have been making noises saying they would like to go into coalition with Labour (and maybe stand in England in future). Eurosceptic Tories are similarly expressing the hope that UKIP will make their statement, pull the Tories right and come back into the fold.

A coalition including an insurgent party is therefore seen by actual politicians as a pretty likely outcome at the next election. Of course these parties will never get into power all on their own.
0
reply
Alfissti
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
I'm sure anything they say today will change 3 days later.

Best not to get your hopes up with regard to anything you deem good they will do. Not sure about the bad parts though
0
reply
jf1994
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Solemn Rain)
What if David Cameroon isn't actually lying but the people behind him are lying to him? Is he still considered to be a liar?
Oh here we go...:rolleyes:
0
reply
tyroncs
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by Anonymous263)
Its too late right now to argue all the stuff that you have said here but ill just say this:
Grammar schools dont pick people on natural talent dont be silly.
the difference is people with money can afford to buy their children tutors who can guide them through the 11 plus exams, poorer families cannot afford this and are put at a disadvantage, i hope you can put 2+2 together from there. Im going to bed.
You can say this with every test though can't you? GCSE's have a bigger impact on people's lives, yet as the rich can afford tutors it advantages them etc etc etc.

Using my own school as an example, we have to do this thing called the Yellis test. It categorises students into A, B, C and D depending on what quartile they are in compared to the rest of the country in terms of intelligence in things such as Maths, English, Analytical skills etc.

My school's results were 77% A and 22% B. Considering 33% of the schools in Kent are Grammar schools, those results are perfect.

To further this point, in selective Local Authorities (such as Kent), 89% of children at Grammar schools achieved a level 5 at Maths in Year 6, compared to 24% for other schools. It is the same story with English, with 75% getting Level 6 in Grammar Schools and only 20% for other schools. If this isn't Grammar Schools picking people based on natural talent then I don't know what is.
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

Do unconditional offers make teenagers lazy?

Yes (47)
61.84%
No (29)
38.16%

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