BTW forgot to thank YG for actually giving a Green sample size in the Sunday Times poll tables. Hitherto, had to estimate using percentage and total sample size.
show previous quotes The fantasy world you inhabit really does get more and more farcical. The rUK would have no negotiating position, lacking natural resources, food (Ireland would have to kow tow to their treaty obligations) and facing massive tariffs on the import of necessities, the impact on the economy would have the UK at door of the IMF within weeks.
That's your core problem, like most Kippers you have an exaggerated and unrealistic idea of the UK's place in the world. The most basic tenets of economics and trade completely elude your mindset because you think trading with the UK on anything other than 100% the EU's own terms would be desirable for the EU.
The rUK would have nothing the EU would want. Not only that it DOES HAVE things the EU DOES want. Such as the financial services industry which operate on a Europe wide basis. And it would ensure that every single bank serious about doing business with the EU would have moved its operations to Edinburgh, Dublin or Frankfurt by the time the rUK ceded from the EU.
ROFLMFAO Its not me who knows SFA about how international trade works
So lets get this right the EU is going to put tariffs on its exports to the rUK making them less competitive forcing us to look elsewhere to supply such goods potentially putting millions of EU workers out of work. Wow I wish all political parties were as innovative in their economic policies. No wonder you want rUK to stay in the EU in order to take all the unemployed Scots workers that the SNP are going to price out of business! Tell me how much will Scotland put on the price of all that energy you are going to sell us? Will you double the price of Whisky to the rUK too? Oh my god this is priceless!
Don't you understand the most basic concepts of international trade. it is the receiving nation that imposes the tariffs on goods to make their own industries competitive. That's why its called protectionism. You really are an idiot!
ROFLMFAO Its not me who knows SFA about how international trade works
So lets get this right the EU is going to put tariffs on its exports to the rUK making them less competitive forcing us to look elsewhere to supply such goods potentially putting millions of EU workers out of work. Wow I wish all political parties were as innovative in their economic policies. No wonder you want rUK to stay in the EU in order to take all the unemployed Scots workers that the SNP are going to price out of business! Tell me how much will Scotland put on the price of all that energy you are going to sell us? Will you double the price of Whisky to the rUK too? Oh my god this is priceless!
Don't you understand the most basic concepts of international trade. it is the receiving nation that imposes the tariffs on goods to make their own industries competitive. That's why its called protectionism. You really are an idiot!
You know, I'll just leave this as it is so everyone can see your lack of trade knowledge.
The latter would reinforce the Tory line of “Go to bed with Farage and wake up with Miliband” which the Tories are convinced will win them back some Con to UKIP defectors.
Out of exactly the same playbook as the excellent
'Are you thinking what we're thinking?"
That was a Crosby / Cameron production too wasn't it?
ROFLMFAO Its not me who knows SFA about how international trade works
So lets get this right the EU is going to put tariffs on its exports to the rUK making them less competitive forcing us to look elsewhere to supply such goods potentially putting millions of EU workers out of work. Wow I wish all political parties were as innovative in their economic policies. No wonder you want rUK to stay in the EU in order to take all the unemployed Scots workers that the SNP are going to price out of business! Tell me how much will Scotland put on the price of all that energy you are going to sell us? Will you double the price of Whisky to the rUK too? Oh my god this is priceless!
Don't you understand the most basic concepts of international trade. it is the receiving nation that imposes the tariffs on goods to make their own industries competitive. That's why its called protectionism. You really are an idiot!
You know, I'll just leave this as it is so everyone can see your lack of trade knowledge.
Is it even less than your knowledge about the financial services sector, or about the same?
@Hengists_Gift Get the popcorn ready for the start of next month. The internet will be full of "spoofs" on the campaign material, and will probably shift far more voters.
FPT A lot of Kippers say "When we leave the EU, Ukip will negotiate this or that". This is Syriza-type over-optimistic chat. Remember that hopey-changey stuff before the Greek election? Even though Europe made it clear it didn't want to play ball with hostile nationalism. The UK will lose markets to the proper free-trade areas of the EU and EFTA, and gain markets exactly nowhere. Fortunately, unlike Syriza, we all know the economics isn't important. Leaving the EU lets Kippers keep out the Poles (the nice chappies who broke Enigma and flew with the RAF) and Romanians (who had the guts to string up their communist despot). Which I guess was the real point of Ukip all along.
ROFLMFAO Its not me who knows SFA about how international trade works
So lets get this right the EU is going to put tariffs on its exports to the rUK making them less competitive forcing us to look elsewhere to supply such goods potentially putting millions of EU workers out of work. Wow I wish all political parties were as innovative in their economic policies. No wonder you want rUK to stay in the EU in order to take all the unemployed Scots workers that the SNP are going to price out of business! Tell me how much will Scotland put on the price of all that energy you are going to sell us? Will you double the price of Whisky to the rUK too? Oh my god this is priceless!
Don't you understand the most basic concepts of international trade. it is the receiving nation that imposes the tariffs on goods to make their own industries competitive. That's why its called protectionism. You really are an idiot!
You know, I'll just leave this as it is so everyone can see your lack of trade knowledge.
By all means! Although I would have thought an economic expert such as yourself would have relished explaining the error of my ways in detail. So by all means do not spare my blushes and feel free to further inform the gathered throng with your state of the art economic strategies. I am sure they will welcome your expertise.
I checked out the odds on Chris Kelly earlier today and they look like good value. He has nothing to lose as he is stepping down and hates Cameron. It would be the perfect payback for the man who supposedly made him cry.
FPT A lot of Kippers say "When we leave the EU, Ukip will negotiate this or that". This is Syriza-type over-optimistic chat. Remember that hopey-changey stuff before the Greek election? Even though Europe made it clear it didn't want to play ball with hostile nationalism. The UK will lose markets to the proper free-trade areas of the EU and EFTA, and gain markets exactly nowhere. Fortunately, unlike Syriza, we all know the economics isn't important. Leaving the EU lets Kippers keep out the Poles (the nice chappies who broke Enigma and flew with the RAF) and Romanians (who had the guts to string up their communist despot). Which I guess was the real point of Ukip all along.
FPT A lot of Kippers say "When we leave the EU, Ukip will negotiate this or that". This is Syriza-type over-optimistic chat. Remember that hopey-changey stuff before the Greek election? Even though Europe made it clear it didn't want to play ball with hostile nationalism. The UK will lose markets to the proper free-trade areas of the EU and EFTA, and gain markets exactly nowhere. Fortunately, unlike Syriza, we all know the economics isn't important. Leaving the EU lets Kippers keep out the Poles (the nice chappies who broke Enigma and flew with the RAF) and Romanians (who had the guts to string up their communist despot). Which I guess was the real point of Ukip all along.
Putting aside that the UK is also not in hock up to its neck to the European Central Bank for vast sums of money as Greece is (we have our own central bank dontcha know), the failing in your argument is that Greece actually wanted to stay in the EU (a bit like Cameron wants to do all sorts of things but still wants to be a member). The leverage of knowing they want to remain a member is the undermining factor that has meant neither has got anywhere near what they want.
However if you are intent on leaving then that leverage is non existent and what is left in terms of leverage is what each party wants from the other. The EU will still want our trade and vice versa. Presumably it will also want our military support and being a close neighbour our general co-operation, diplomatic support in global issues, co-operation in regional matters and various pan-continental initiatives. As such there is no reason to believe that the EU whilst protecting its interests will be unco-operative in post withdrawal negotiations.
I would also observe that your lack of belief in ability of the British Government (with or without UKIP leading it) and the UK people in general seems to be complete. Are you sure you actually like living in this country at all?
If you think about it in strictly polling terms, a lot of younger voters are going to start thinking about voting when "twatter" and "facepalm" are full funny shares and retweets?
Two of the most obvious UKIP defectors Henry Smith (Crawley) and Phillip Hollobone (Kettering) both fit the second category but the danger of Labour taking their seat would still apply at the election as well.
Looking at the other contenders I can't see who else would defect, if I had to guess I'd go with Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) who may feel he is in trouble to UKIP locally.
This article from politico.com is worth reading for anyone planning to bet on the GOP nomination. As a centre-left publication, it is, while certainly not disinterested, perhaps somewhat more neutral on the candidates than most GOP publications night be (as each will have their favorites).
The net net is that: - Walker had a good conference, but some stumbles which shows he needs to improve before the campaign proper starts - Bush has a strategy for countering charges he is not conservative enough - Fiorina had a good outing and is the Hillary-basher-in-chief (a reason why I think she is a strong possibility for being on the ticket as VP) - Christie failed badly - Cruz and Jindal will be troublemakers (but with no real hint that they can ultimately succeed in winning the nod) - the underdogs made no headway
Look everybody its easy to find out who it could be. It's either a retiring MP or a sitting MP. If it's a sitting MP ,there are not many seats that UKIP have not selected yet, and not many that UKIP could win that they have not selected yet, and even less that UKIP could win but have not selected with a Tory MP who hates Cameron so much.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talk of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talkg of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
Could be the personal political views of someone who likes the coalition so much he doesn't want to satirize it.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talkg of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
Could be the personal political views of someone who likes the coalition so much he doesn't want to satirize it.
More likely reason is the writing team got a big gig with Veep on HBO (which I can't stand).
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talkg of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
Could be the personal political views of someone who likes the coalition so much he doesn't want to satirize it.
More likely reason is the writing team got a big gig with Veep on HBO (which I can't stand).
I was thinking the same. I wanted to like VEEP, but find it unwatchable.
In his column in the Mail on Sunday, James Forsyth suggests this is "almost certainly [David] Cameron's last General Election battle." But he argues that the Conservatives won't "win without taking some risks" and that some Tories are pushing for the right to buy - "the great, iconic Thatcherite policy" - to be extended to two and a half million housing association properties.
Given there is so much casual comment on UKIP's immigration policy, here's a little quiz for the assorted critics of UKIP immigration policy on here:
Using the latest quarterly immigration figures how many immigrants would have entered the country under UKIPs current stated immigration policy?
a) -343,000 b) 0 c) 376,000
Controlling immigration is?
a) Rascist b) Impossible c) A key national security function of government
What is UKIP's immigration policy?
a) End Immigration and repatriate all immigrants in the last 10 years b) End Immigration c) Implement a points style flexible quota system along the lines of the Australian Immigration system
What will UKIP set the quota level at for immigration?
a) Repatriation of as many immigrants as possible ensuring net negative migration of tens if not hundreds of thousands per year b) Restricting Immigration to 50,000 gross c) Restricting Immigration to 50,000 net
I would also observe that your lack of belief in ability of the British Government (with or without UKIP leading it) and the UK people in general seems to be complete. Are you sure you actually like living in this country at all?
He is also slightly glossing over WTO rules and MFN status, and all that implies.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talk of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
I would also observe that your lack of belief in ability of the British Government (with or without UKIP leading it) and the UK people in general seems to be complete. Are you sure you actually like living in this country at all?
He is also slightly glossing over WTO rules and MFN status, and all that implies.
I would also observe that your lack of belief in ability of the British Government (with or without UKIP leading it) and the UK people in general seems to be complete. Are you sure you actually like living in this country at all?
He is also slightly glossing over WTO rules and MFN status, and all that implies.
Unfortunately WTO rules are too complicated for some people, much easier to believe the 3 million jobs myth.
FPT A lot of Kippers say "When we leave the EU, Ukip will negotiate this or that". This is Syriza-type over-optimistic chat. Remember that hopey-changey stuff before the Greek election? Even though Europe made it clear it didn't want to play ball with hostile nationalism. The UK will lose markets to the proper free-trade areas of the EU and EFTA, and gain markets exactly nowhere. Fortunately, unlike Syriza, we all know the economics isn't important. Leaving the EU lets Kippers keep out the Poles (the nice chappies who broke Enigma and flew with the RAF) and Romanians (who had the guts to string up their communist despot). Which I guess was the real point of Ukip all along.
Applause.
Applause indeed for such a clear illustration of the leftie worldview. The reality is that trading partners need trading partners; the EU will tango with the UK either way because their businesses need people to sell stuff to. The left doesn't recognise that the world works like that, reciprocally. It thinks that if we leave, the EU will cut off our benefits.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talk of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
The last series did involve a coalition, the one with Nicola Murray and the 'quiet bat people'
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
There are actually worse things than a car crash at a poster launch. These are 2 of the worst political adverts in history that lead to landslide defeats:
1. McGovern 1972 Key message: McGovern will be a disaster, I'll vote Nixon I'm not crazy. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av_nDxp4iXE
2. Progressive Conservatives 1993 Key message: An ugly person can't be PM. www.youtube.com/watch?v=D000Amn9CIA
Compare that to the 2 best political adverts in history
1. Nixon 1972 Key message: The Beatles love Nixon (really sounds like a Beatles song). www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMO5DfRIv-k
2. Reagan 1984 Key message: Reagan brought America out of the darkness. www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSY
I recall the Referendum Party "gained" an MP when Sir George Gardiner defected from the Conservatives just before the 1997 election. It didn't stop the Conservatives retaining the seat comfortably so the likelihood is it will be a maverick who won't bring too many supporters with him/her and it probably won't affect the result in the seat much either.
It's a useful ploy from Farage to a) keep UKIP in the media spotlight and b) put the Conservatives on the defensive. It's curious because on the key aspect of economic policy UKIP has fully supported the Osborne line so one would think irrespective of anything formal UKIP would support a minority Conservative administration's Queen's Speech.
FPT - having George Osborne supporting you must remind Cameron of how Caesar felt when Brutus told him "I've got your back, mate". It's often forgotten Cameron has been Conservative leader for nearly a decade - were he to serve a full second term he would surpass Margaret Thatcher and be closing on WSC in terms of longevity.
He/she is a hysterical delusional bigoted left wing extremist who is a danger to themself and the public at large. He / she should be locked in a padded cell for their and the public's safety. Sadly there is little chance of rehabilitation. So restraint and medication should be a permanent course of action.
Mainly B's
He / She is a typical sneering urban liberal who has spent too much time believing their own propaganda to recognise the truth. As a result their head is firmly attached via their nether orifice to their lower bowel. This condition is believed treatable After surgery to release the head sufferers can be rehabilitated by undertaking a suitable course of flagellation and humiliation to remove all narcissistic tendencies.
Labour are past masters at car crash poster launches.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
I strongly feel, that if armando iannucci sued the people in charge of Labour's 2010 election campaign for copyright infringement to any rights he holds to The Thick of It, im sure he would easily win.
It is a real shame we haven't see a return of The Thick of It. Originally, I remember that there was talkg of getting at least one series of Coalition politics, but it never materialized.
Could be the personal political views of someone who likes the coalition so much he doesn't want to satirize it.
You never watch Alan Partridge? His caricature of Alan being a conservative are not written from the perspective of anyone who supports Conservative politics.
The Thick of It is great because it isnt about policies, its about day to day politics of government. It could be set in any era. It resonates because of the Alistair Campbell style that it aped was pretty canny with how we perceive modern government to be.
England cricket humiliation - tick Liverpool win - tick Arsenal win - tick England rugby lose - tick Spurs lose - effing bloody tick...
I did have the accumulator with William Hill on a 'slip' online for the last 4 earlier but couldn't bring myself to do it. wouldn't have helped anyway.
He/she is a hysterical delusional bigoted left wing extremist who is a danger to themself and the public at large. He / she should be locked in a padded cell for their and the public's safety. Sadly there is little chance of rehabilitation. So restraint and medication should be a permanent course of action.
Mainly B's
He / She is a typical sneering urban liberal who has spent too much time believing their own propaganda to recognise the truth. As a result their head is firmly attached via their nether orifice to their lower bowel. This condition is believed treatable After surgery to release the head sufferers can be rehabilitated by undertaking a suitable course of flagellation and humiliation to remove all narcissistic tendencies.
Mainly C's
You seem to understand UKIP's view of Immigration
All C's
Being right is its own reward!
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
Look everybody its easy to find out who it could be. It's either a retiring MP or a sitting MP. If it's a sitting MP ,there are not many seats that UKIP have not selected yet, and not many that UKIP could win that they have not selected yet, and even less that UKIP could win but have not selected with a Tory MP who hates Cameron so much.
UKIP have a vacancy in NW Hampshire. its possible they could have a shuffle round and parachute a candidate in from elsewhere to accommodate a defecting MP. UKIP must have thought a reasonable shot with George Young standing down else why would Diane James have stood their in the first place?
I have a hunch who it might be but I'm staying schtum simply because I wouldn't want to frighten the horses.
I know, but he's a certainty to me, well I have backed the SNP to win his seat, but that's more in hope than expectation, I suspect he has a large personal vote.
England cricket humiliation - tick Liverpool win - tick Arsenal win - tick England rugby lose - tick Spurs lose - effing bloody tick...
I did have the accumulator with William Hill on a 'slip' online for the last 4 earlier but couldn't bring myself to do it. wouldn't have helped anyway.
I feel lower than a Mark Reckless.
On the bright side, you would have been PB's TOTY.
I nearly did a thread on the other traitorous pig-dog, but I thought that would be cruel on you.
Sol Campbell may run as Tory candidate in seat to be vacated by Malcolm Rifkind
Former England star declines to rule out standing in Kensington, the London seat being vacated by peer embroiled in cash-for-access claims
I know, but he's a certainty to me, well I have backed the SNP to win his seat, but that's more in hope than expectation, I suspect he has a large personal vote.
If you look at the 83 GE result, an obvious big SNP-SDP tactical switch took place to help him unseat the Conservatives. He's maintained it for 32 years but all things...
Look everybody its easy to find out who it could be. It's either a retiring MP or a sitting MP. If it's a sitting MP ,there are not many seats that UKIP have not selected yet, and not many that UKIP could win that they have not selected yet, and even less that UKIP could win but have not selected with a Tory MP who hates Cameron so much.
Phillip Davies? UKIP haven't selected anyone in Shipley and he most certainly fits the UKIP profile.
I know, but he's a certainty to me, well I have backed the SNP to win his seat, but that's more in hope than expectation, I suspect he has a large personal vote.
If you look at the 83 GE result, an obvious big SNP-SDP tactical switch took place to help him unseat the Conservatives. He's maintained it for 32 years but all things...
I'm working on the basis he had 50% plus of the vote last time, he has also has 25% Tory and Lab votes to squeeze for tactical Unionist voting.
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
I know, but he's a certainty to me, well I have backed the SNP to win his seat, but that's more in hope than expectation, I suspect he has a large personal vote.
If you look at the 83 GE result, an obvious big SNP-SDP tactical switch took place to help him unseat the Conservatives. He's maintained it for 32 years but all things...
I'm working on the basis he had 50% plus of the vote last time, he has also has 25% Tory and Lab votes to squeeze for tactical Unionist voting.
If there was to be an unnamed VI question (Same as Danny) in his seat his price would be about 3-1 to hold.
But then, so does net migration into the UK of nearly a third of a million in a single year.
Maybe a 'soft cap', with exceptions for those earning/worth a certain amount of money?
Hard caps have been tried by others in the past, and the result of them is that people (especially corporates) attempt to get visas in case they need them, because they know the door will shut at a certain point in the year. The result is that your quota is filled in January or February, and businesses have very little flexibility.
You are much better off having a point system and accepting that some years you'll have 80,000 and some years 25,000.
Sol Campbell standing as a Tory in such a high profile seat will serve Ed's interests well. He has publicly railed against the mansion tax because he has £70,000,000 in various properties. A not very popular ex footballer being invited to become a Tory MP to guard his £70,000,000 from the tax man might just make the absurdity of the claim that we're all in this together better than a thousand 48 sheet posters.....
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
All immigration levels should be decided by the British parliament. We should be allowed to discriminate e.g: if a certain nationality has a disproportionate number of criminals we should be allowed to bar that nationality or set strict limits. We might prefer to have no limits on Aussies and other "favoured nations".
No 1 priority is Farage and UKIP want a referendum. It's in the name. So another defection will most likely be just enough to put Miliband into No 10, the one guy that states he is not having a referendum and will for the next 5 years ties us in so tightly to the EU that escape will never be possible. We can all then live in Milibands socialist utopia for ever after and the UKIP party will become utterly irrelevant
There's is just one thing? It's the direct opposite of what Farage wants.......
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
Absolutely agree. I think skills-shortage visas should be on a market needs basis, rather than part of any overall quota. The US does that reasonably well, with general exceptions and industry-specific exceptions.
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
All immigration levels should be decided by the British parliament. We should be allowed to discriminate e.g: if a certain nationality has a disproportionate number of criminals we should be allowed to bar that nationality or set strict limits. We might prefer to have no limits on Aussies and other "favoured nations".
I've started five business: all are international in nature, and all are substantial export earners for the UK.
What you propose is madness.
If who I can employ is permanently changing, with annual shuffles for what skills are needed, etc., then I simply wouldn't start a business in the UK.
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
RIP.
RIP.
I'm embarrassed to say that the book's been in my extended to-read pile for a few years now, and I have't got around to reading it yet.
He/she is a hysterical delusional bigoted left wing extremist who is a danger to themself and the public at large. He / she should be locked in a padded cell for their and the public's safety. Sadly there is little chance of rehabilitation. So restraint and medication should be a permanent course of action.
Mainly B's
He / She is a typical sneering urban liberal who has spent too much time believing their own propaganda to recognise the truth. As a result their head is firmly attached via their nether orifice to their lower bowel. This condition is believed treatable After surgery to release the head sufferers can be rehabilitated by undertaking a suitable course of flagellation and humiliation to remove all narcissistic tendencies.
Mainly C's
You seem to understand UKIP's view of Immigration
All C's
Being right is its own reward!
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
Not the way that the immigration figures are structured at the moment its not. Far more than 50,000 immigrants gross will still come to this country each year. On the last figures it changes them slightly upwards and rather than 376,000 immigrants in the last year it would be 380,000. Much closer to 50,000 net but granted that may not necessarily be the case every time given the way Woolfe seems to be approaching the issue.
What Woolfe seems to be talking about though is a completely new way of structuring the immigration figures. I'm not sure now is the right time to be doing that though.
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
"let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer,"
Where's the job based, what's the particular work, and what're the pay and conditions?
;-)
Being serious for a moment, you make an excellent point.
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
RIP.
RIP.
I'm embarrassed to say that the book's been in my extended to-read pile for a few years now, and I have't got around to reading it yet.
I remember the book particularly because it (along with Barry Cunliffe's Iron Age Communities in Britain) cost me 3 weekend's work in my parent's bookshop to be able to afford to buy it. Most of my books for going to university I got as presents from my parents via the shop but after having tapped them for a not inconsiderable number of tomes, I considered it only fair I pay for the remainder through work. The book is still sat behind me on the shelf as I type and has proved invaluable time and time again throughout my career even in an age of internet.
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
RIP.
RIP.
I'm embarrassed to say that the book's been in my extended to-read pile for a few years now, and I have't got around to reading it yet.
I remember the book particularly because it (along with Barry Cunliffe's Iron Age Communities in Britain) cost me 3 weekend's work in my parent's bookshop to be able to afford to buy it. Most of my books for going to university I got as presents from my parents via the shop but after having tapped them for a not inconsiderable number of tomes, I considered it only fair I pay for the remainder through work. The book is still sat behind me on the shelf as I type and has proved invaluable time and time again throughout my career even in an age of internet.
It's not on Kindle! I hate having to buy dead tree books,
England cricket humiliation - tick Liverpool win - tick Arsenal win - tick England rugby lose - tick Spurs lose - effing bloody tick...
I did have the accumulator with William Hill on a 'slip' online for the last 4 earlier but couldn't bring myself to do it. wouldn't have helped anyway.
I feel lower than a Mark Reckless.
On the bright side, you would have been PB's TOTY.
I'll thank you to remember that there has been, is and will only ever be one TOTY on PB.
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
RIP.
RIP.
I'm embarrassed to say that the book's been in my extended to-read pile for a few years now, and I have't got around to reading it yet.
I remember the book particularly because it (along with Barry Cunliffe's Iron Age Communities in Britain) cost me 3 weekend's work in my parent's bookshop to be able to afford to buy it. Most of my books for going to university I got as presents from my parents via the shop but after having tapped them for a not inconsiderable number of tomes, I considered it only fair I pay for the remainder through work. The book is still sat behind me on the shelf as I type and has proved invaluable time and time again throughout my career even in an age of internet.
It's not on Kindle! I hate having to buy dead tree books,
I refuse to have anything to do with electronic books even though my own book was published on kindle. Paper is the only proper way to read books. The rest is just surfing.
Mr. Grandiose, my sympathy for them is so minute it's in danger of becoming negative and forming anti-matter.
I wasn't suggesting they get out the begging bowl. Only that Mr Campbell's reported fortune is very much the rariety. Elsewhere it's clearly that they get accustomed to a certain sort of lifestyle and bleed their funds dry before changing it...
No 1 priority is Farage and UKIP want a referendum. It's in the name. So another defection will most likely be just enough to put Miliband into No 10, the one guy that states he is not having a referendum and will for the next 5 years ties us in so tightly to the EU that escape will never be possible. We can all then live in Milibands socialist utopia for ever after and the UKIP party will become utterly irrelevant
There's is just one thing? It's the direct opposite of what Farage wants.......
I really don't get his game plan
Its called 'gravy train'. You might think I'm being self indulgent saying that - but its Farage who is self indulgent.
England cricket humiliation - tick Liverpool win - tick Arsenal win - tick England rugby lose - tick Spurs lose - effing bloody tick...
I did have the accumulator with William Hill on a 'slip' online for the last 4 earlier but couldn't bring myself to do it. wouldn't have helped anyway.
I feel lower than a Mark Reckless.
The only result of significance went the right way. OTBC!
FPT A lot of Kippers say "When we leave the EU, Ukip will negotiate this or that". This is Syriza-type over-optimistic chat. Remember that hopey-changey stuff before the Greek election? Even though Europe made it clear it didn't want to play ball with hostile nationalism. The UK will lose markets to the proper free-trade areas of the EU and EFTA, and gain markets exactly nowhere. Fortunately, unlike Syriza, we all know the economics isn't important. Leaving the EU lets Kippers keep out the Poles (the nice chappies who broke Enigma and flew with the RAF) and Romanians (who had the guts to string up their communist despot). Which I guess was the real point of Ukip all along.
This would be the part where I offer a counter argument, only to do that I'd have had to find one in this post. Sadly when you get through the meaningless smeary invective, hyperbole, and baseless crystal ball gazing, you're left with nothing - like a sausageless casserole.
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
All immigration levels should be decided by the British parliament. We should be allowed to discriminate e.g: if a certain nationality has a disproportionate number of criminals we should be allowed to bar that nationality or set strict limits. We might prefer to have no limits on Aussies and other "favoured nations".
I've started five business: all are international in nature, and all are substantial export earners for the UK.
What you propose is madness.
If who I can employ is permanently changing, with annual shuffles for what skills are needed, etc., then I simply wouldn't start a business in the UK.
That sounds very like the hypothetical emigratory flounce of the rich in response to rises in income tax. In reality the most likely outcome would be that you would find your analog semiconductor engineer already here, you'd just have to pay more for him, or you'd get the job done temporarily elsewhere what with your businesses being "international in nature".
Steven Woolfe, the UKIP immigration spokesman, speaking on the Daily Politics a few days ago said their immigration targets were gross numbers not net. In particular he said the target for gross immigration for employment (EU and non-EU but excluding students) would be 50,000. That is a B answer.
So: let's say I have an analog semiconductor design business, and I need an analog semiconductor engineer, and there are no British candidates, and it's May and the 50,000 work visas have gone, does that mean I'm out of luck until the following January?
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
All immigration levels should be decided by the British parliament. We should be allowed to discriminate e.g: if a certain nationality has a disproportionate number of criminals we should be allowed to bar that nationality or set strict limits. We might prefer to have no limits on Aussies and other "favoured nations".
I've started five business: all are international in nature, and all are substantial export earners for the UK.
What you propose is madness.
If who I can employ is permanently changing, with annual shuffles for what skills are needed, etc., then I simply wouldn't start a business in the UK.
That sounds very like the hypothetical emigratory flounce of the rich in response to rises in income tax. In reality the most likely outcome would be that you would find your analog semiconductor engineer already here, you'd just have to pay more for him, or you'd get the job done temporarily elsewhere what with your businesses being "international in nature".
That only works if there are enough of skill X in the country. Otherwise the net result, at least in the short-term, is to slow growth and increase inflation. One would hope in the longer term our education would respond to market forces, but good luck with that. And in truly cutting edge industries, that simply is not an option.
If you want your company to be a world-beater, you need access to the best global talent. Simples.
Comments
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/572053013654847488
Hengists_Gift
4:04PM
Dair said:
show previous quotes
The fantasy world you inhabit really does get more and more farcical. The rUK would have no negotiating position, lacking natural resources, food (Ireland would have to kow tow to their treaty obligations) and facing massive tariffs on the import of necessities, the impact on the economy would have the UK at door of the IMF within weeks.
That's your core problem, like most Kippers you have an exaggerated and unrealistic idea of the UK's place in the world. The most basic tenets of economics and trade completely elude your mindset because you think trading with the UK on anything other than 100% the EU's own terms would be desirable for the EU.
The rUK would have nothing the EU would want. Not only that it DOES HAVE things the EU DOES want. Such as the financial services industry which operate on a Europe wide basis. And it would ensure that every single bank serious about doing business with the EU would have moved its operations to Edinburgh, Dublin or Frankfurt by the time the rUK ceded from the EU.
ROFLMFAO Its not me who knows SFA about how international trade works
So lets get this right the EU is going to put tariffs on its exports to the rUK making them less competitive forcing us to look elsewhere to supply such goods potentially putting millions of EU workers out of work. Wow I wish all political parties were as innovative in their economic policies. No wonder you want rUK to stay in the EU in order to take all the unemployed Scots workers that the SNP are going to price out of business! Tell me how much will Scotland put on the price of all that energy you are going to sell us? Will you double the price of Whisky to the rUK too? Oh my god this is priceless!
Don't you understand the most basic concepts of international trade. it is the receiving nation that imposes the tariffs on goods to make their own industries competitive. That's why its called protectionism. You really are an idiot!
Nigel often claims, or at least hints that he has something up his sleeve. Sometimes he does, often he doesn't.
He needs to keep in the news though, so hinting at stuff like this is a shot to nothing for him.
Out of exactly the same playbook as the excellent
'Are you thinking what we're thinking?"
That was a Crosby / Cameron production too wasn't it?
http://jonnynexus.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/MichaelHoward.jpg
http://www.freefoto.com/preview/11-45-18/Conservatives-Poster-Campaign-2005
And this one
http://www.andypryke.com/twiki/pub/Andypublic/BlogApril2005/tory_thinking_we_re_stinking.jpg
Do you think Dave and Lynton reminisce about the good old days?
Get the popcorn ready for the start of next month.
The internet will be full of "spoofs" on the campaign material, and will probably shift far more voters.
A referendum for a vote on losing a vote in Europe and not having a vote with the rest of the world?
Hard choice, I need to think about it.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfO4FmvHwi8
Do you think Miliband will get Mandelson to speak for him too?
Which one though?
However if you are intent on leaving then that leverage is non existent and what is left in terms of leverage is what each party wants from the other. The EU will still want our trade and vice versa. Presumably it will also want our military support and being a close neighbour our general co-operation, diplomatic support in global issues, co-operation in regional matters and various pan-continental initiatives. As such there is no reason to believe that the EU whilst protecting its interests will be unco-operative in post withdrawal negotiations.
I would also observe that your lack of belief in ability of the British Government (with or without UKIP leading it) and the UK people in general seems to be complete. Are you sure you actually like living in this country at all?
Looking at the other contenders I can't see who else would defect, if I had to guess I'd go with Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) who may feel he is in trouble to UKIP locally.
The net net is that:
- Walker had a good conference, but some stumbles which shows he needs to improve before the campaign proper starts
- Bush has a strategy for countering charges he is not conservative enough
- Fiorina had a good outing and is the Hillary-basher-in-chief (a reason why I think she is a strong possibility for being on the ticket as VP)
- Christie failed badly
- Cruz and Jindal will be troublemakers (but with no real hint that they can ultimately succeed in winning the nod)
- the underdogs made no headway
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/what-we-learned-from-cpac-2015-115623.html?hp=t1_r
It's either a retiring MP or a sitting MP.
If it's a sitting MP ,there are not many seats that UKIP have not selected yet, and not many that UKIP could win that they have not selected yet, and even less that UKIP could win but have not selected with a Tory MP who hates Cameron so much.
Probably couldn't get the funding?
Posted at 16:58
In his column in the Mail on Sunday, James Forsyth suggests this is "almost certainly [David] Cameron's last General Election battle." But he argues that the Conservatives won't "win without taking some risks" and that some Tories are pushing for the right to buy - "the great, iconic Thatcherite policy" - to be extended to two and a half million housing association properties.
Using the latest quarterly immigration figures how many immigrants would have entered the country under UKIPs current stated immigration policy?
a) -343,000
b) 0
c) 376,000
Controlling immigration is?
a) Rascist
b) Impossible
c) A key national security function of government
What is UKIP's immigration policy?
a) End Immigration and repatriate all immigrants in the last 10 years
b) End Immigration
c) Implement a points style flexible quota system along the lines of the Australian Immigration system
What will UKIP set the quota level at for immigration?
a) Repatriation of as many immigrants as possible ensuring net negative migration of tens if not hundreds of thousands per year
b) Restricting Immigration to 50,000 gross
c) Restricting Immigration to 50,000 net
Bah. Not too surprised England lost, but still.
In more important news, testing has ended, the first race is in less than a fortnight. Thanks to new safety regulations, it'll be at 5am.
I plan on putting up a pre-season piece tomorrow.
"He is also slightly glossing over WTO rules and MFN status, and all that implies."
What that implies is that the rest of the world will take our side against the EU? .....
Or possibly not?
By "we" you mean the USA who will look after our best interests?
Or another "we"?
These are 2 of the worst political adverts in history that lead to landslide defeats:
1. McGovern 1972
Key message: McGovern will be a disaster, I'll vote Nixon I'm not crazy.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av_nDxp4iXE
2. Progressive Conservatives 1993
Key message: An ugly person can't be PM.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=D000Amn9CIA
Compare that to the 2 best political adverts in history
1. Nixon 1972
Key message: The Beatles love Nixon (really sounds like a Beatles song).
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMO5DfRIv-k
2. Reagan 1984
Key message: Reagan brought America out of the darkness.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSY
Thanks
Gin
More tonic
I recall the Referendum Party "gained" an MP when Sir George Gardiner defected from the Conservatives just before the 1997 election. It didn't stop the Conservatives retaining the seat comfortably so the likelihood is it will be a maverick who won't bring too many supporters with him/her and it probably won't affect the result in the seat much either.
It's a useful ploy from Farage to a) keep UKIP in the media spotlight and b) put the Conservatives on the defensive. It's curious because on the key aspect of economic policy UKIP has fully supported the Osborne line so one would think irrespective of anything formal UKIP would support a minority Conservative administration's Queen's Speech.
FPT - having George Osborne supporting you must remind Cameron of how Caesar felt when Brutus told him "I've got your back, mate". It's often forgotten Cameron has been Conservative leader for nearly a decade - were he to serve a full second term he would surpass Margaret Thatcher and be closing on WSC in terms of longevity.
Mainly A's
He/she is a hysterical delusional bigoted left wing extremist who is a danger to themself and the public at large. He / she should be locked in a padded cell for their and the public's safety. Sadly there is little chance of rehabilitation. So restraint and medication should be a permanent course of action.
Mainly B's
He / She is a typical sneering urban liberal who has spent too much time believing their own propaganda to recognise the truth. As a result their head is firmly attached via their nether orifice to their lower bowel. This condition is believed treatable After surgery to release the head sufferers can be rehabilitated by undertaking a suitable course of flagellation and humiliation to remove all narcissistic tendencies.
Mainly C's
You seem to understand UKIP's view of Immigration
All C's
Being right is its own reward!
The Thick of It is great because it isnt about policies, its about day to day politics of government. It could be set in any era. It resonates because of the Alistair Campbell style that it aped was pretty canny with how we perceive modern government to be.
Liverpool win - tick
Arsenal win - tick
England rugby lose - tick
Spurs lose - effing bloody tick...
I did have the accumulator with William Hill on a 'slip' online for the last 4 earlier but couldn't bring myself to do it. wouldn't have helped anyway.
I feel lower than a Mark Reckless.
http://www.stevenwoolfe.uk/steven-on-migration 9:00 minutes in.
I have a hunch who it might be but I'm staying schtum simply because I wouldn't want to frighten the horses.
I know, but he's a certainty to me, well I have backed the SNP to win his seat, but that's more in hope than expectation, I suspect he has a large personal vote.
And F1 starts in under a fortnight. Nyoooooooooom!
I nearly did a thread on the other traitorous pig-dog, but I thought that would be cruel on you.
Sol Campbell may run as Tory candidate in seat to be vacated by Malcolm Rifkind
Former England star declines to rule out standing in Kensington, the London seat being vacated by peer embroiled in cash-for-access claims
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/01/sol-campbell-may-stand-tory-mp-malcolm-rifkind-seat
Mike's going on a short holiday this week and I'm editing PB, and as you all know, nothing major happens when Mike goes on holiday.
Also: we have long had open borders with Ireland for employment; is that to go as well?
And, are we still going to let young Aussies and Kiwis in for a couple of years post university (with the option of staying forever)?
But then, so does net migration into the UK of nearly a third of a million in a single year.
Maybe a 'soft cap', with exceptions for those earning/worth a certain amount of money?
You are much better off having a point system and accepting that some years you'll have 80,000 and some years 25,000.
Alastair Campbell@campbellclaret·35 mins35 minutes ago
Despite his ott attack in Ashley Barnes I hope Mourinho gets the treble. Good for the book #Winners http://www.kicca.com/campbellclaret/posts/54f3513ccc10edb5424462c5 …
There's is just one thing? It's the direct opposite of what Farage wants.......
I really don't get his game plan
Just heard this evening via Britarch that the great Sheppard Frere, author of the seminal work 'Britannia' died on Thursday. I can't really say he died too young given that he was 98 but it is still sad when someone who has had such a huge influence on a particular field passes away.
RIP.
What you propose is madness.
If who I can employ is permanently changing, with annual shuffles for what skills are needed, etc., then I simply wouldn't start a business in the UK.
I'm embarrassed to say that the book's been in my extended to-read pile for a few years now, and I have't got around to reading it yet.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/migration1/migration-statistics-quarterly-report/february-2015/info-long-term-international-migration.html
What Woolfe seems to be talking about though is a completely new way of structuring the immigration figures. I'm not sure now is the right time to be doing that though.
Where's the job based, what's the particular work, and what're the pay and conditions?
;-)
Being serious for a moment, you make an excellent point.
Mr. Tyndall, you can always use CreateSpace or Lulu to self-publish physical editions.
If you want your company to be a world-beater, you need access to the best global talent. Simples.