Josias - change the word "persecuting" to "don't care about their welfare". Another_richard's point is a very good one. Whether UKIP have the right answers is another matter altogether, but you need to understand that many people in this country feel that the implicit pact between the establishment and the people has been broken.
Indeed, but it's not a good point as he used 'persecuting', ffs.
It's that sort of terminology that makes UKIP a laughing stock.
And that's a problem UKIP face: I'm concerned about Europe. I don't really want more powers to go to Europe. But I'm also very concerned about full withdrawal. I am wavering, and would likely vote 'out' on a sensible referendum question.
But UKIP aren't interested in appealing to me. They don't have a view for a Britain outside Europe (with some very honourable exceptions, such as Mr Tyndall).
Why on Earth should I vote for them? I'm a floating voter (yes, really), and as things currently stand I'd be more likely to vote Labour than UKIP ...
The biggest impediment to UKIP making progress at Westminster is that Nigel Farage simply isn't good enough. He will come under scrutiny and he will be found wanting. It's just a question of time.
Not good enough to be PM? I'd probably agree with you.
But, that's almost beside the point. UKIP's role is to be a catalyst for change of a decadent political system.
I think the one thing in this whole scenario that will stop it is this:
At Westminster Elections, Scots, particularly around the central belt will simply vote Labour. Doesn't matter if they voted for an independent Scotland. They'll trust Labour because only Labour can do the bidding on their behalf against the Tories. And when they get to the ballot box the Labour tickbox is simply bigger than the rest.
I agree this is basically what happens today, though it is possibly weakening. But it is very unusual (twice, I think, since the Tory high watter mark in Scotland ca 1955) for Scottish MPs to make any difference in a UK GE - England is just too big and the FPTP system too flip-flop. But in a 3/4 horse race ...
The other point is that the scenario is predicated on a Yes to Indy vote. And it would be insane to vote for indy and then vote London Labour (if it still existed in Scotland after a Yes, which is another very important issue affecting your analysis). You would want SNP or other pro-indy MPs to stand up for you in negotiations, not Labour or for that matter LD or Tory MPs who would still feel tied to London (and perhaps try to sabotage indy - some in Labour have already beem muttering about that).
But as the SNP or a hypothetical truly independent Scottish Labour Party would also be agin UKIP, the result is the same anyway - though whether it makes any difference is another matter as above. Moreover, I would certainly expect any pro-Indy MPs to refrain from voting on matters that only affected EWNI, as the SNP do today, so that would weaken the Scottish factor further. .
@JosiasJessop. You're the last person on this board I'd consider as a UKIP supporter. Well potentially more so than Antifrank but that's not saying much.
I thought Paul Mid Beds once said he was a LibDem supporter.
The LibDems were once the insurgent, protest party.
It's not important and very possibly I'm wrong but my recollection was that he remains a LibDem supporter, so I'm not sure the relevance of your point.
@JosiasJessop. You're the last person on this board I'd consider as a UKIP supporter. Well potentially more so than Antifrank but that's not saying much.
Heh. May I ask why? As I said, I'm hardly pro-Europe in outlook.
Given Cronie and Imelda Blairs' "Education, education, [re-]education" that the leftards has imposed upon us Englishmen [and women (outwith Stoke/Brighton)] is it not nice that children - albeit from a foreign lande - are learning from their betters; aspiring for quality over - well, if I have to say it - left-wing shyte...?
Josias - change the word "persecuting" to "don't care about their welfare". Another_richard's point is a very good one. Whether UKIP have the right answers is another matter altogether, but you need to understand that many people in this country feel that the implicit pact between the establishment and the people has been broken.
Indeed, but it's not a good point as he used 'persecuting', ffs.
It's that sort of terminology that makes UKIP a laughing stock.
Its what many people think.
Its the experience of being on the receiving end of the "do this, don't do that, think this, don't think that" mentality from people different to yourself and who don't seem to like you.
You might think that makes UKIP a laughing stock but millions of people see and experience it differently.
That you seemingly hold them in contempt for such views merely reinforces their belief that they're being persecuted.
Interesting scenario, although on Scotland as no debate in history has produced a 'bounce' for the winner on anything like the scale Yes would need to overtake No I doubt it, and Darling is a formidable debater himself!
This scenario also seems to have Farage as PM and Lucaslosing her seat, despite the fact the Greens already have a base in the House of Commons unlike UKIP
Plenty of interesting quotes on this. Vince Cable: "Year after year, they would tell the Liberal Democrats that it was economically stupid to raise the top rate of tax above 40%. That was their message, year after year.
Then, a few weeks before the end of their Government—I think it was 57 days—they introduced the 50p rate in order to create a political dividing line. That decision had nothing whatever to do with economics.
The point that they had been making over all those years was that raising the top rate in that way would raise relatively little revenue."
The 50 pence thing is a good move from Balls for Labour. It'll satisfy their base for very little political hassle. It can also be a counterpoint to other things he might announce that are less popular in his base.
Whether it's good economically is a whole different matter, and I doubt Balls cares.
The Huffington Post say what I have been saying for the last 48 hours...
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
@FluffyThoughts That's an awesome song and cover. Not sure how much it has to do with the Lib Dems though . More about the self, conscious, Jungism and the perceived disharmony of our current DNA.
Incidentally an alternative cover of Ænima has Bill Hicks on the cover. He died at the age of 32. That's the same age as I am now !
Not bad politics from Balls here. It's an argument that goes over most peoples heads as to whether it raises tax for the country or not, personally I don't even know if it is a net loss or net gainer for the coffers. I'm leaning towards a net loss but I'd consider myself more economically and politically literate than an average man on the clapham omnibus.
As @JosiasJessop says this is low hanging fruit to apparently raise more cash whilst getting the approval of the base and I don't think the average swing voter will care too much either way.
The Huffington Post say what I have been saying for the last 48 hours...
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
Precisely. It's easy to forget that even though we have PB-Tories and PB-Kinnocks and so on, we've all got the selection bias of being vastly more interested about politics and political events than the average voter. See also - Rennard.
"Persecution" is a term I'd restrict to people who are being subjected to mass murder in places like Syria.
However, I think many voters do find the modern State bullying, shrill, self-serving, and definitely not looking out for their interests.
Its the grinding sense that all the advantages are being kept by 'them' and not you ie increasing wealth divides, that its much harder to 'get on in life' than it was for previous generations ie negative social mobility, that its 'one rule for them and another rule for us' - Vicki Pryce's new job is a classic example of this.
Its not perecution in a brutal dictatorship style but it is of the more low level bullying type from someone stronger than you and who dislikes you.
Now some of this 'bullying' might be unintentional or though carelessness or caused by outside trends eg globalisation but some it does appear to be from nothing more than dislike of people different to themselves.
I've seen a few people state this to the point it's become an accepted truth, but do you have any occasion in mind that makes you think that?
Darling's sporadic forays into the Independence debate have been mediocre to say the least, and his best Better Together buddies are describing him as “comatose”, "useless" and a poor communicator. I'd accept he'd probably be a better debater than the other UKOK Alistair, but that's not an enormously high bar to get over (and you'd have to be a limbo dancer to get under it).
Btw anyone noted how good Ladbrokes interface from Oddschecker is ?
Click on the bet and you get a small browser window that has your details remembered, select stake and then you can login and bet all in one click. Definitely the best.
Also they seem to be top price on more horses recently than I remember in a while (Winners unfortunately for them though ). Also getting in on the Racingpost app is a good move too. They might be a monolith, but I think Ladbrokes have perhaps woken up and smelt the coffee slightly. Their website still isn't great though.
The Huffington Post say what I have been saying for the last 48 hours...
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
A further point is that the expenses scandal and sex scandals have so damaged the reputation of the mainstream that Godfrey Bloom's and Cllr. Sylvester's gaffes appear trivial by comparison.
Expect more from Balls on tax. 50p rate will be the start of tapping into the widespread us and and then disquiet. A pledge to get big business to pay tax, corporation tax changes to rebalance wage increases back to average employees rather than CEOs, living wage etc etc.
You may not agree with the substance of the policies but politically they win the election. People feel worse off and its been made clear to them (and Labour will play this hard) that the few at the very top have engorged themselves through massive wages and no tax. The Tories will oppose all of this making them look like they support the high wages and low taxes of the people who directly fund their party. Or the Tories will state their damascean conversion as with the minimum wage and no one will take them seriously again.
"Persecution" is a term I'd restrict to people who are being subjected to mass murder in places like Syria.
However, I think many voters do find the modern State bullying, shrill, self-serving, and definitely not looking out for their interests.
Its the grinding sense that all the advantages are being kept by 'them' and not you ie increasing wealth divides, that its much harder to 'get on in life' than it was for previous generations ie negative social mobility, that its 'one rule for them and another rule for us' - Vicki Pryce's new job is a classic example of this.
Its not perecution in a brutal dictatorship style but it is of the more low level bullying type from someone stronger than you and who dislikes you.
Now some of this 'bullying' might be unintentional or though carelessness or caused by outside trends eg globalisation but some it does appear to be from nothing more than dislike of people different to themselves.
I suspect it is more that in many cases they are finding life tough - either economically (with low saving rates, increased competition leading to wage pressure/outsourcing) or culturally (rapid immigration, changing social mores, etc).
It is very tempting as an individual to seek to create an overarching narrative as to why everything seems to be going to hell in a handbasket. And it is very tempting to find a remote and all powerful entity (be it "Europe" or "the Establishment" or "Immigrants"*) to blame. They are wrong factually speaking, but I can absolutely understand why they feel persecuted. Eurocrats really *don't* get up in the morning and think "how can I grind the faces of the British in the dirt today"
* I suspect that those UKIPpers who blame "Immigrants" tend to blame them en mass, while in many cases liking/disliking those immigrants that they know personally based on individual merits. In other words I think the fear of immigration is - in most cases - based on fear of economic consequences/alienation/cultural change rather than racism
Wouldn't the top rate of tax actually be 52% rather than 50% because of NI on top? I could just about take a 50% rate as long as it was done with folding NI into the income tax, but not on its own.
Robert, the problem with your open borders approach is that there is a large proportion of the British population who are absolutely unprepared for competition (because of the failures of the education system over generations).
You either need to be prepared for massive intervention in order to turn this around / support a reasonable standard of living (and hence a stable society) or to defer open borders until people have been reskilled
Wouldn't the top rate of tax actually be 52% rather than 50% because of NI on top? I could just about take a 50% rate as long as it was done with folding NI into the income tax, but not on its own.
If you include employers' NI, then it's effectively 58% or so.
I think that there will be many who are not on the 50% rate because of working via limited companies, such as Ken Livingston and Gordon Brown, and most of my medical colleagues in private practice.
Those most affected would be on salaried PAYE, such as BBC personalities. Expect Andrew Neil and Paxman etc to become noticeably harder on Labour economic policy. It is not just City types who are vulnerable to this tax rate, but also a lot of influential people in media, law and other positions that can influence the narrative in the run up to an election.
That's an extraordinary link - well worth everyone reading.
I had always assumed that the Mail spun their stories pretty hard and weren't above "polishing" a quote or two. But if that journalist is halfway right then the Mail deserve to be absolutely hauled over the coals.
The Huffington Post say what I have been saying for the last 48 hours...
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
Precisely. It's easy to forget that even though we have PB-Tories and PB-Kinnocks and so on, we've all got the selection bias of being vastly more interested about politics and political events than the average voter. See also - Rennard.
The Hancock business might be a little different. The local LD councillors seem to be closing ranks around Mr Hancock, and the local newspaper is covering it.
The Huffington Post say what I have been saying for the last 48 hours...
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
A further point is that the expenses scandal and sex scandals have so damaged the reputation of the mainstream that Godfrey Bloom's and Cllr. Sylvester's gaffes appear trivial by comparison.
Yes, most people have said un PC things for a laugh and known they hadn't meant it, so they don't hold these "gaffes" against politicians.
Expect more from Balls on tax. 50p rate will be the start of tapping into the widespread us and and then disquiet. A pledge to get big business to pay tax, corporation tax changes to rebalance wage increases back to average employees rather than CEOs, living wage etc etc.
You may not agree with the substance of the policies but politically they win the election. People feel worse off and its been made clear to them (and Labour will play this hard) that the few at the very top have engorged themselves through massive wages and no tax. The Tories will oppose all of this making them look like they support the high wages and low taxes of the people who directly fund their party. Or the Tories will state their damascean conversion as with the minimum wage and no one will take them seriously again.
Yes, the politics of envy can be politically successful. But political success brings complacency. If we want individuals and the nation to prosper it requires continuous hard slogging by all in this globalised world. That's something that Labour can't envisage and resulted in a culture of mediocrity under the last government.
The main problem with truly open borders is the sheer scale of population movement here. Approximately 45 million people in the world would like to move to the UK:
Even if only a quarter of them came in the next five years, it would still utterly overwhelm the UK. I believe rcs' solution is not to give these people access to the welfare state, so this would depend on people being comfortable with neighbours dying in the streets. Given that many people from Africa etc may not have the money to move back, they may also resort to crime if they can not get jobs. We'd also have to wonder where these people would live. rcs seems to be under the impression they would act like law-abiding Englishmen, and only move if they had a residence lined up. In reality you would just get the Marble Arch situation in every public square in SE England.
The latest figures show that those earning over £150,000 paid almost £10 billion more in tax in the three years when the 50p top rate of tax was in place than when the government conducted its assessment of the tax back in 2012.
Robert, the problem with your open borders approach is that there is a large proportion of the British population who are absolutely unprepared for competition (because of the failures of the education system over generations).
You either need to be prepared for massive intervention in order to turn this around / support a reasonable standard of living (and hence a stable society) or to defer open borders until people have been reskilled
A problem is that some people cannot be reskilled. They fundamentally lack the mental or physical abilities to add even moderate levels of value in their work.
I am sure that White Dee could make up for her loss of benefits by providing services to the people living on the street, shortly to be named "No-benefits street"
The main problem with truly open borders is the sheer scale of population movement here. Approximately 45 million people in the world would like to move to the UK:
Even if only a quarter of them came in the next five years, it would still utterly overwhelm the UK. I believe rcs' solution is not to give these people access to the welfare state, so this would depend on people being comfortable with neighbours dying in the streets. Given that many people from Africa etc may not have the money to move back, they may also resort to crime if they can not get jobs. We'd also have to wonder where these people would live. rcs seems to be under the impression they would act like law-abiding Englishmen, and only move if they had a residence lined up. In reality you would just get the Marble Arch situation in every public square in SE England.
The latest figures show that those earning over £150,000 paid almost £10 billion more in tax in the three years when the 50p top rate of tax was in place than when the government conducted its assessment of the tax back in 2012.
It is very tempting as an individual to seek to create an overarching narrative as to why everything seems to be going to hell in a handbasket. And it is very tempting to find a remote and all powerful entity (be it "Europe" or "the Establishment" or "Immigrants"*) to blame. They are wrong factually speaking, but I can absolutely understand why they feel persecuted. Eurocrats really *don't* get up in the morning and think "how can I grind the faces of the British in the dirt today"
Certainly not all of the 'establishment' dislike groups differently to themselves but some do ** and some of these will allow their prejudices to influence their use of power.
Wider spread is the general establishment attitude of disdain to those different to themselves.
There is an economic logic to this. With a smaller economic cake to be divided up than expected its easier to maintain your share whilst reducing some other group's if you can first 'demonise' them.
** The Samuel "The working classes have no value" Brittan mentality. Of course there are people in all groups in society who have a deep dislike of groups different to their own.
Robert, the problem with your open borders approach is that there is a large proportion of the British population who are absolutely unprepared for competition (because of the failures of the education system over generations).
You either need to be prepared for massive intervention in order to turn this around / support a reasonable standard of living (and hence a stable society) or to defer open borders until people have been reskilled
A problem is that some people cannot be reskilled. They fundamentally lack the mental or physical abilities to add even moderate levels of value in their work.
I disagree. Not everyone is going to be the next antifrank or rcs1000. But there are plenty of jobs that should be well within the scope of the majority of people. Roles like roadsweeping or litter collection, for instance. We may even choose, as a society, to pay more for these roles than the "value added" (given that the assumed alternative for these individuals is a life on benefits) because of the positive pyschological benefits of someone being in work.
For the clearly physically or mentally disabled, and therefore incapable of work, naturally, there needs to be appropriate provision.
top 1% of incomes contributed 25% in tax - remember all those creative types with creative accountants - advised by BBC personnel dept to set up companies and pay dividends rather than income tax. Which media types tell us how to pay taxes, and then try hardest to avoid them? Tis a funny old world.
Futile tilting at windmills. The naivety and earnestness of the journalist is a wonder to behold.
Challenging the Mail on fact and exposing the way they spin their story will not help the cause of open borders a jot.
What will help is more interviews with presentable, English speaking, respectful and eager young Bulgarians and Romanians arriving at our ports. It is very easy then for the public to compare what they see with the indigenous occupants of Benefits Street.
Anyway, loved this para in the article:
There were so many loose ends with the Daily Mail’s story that I decided to enlist the help of my colleague, Alina Matis, award winning journalist and Foreign Affairs Editor of one of Romania’s leading newspapers, Gândul. Alina recently won a prize in the ‘European Reporter’ contest for her article about immigration.
That would have had Paul Dacre choking on his morning Nespresso.
Robert, I believe I asked you once before and don't remember getting an answer.
Since companies want us to have open borders so they can have the workforce they need at the cost they want to pay (so in effect they are using free movement of people to keep their workforce overheads down) would you not accept that they should also take on full responsibility for those migrant workers if and when they decide they no longer need them.
So anyone employing a foreign worker would have full responsibility for all the benefits costs for them and their family from the time they lay them off until they either leave the country or find alternative employment.
After all, why should the companies get the benefits of a mass migration of labour whilst expecting the state to pick up all the costs once they have decided they are no longer needed?
Also Robert I would be very careful about posting lines from the fanatically pro-Eu British Influence.
As I pointed out the other day they are not above stating outright lies on their website to suport their warped view of the world.
In their 'myth-busting' posting a few days ago that TSE linked to they claimed that although we have a balance of trade deficit in goods with the EU, if you include services then we have a balance of trade surplus.
This is an outright lie. Including both goods and services our balance of trade deficit for 2012 (the last year we have Pink Book figures for) stands at £90 billion.
British Influence had already comprehensively lost the argument on trade with the EU before they were even formed which is why they have to resort to lies in the hope no one will actually check their figures.
Much as I think the mail is a rag, British Influence are no better when it comes to the truth.
8/16 - mind you I understand the UKIP manifesto is to be re-written, presumably to remove the less important commitments. After all there is a major difference between a political party going UP from 3% to 23% and one going DOWN from 23% to 3%.
Comments
It's that sort of terminology that makes UKIP a laughing stock.
And that's a problem UKIP face: I'm concerned about Europe. I don't really want more powers to go to Europe. But I'm also very concerned about full withdrawal. I am wavering, and would likely vote 'out' on a sensible referendum question.
But UKIP aren't interested in appealing to me. They don't have a view for a Britain outside Europe (with some very honourable exceptions, such as Mr Tyndall).
Why on Earth should I vote for them? I'm a floating voter (yes, really), and as things currently stand I'd be more likely to vote Labour than UKIP ...
But, that's almost beside the point. UKIP's role is to be a catalyst for change of a decadent political system.
The other point is that the scenario is predicated on a Yes to Indy vote. And it would be insane to vote for indy and then vote London Labour (if it still existed in Scotland after a Yes, which is another very important issue affecting your analysis). You would want SNP or other pro-indy MPs to stand up for you in negotiations, not Labour or for that matter LD or Tory MPs who would still feel tied to London (and perhaps try to sabotage indy - some in Labour have already beem muttering about that).
But as the SNP or a hypothetical truly independent Scottish Labour Party would also be agin UKIP, the result is the same anyway - though whether it makes any difference is another matter as above. Moreover, I would certainly expect any pro-Indy MPs to refrain from voting on matters that only affected EWNI, as the SNP do today, so that would weaken the Scottish factor further. .
Given Cronie and Imelda Blairs' "Education, education, [re-]education" that the leftards has imposed upon us Englishmen [and women (outwith Stoke/Brighton)] is it not nice that children - albeit from a foreign lande - are learning from their betters; aspiring for quality over - well, if I have to say it - left-wing shyte...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t99FHM1BjPA
:not-for-lib-dhimmies:
Its the experience of being on the receiving end of the "do this, don't do that, think this, don't think that" mentality from people different to yourself and who don't seem to like you.
You might think that makes UKIP a laughing stock but millions of people see and experience it differently.
That you seemingly hold them in contempt for such views merely reinforces their belief that they're being persecuted.
This scenario also seems to have Farage as PM and Lucaslosing her seat, despite the fact the Greens already have a base in the House of Commons unlike UKIP
However, I think many voters do find the modern State bullying, shrill, self-serving, and definitely not looking out for their interests.
www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2012/excheq-income-tax-2042.pdf
Plenty of interesting quotes on this. Vince Cable: "Year after year, they would tell the Liberal Democrats that it was economically stupid to raise the top rate of tax above 40%. That was their message, year after year.
Then, a few weeks before the end of their Government—I think it was 57 days—they introduced the 50p rate in order to create a political dividing line. That decision had nothing whatever to do with economics.
The point that they had been making over all those years was that raising the top rate in that way would raise relatively little revenue."
Evidently Ed Balls agrees
@joelhillssky: Business fightback begins: CBI, "a 50p income tax rate...puts talented people off coming to the UK to invest and create jobs."
Whether it's good economically is a whole different matter, and I doubt Balls cares.
"Conventional wisdom in the Westminster village is that party gaffes like Godfrey Bloom's 'Bongo Bongo' land and Silvester blaming changes in the weather on homosexuality, should equate to a drop in support for a new, untested party...But Ukip's support in the opinion polls actually paints a very different picture...... Goodwin said that levels of political dissatisfaction among Ukip voters are "extremely high" meaning they are happy to turn a blind eye to the "amateur mistakes of a new party to send a message to the political establishment on issues they care deeply about".
"That is not just Europe," he added, "but about immigration, the financial crisis, and the performance of mainstream parties on those issues." "
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/24/ukip_1_n_4657394.html
Incidentally an alternative cover of Ænima has Bill Hicks on the cover. He died at the age of 32. That's the same age as I am now
Balls at it again...balance the budget, except he isn't committing to that at all.
But the financially illiterate media wont pick up on it, that's for sure. He gets to sound tough, while continue to tax and spend more.
As @JosiasJessop says this is low hanging fruit to apparently raise more cash whilst getting the approval of the base and I don't think the average swing voter will care too much either way.
Its not perecution in a brutal dictatorship style but it is of the more low level bullying type from someone stronger than you and who dislikes you.
Now some of this 'bullying' might be unintentional or though carelessness or caused by outside trends eg globalisation but some it does appear to be from nothing more than dislike of people different to themselves.
Darling's sporadic forays into the Independence debate have been mediocre to say the least, and his best Better Together buddies are describing him as “comatose”, "useless" and a poor communicator. I'd accept he'd probably be a better debater than the other UKOK Alistair, but that's not an enormously high bar to get over (and you'd have to be a limbo dancer to get under it).
Click on the bet and you get a small browser window that has your details remembered, select stake and then you can login and bet all in one click. Definitely the best.
Also they seem to be top price on more horses recently than I remember in a while (Winners unfortunately for them though
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9700321/Council-defends-taking-foster-children-away-from-UKIP-members.html
You may not agree with the substance of the policies but politically they win the election. People feel worse off and its been made clear to them (and Labour will play this hard) that the few at the very top have engorged themselves through massive wages and no tax. The Tories will oppose all of this making them look like they support the high wages and low taxes of the people who directly fund their party. Or the Tories will state their damascean conversion as with the minimum wage and no one will take them seriously again.
It is very tempting as an individual to seek to create an overarching narrative as to why everything seems to be going to hell in a handbasket. And it is very tempting to find a remote and all powerful entity (be it "Europe" or "the Establishment" or "Immigrants"*) to blame. They are wrong factually speaking, but I can absolutely understand why they feel persecuted. Eurocrats really *don't* get up in the morning and think "how can I grind the faces of the British in the dirt today"
* I suspect that those UKIPpers who blame "Immigrants" tend to blame them en mass, while in many cases liking/disliking those immigrants that they know personally based on individual merits. In other words I think the fear of immigration is - in most cases - based on fear of economic consequences/alienation/cultural change rather than racism
Today marks ten years since the Opportunity Rover landed on Mars. It is still doing useful scientific work. Not bad for a planned ninety-day mission!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_rover
You either need to be prepared for massive intervention in order to turn this around / support a reasonable standard of living (and hence a stable society) or to defer open borders until people have been reskilled
Those most affected would be on salaried PAYE, such as BBC personalities. Expect Andrew Neil and Paxman etc to become noticeably harder on Labour economic policy. It is not just City types who are vulnerable to this tax rate, but also a lot of influential people in media, law and other positions that can influence the narrative in the run up to an election.
I had always assumed that the Mail spun their stories pretty hard and weren't above "polishing" a quote or two. But if that journalist is halfway right then the Mail deserve to be absolutely hauled over the coals.
The main problem with truly open borders is the sheer scale of population movement here. Approximately 45 million people in the world would like to move to the UK:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/153992/150-million-adults-worldwide-migrate.aspx
Even if only a quarter of them came in the next five years, it would still utterly overwhelm the UK. I believe rcs' solution is not to give these people access to the welfare state, so this would depend on people being comfortable with neighbours dying in the streets. Given that many people from Africa etc may not have the money to move back, they may also resort to crime if they can not get jobs. We'd also have to wonder where these people would live. rcs seems to be under the impression they would act like law-abiding Englishmen, and only move if they had a residence lined up. In reality you would just get the Marble Arch situation in every public square in SE England.
They might be here.
www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2012/excheq-income-tax-2042.pdf
Wider spread is the general establishment attitude of disdain to those different to themselves.
There is an economic logic to this. With a smaller economic cake to be divided up than expected its easier to maintain your share whilst reducing some other group's if you can first 'demonise' them.
** The Samuel "The working classes have no value" Brittan mentality. Of course there are people in all groups in society who have a deep dislike of groups different to their own.
For the clearly physically or mentally disabled, and therefore incapable of work, naturally, there needs to be appropriate provision.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/whose-policy-ukip-or-monster-raving-loony-party
top 1% of incomes contributed 25% in tax - remember all those creative types with creative accountants - advised by BBC personnel dept to set up companies and pay dividends rather than income tax. Which media types tell us how to pay taxes, and then try hardest to avoid them? Tis a funny old world.
Futile tilting at windmills. The naivety and earnestness of the journalist is a wonder to behold.
Challenging the Mail on fact and exposing the way they spin their story will not help the cause of open borders a jot.
What will help is more interviews with presentable, English speaking, respectful and eager young Bulgarians and Romanians arriving at our ports. It is very easy then for the public to compare what they see with the indigenous occupants of Benefits Street.
Anyway, loved this para in the article:
There were so many loose ends with the Daily Mail’s story that I decided to enlist the help of my colleague, Alina Matis, award winning journalist and Foreign Affairs Editor of one of Romania’s leading newspapers, Gândul. Alina recently won a prize in the ‘European Reporter’ contest for her article about immigration.
That would have had Paul Dacre choking on his morning Nespresso.
Since companies want us to have open borders so they can have the workforce they need at the cost they want to pay (so in effect they are using free movement of people to keep their workforce overheads down) would you not accept that they should also take on full responsibility for those migrant workers if and when they decide they no longer need them.
So anyone employing a foreign worker would have full responsibility for all the benefits costs for them and their family from the time they lay them off until they either leave the country or find alternative employment.
After all, why should the companies get the benefits of a mass migration of labour whilst expecting the state to pick up all the costs once they have decided they are no longer needed?
As I pointed out the other day they are not above stating outright lies on their website to suport their warped view of the world.
In their 'myth-busting' posting a few days ago that TSE linked to they claimed that although we have a balance of trade deficit in goods with the EU, if you include services then we have a balance of trade surplus.
This is an outright lie. Including both goods and services our balance of trade deficit for 2012 (the last year we have Pink Book figures for) stands at £90 billion.
British Influence had already comprehensively lost the argument on trade with the EU before they were even formed which is why they have to resort to lies in the hope no one will actually check their figures.
Much as I think the mail is a rag, British Influence are no better when it comes to the truth.