UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
A Greek chorus has burst into song. Yet the mewling and squawking we'd hear on here if an avoidable policy screw-up costing billions emerged from the Treasury would be unbearable. £98,000 a year sounds ridiculously low for such a senior post within the executive.
Its strange how the pay rise cap doesn't apply to Osborne's inner circle.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
How is that 'unhelpful to renegotiation'? Wouldn't it mean the 'problem' was even bigger, strengthening Cameron's hand?
Of course not. I support the greatest football team in the land, soon to be slayers of Man Utd, Norwich City!
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
Quarterly is in line with many other requirements like VAT Submissions. Seems entirely reasonable to me. I already make quarterly submissions to HMRC.
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
How is that 'unhelpful to renegotiation'? Wouldn't it mean the 'problem' was even bigger, strengthening Cameron's hand?
Of course not. I support the greatest football team in the land, soon to be slayers of Man Utd, Norwich City!
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
The Liberal, as opposed to the Liberal Democrat, victory in the Ryedale by-election last night has some in the Auchentennach Fine Pie empire considering a more nuanced product of more robust style to meet the clearly considerable demand in Yorkshire.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
People are in general libertarian for themselves but tough for Others.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
Quarterly is in line with many other requirements like VAT Submissions. Seems entirely reasonable to me. I already make quarterly submissions to HMRC.
Many small business do not make quarterly VAT submissions and/or are on flat rate schemes.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
Quarterly is in line with many other requirements like VAT Submissions. Seems entirely reasonable to me. I already make quarterly submissions to HMRC.
As an accountant, i'm dreaming of the additional fees already.
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
How is that 'unhelpful to renegotiation'? Wouldn't it mean the 'problem' was even bigger, strengthening Cameron's hand?
Of course not. I support the greatest football team in the land, soon to be slayers of Man Utd, Norwich City!
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
How is that 'unhelpful to renegotiation'? Wouldn't it mean the 'problem' was even bigger, strengthening Cameron's hand?
Allegedly the issue is that the data might reveal immigration is even higher than the official data show and thus boost support for leave.
Remember - 'unhelpful' to the PM's renegotiation in an official context means 'unhelpful to the PM's hopes of duping the voters'. He isn't interested in a deal that will actually change anything.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
People are in general libertarian for themselves but tough for Others.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Ye-es, though I think we all accept that laws will apply to everyone. You can't actually ban collar ruffs for your neighbour but not yourself.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
Quarterly is in line with many other requirements like VAT Submissions. Seems entirely reasonable to me. I already make quarterly submissions to HMRC.
Many small business do not make quarterly VAT submissions and/or are on flat rate schemes.
At one stage of my life I ran a small business, and made monthly returns. Mind you, I was a repayment trader so it was very much in my interest to do so. TBH it wasn't particularly onerous.
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
How is that 'unhelpful to renegotiation'? Wouldn't it mean the 'problem' was even bigger, strengthening Cameron's hand?
Of course not. I support the greatest football team in the land, soon to be slayers of Man Utd, Norwich City!
Welcome to a small but select club on pb.
Oh ~Lord I can never forgive them for their association with Delia 'let's be having you' Smith
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
Nuttall is as right wing economically as the rest of the UKIP leadership. The only difference is that he does it with a scouse accent. To win current Labour voters over en masse - and it is certainly doable IMO - UKIP needs to move left in a number of areas.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Why shouldn't they? PAYE employees need their income filing every time they get paid. If you're fortnightly paid that's every fortnight so 26 times a year. If you're monthly paid then it's monthly so 12 HMRC submissions a year.
Other than an anachronism what is wrong with joining the modern era like every other person?
Well why not every week - perhaps every day? It is creating unnecessary work for small businesses and HMRC.
Quarterly is in line with many other requirements like VAT Submissions. Seems entirely reasonable to me. I already make quarterly submissions to HMRC.
As an accountant, i'm dreaming of the additional fees already.
I rest my case. This is a ticking bomb for Osborne, but he will probably be in No. 10 by the time it goes off and will be able to blame Javid.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
This is what matters, as it's proven that all governments have sold us out to the EU, the Cameron government lying with aplomb to the British people. This from The Times on Cameron's retreat from nothing:
"The breakthrough came after the government was accused of a cover-up as it emerged that it had justified withholding up-to-date figures on the number of EU migrants in or seeking jobs in Britain because their release would be “unhelpful to the renegotiation process”. Figures showed that nearly two million migrants from the EU had been given national insurance cards to work in Britain over the past four years — more than twice the number officially estimated as entering the country."
No wonder our streets, hospitals, schools etc., are crowded and full to bursting. The world of my grandchildren and great grandchildren will be very unpleasant indeed.
Too many immigrants on the motorway? Try leaving earlier.
I have some empathy with both positions - many who think they're Libertarians actually just want rules they like, and others for everyone else.
However, once this is pointed out - many will stop, think and go Okay. Goose and gander stuff. I gave a few quid to the old Libertarian Party before Devil's Kitchen was squished by Andrew Neil.
TBH, I think genuine Libertarians are just a bit more self-confident in themselves/don't want to be beholden to others/expect to fix their own woes. As ever, it all depends on how dogmatic you decide to be about where to draw the line.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
People are in general libertarian for themselves but tough for Others.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Ye-es, though I think we all accept that laws will apply to everyone. You can't actually ban collar ruffs for your neighbour but not yourself.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
People are in general libertarian for themselves but tough for Others.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Ye-es, though I think we all accept that laws will apply to everyone. You can't actually ban collar ruffs for your neighbour but not yourself.
But you can want things you like legal and things you don't tackled. Smoker? Smoking is a civil liberty how dare the government say what you can do. Non smoker? Smoking in confined spaces is a public health menace so should be banned.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
Nuttall is as right wing economically as the rest of the UKIP leadership. The only difference is that he does it with a scouse accent. To win current Labour voters over en masse - and it is certainly doable IMO - UKIP needs to move left in a number of areas.
David Cameron used to be a social conservative who voted for Section 28. The general public don't pay enough attention to notice. A Scouse accent and a couple of big announcements about renationalising the railways and, Bob's your uncle, UKIP are a left wing party!!
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
@ChrisGiles_ · 18s18 seconds ago Rise in wealth inequality not a top 1% thing. (wealth share constant) It's a Lon & SE house price thing.
Of course and I wonder if that is net wealth excluding mortgages. We have friends with enormous salaries in the SE who struggle to make ends meet because they insist on a very lavish lifestyle. Their notional wealth is high solely because of the house but otherwise they live literally month to month without any significant savings.
Do you think this is a symptom of Peak Miliband just working its way through the system a bit early, or a reflection of a general thumbs down for Corbynism?
Many here are expecting a Bad Night For Labour in May, based on mainly the former. Given what happened in Oldham - I'm a bit sceptical about what's causing what. Very pleased as a Tory though whatever's going on
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
Might and impossible are two incompatible things. If something is impossible then there is no might about it
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
If I'm reading between the lines correctly, are you implying you're not a fan of UKIP??
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
You see by implication you're accusing millions of people of being racist, are you comfortable with that stance?
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
Nuttall is as right wing economically as the rest of the UKIP leadership. The only difference is that he does it with a scouse accent. To win current Labour voters over en masse - and it is certainly doable IMO - UKIP needs to move left in a number of areas.
That is true. Actually, in pre-Jezza days I'd have said that UKIP could have profitably outflanked Labour on the left in some areas.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
Rofl - the lack of self-awareness is staggering. Keep on trucking
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
Might and impossible are two incompatible things. If something is impossible then there is no might about it
He ain't too good on the nuances associated with actual reading of the article.
Did I hear aright this morning that Carswell said UKIP should take a leaf out of the SNP's book?
'Why can't a Nigel be more like a Nicola?'
That'll go down like a cup of cold sick in the bierkellers.
UKIP could have their own helicopter. Oh wait, Farage and aircraft is a potent, near fatal mix. Perhaps that's not such a good idea.
Do you find plane crashes amusing?
No. And neither did the unfortunate and now deceased pilot that fell foul of Farage, and his stupid stunt.
You mean the licensed commercial pilot operating a correctly fitted aircraft whose was familiar with towing banners behind his aircraft. The pilot who was sadly killed when the banner wrapped around the aircraft tailplane and caused him to lose control until it was too late ? And which part of this is Farage's fault pray tell ?
@ChrisGiles_ · 18s18 seconds ago Rise in wealth inequality not a top 1% thing. (wealth share constant) It's a Lon & SE house price thing.
Of course and I wonder if that is net wealth excluding mortgages. We have friends with enormous salaries in the SE who struggle to make ends meet because they insist on a very lavish lifestyle. Their notional wealth is high solely because of the house but otherwise they live literally month to month without any significant savings.
Actually, Chris Giles is apparently wrong. Property wealth (net) has declined relative to financial wealth (net) and, in particular, to private pension wealth. This is true in aggregate and for both the top 10% and the bottom 50%.
According to Havard research - we're all a bit racist and favour our own tribe, no matter how hard we try to smother human nature.
I'm really bored of the You're A Racist as a form of argument. I'd love it if everyone judged others they didn't know as individuals - but we don't. We make generalisations based on behaviour.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
You see by implication you're accusing millions of people of being racist, are you comfortable with that stance?
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
You see by implication you're accusing millions of people of being racist, are you comfortable with that stance?
Yes why wouldn't I be? Should I be PC and pretend there is no racism in this country?
Why is it deemed necessary to publicise which school the future King will be attending as a child..It puts the local area under pressure and endangers the life of every other pupil.Today the nut jobs have been informed..
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
No - because he doesn't need the permission of the EU to enact it - nor could the EU stop him doing it. But surely you know that the only current problem with the British proposal relates to discrimination against non-British EU nationals. A blanket proposal solves the problem very neatly imho.
Without Nigel Farage Ukip wouldn't have won the Euros, we wouldn't be having a referendum and Ukip wouldn't have got nearly 4m votes, for those reasons he has and deserves enormous respect in the party. However all political careers end, most badly, and I'd love to see a dignified exit for Nigel. He can be absolutely proud of his achievements, no non Westminster politician has done as much to shape politics in the UK.
There are several good quality people within the party capable of leading, albeit in a different style, my choice would be Suzanne Evans with Stephen Woolfe and Paul Nuttall taking prominent roles.
I have utmost respect and regard for Nigel, I sincerely hope that despite the efforts and wishes of some it doesn't end acrimoniously.
Farage is like Hannibal. Good at winning some impressive battles, but you need someone else/better to win the war.
Wrong comparison. In footballing terms Farage took a team from the Conference to the QF of the Champions League. Now whether anybody is capable of building on that remains to be seen, but nobody else would have been capable of what he's done.
Conference? QF of Champions League?
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
He helped form Ukip in 1993
But he wasn't leader then. So if actions while not leader are relevant then anyone else can be leader now?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, if you're disputing that Farage was instrumental in making Ukip what it is today then we'll have to disagree.
I dispute that Nigel Farage as leader took UKIP from Conference to QF of the Champions League.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
If I'm reading between the lines correctly, are you implying you're not a fan of UKIP??
@ChrisGiles_ · 18s18 seconds ago Rise in wealth inequality not a top 1% thing. (wealth share constant) It's a Lon & SE house price thing.
Of course and I wonder if that is net wealth excluding mortgages. We have friends with enormous salaries in the SE who struggle to make ends meet because they insist on a very lavish lifestyle. Their notional wealth is high solely because of the house but otherwise they live literally month to month without any significant savings.
Actually, Chris Giles is apparently wrong. Property wealth (net) has declined relative to financial wealth (net) and, in particular, to private pension wealth. This is true in aggregate and for both the top 10% and the bottom 50%.
I do think that pensioners, especially those of us on public pensions, have had a good settlement over the last ten years and ought to be required to share more of the burden of assisting in the mending of the public finances.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
Might and impossible are two incompatible things. If something is impossible then there is no might about it
He ain't too good on the nuances associated with actual reading of the article.
Pfft you and Mr Thomspon wouldn't believe it was a No from the other EU leaders if Cameron came home with a bits of paper saying No signed by all of them and a black eye from Frau Merkel, you would think it was just a negotiation position.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
No - because he doesn't need the permission of the EU to enact it - nor could the EU stop him doing it. But surely you know that the only current problem with the British proposal relates to discrimination against non-British EU nationals. A blanket proposal solves the problem very neatly imho.
Hang on a minute, I want you to be clear here, are you saying Cameron could stop benefits to migrants without EU consent?
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
I note that last night for the third time in a month the Conservatives won a council by-election on less than 30% of the vote in a four way marginal. They'd better hope that they're not using up all their luck.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
No, no:
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
I note that last night for the third time in a month the Conservatives won a council by-election on less than 30% of the vote in a four way marginal. They'd better hope that they're not using up all their luck.
Don't read too much into lone by elections in the winter with low turnouts.
Next May will give us a better idea.
To paraphrase Mike, the Tories will be lucky every day Corbyn is leader.
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
It's not an issue except for Cameroon's who are desperate to hang on to it as the only remaining item of substance they hope to get from the EU Renegotiation, if that fails, he has nothing except window dressing (according to many even the benefits thing is window dressing for the reasons you state).
Without this remaining item it will be very hard to claim the renegotiations are not a failure, where as it should be obvious to all that they are already a failure. Compared to what Cameron laied out in the Bloomberg Speech is absurdly timid, an in no way " fundamental, far-reaching change."
Cameroon's also hope if they jump up and down about this issue enough people will forget the other items he wanted, and be suitably impressed when he brings this small bit of tinsel home.
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
If they are on low wages, the benefits and free NHS will outweigh the taxes.
But it's a hot button issue because Cameron managed to convince the press that this was his way of limiting immigration because he knew the EU wouldn't let him negotiate on immigration. It was a master class in PR!
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
There are two reasons:
1. These people have not contributed to the UK through historic payments, and therefore are receiving without contributing.
2. If you assume that likelihood of people to emigrate/immigrate is based around economic factors (which is a reasonable assumption), then it will increase levels of immigration. Worse, it will likely encourage those people who have the lowest marginal utility to the economy.
Personally, I think all benefits should be contributory.
Labour MP Kate Hoey "Wish my colleague @angelaeagle would stop repeating the completely untrue statement that 3m jobs will go if we leave EU" @labourleave
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
No, no:
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
I am not sure there is any evidence that this is not the case, isn't this exactly the sort of fabricated row that Lansley spoke of in August, lets Dave look tough because he eventually "wrestles" from the EU what they decided he could have months ago.
Of course there's racism in the country, but you said
A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party
I'm curious to establish that if somebody votes Ukip you consider them to be racist.
No I think that Farage is racist, or has decided to appeal to racists if he isn't.
I don't think everyone who votes for Conservatives is identical to Cameron. I don't think everyone who voted for Labour is identical to Miliband. I don't think everyone who voted for UKIP is identical to Farage.
There are probably a lot of people who voted for UKIP despite not because of the parties racism.
Of course there's racism in the country, but you said
A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party
I'm curious to establish that if somebody votes Ukip you consider them to be racist.
No I think that Farage is racist, or has decided to appeal to racists if he isn't.
I don't think everyone who votes for Conservatives is identical to Cameron. I don't think everyone who voted for Labour is identical to Miliband. I don't think everyone who voted for UKIP is identical to Farage.
There are probably a lot of people who voted for UKIP despite not because of the parties racism.
OK I know you like discussion, perhaps you could outline Ukip policy that is/are racist.
I didn't get that irked until I saw a C5 docu about Romanians sucking tax credits/child benefit out of the system, and sending it all back home/playing the system. The money we hand out here is a fortune for them.
I haven't met a Big Issue seller that isn't Romanian either. I prickled with anger and felt I occupied the same Kipper space on a Venn diagram for quite a while after the show ended.
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
Full on libertarianism is more than simply government not telling us what to do, it is tied in intimately with state reductionism in all areas of government and ideologically that should include defence and particularly border control. After all borders and border control are functions of big government whose main purposes are to limit the freedoms of individuals to go where they please.
Which is why when I see people flirt with the idea of a libertarian UKIP, I roll my eyes and wonder whether they really understand what this philosophy requires. It would be very interesting to see that logical leap being made within UKIP, but I don't see it somehow.
Personally, I see large scale state reduction with libertarian philosophy underpinning it as one of the major risks if we risk assess all the ways in which a Western Democracy might implode in the next 30-50 years. That is especially true of Anglophone democracies. The libertarian mindset is invidious in right-wing parties and, unlike Communist mindsets whose appearance immediately ring alarm bells with the electorate, the public don't have a clue about what libertarianism means.
I actually get on well with the radical libertarians I have encountered in my time, but I group them politically in the same idealistic nutter basket alongside some of Corbyn's fluffier fellow travellers.
I didn't get that irked until I saw a C5 docu about Romanians sucking tax credits/child benefit out of the system, and sending it all back home/playing the system. The money we hand out here is a fortune for them.
I haven't met a Big Issue seller that isn't Romanian either. I prickled with anger and felt I occupied the same Kipper space on a Venn diagram for quite a while after the show ended.
I don't really get why benefits for EU migrants exercise people so much. As I understand it the great majority of such migrants are working. They may be getting in-work benefits but, then, they are paying taxes. Meanwhile we have unemployment at the lowest level for years. What's so bad about this?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
The Big Issue selling is a scam and the Big Issue know and wont do anything about it. A handful of individuals control the trade, buy up all the magazines, then force people to sell them. Virtually none involved are homeless and they are also claiming benefits.
I note that last night for the third time in a month the Conservatives won a council by-election on less than 30% of the vote in a four way marginal. They'd better hope that they're not using up all their luck.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
No - because he doesn't need the permission of the EU to enact it - nor could the EU stop him doing it. But surely you know that the only current problem with the British proposal relates to discrimination against non-British EU nationals. A blanket proposal solves the problem very neatly imho.
Hang on a minute, I want you to be clear here, are you saying Cameron could stop benefits to migrants without EU consent?
Yes. Of course he could - the only problem with the current proposal is that it applies ONLY to migrants. If the ban applied to everyone in the UK for 4 years without contributions the EU could do nothing about it as it would not be discriminatory. The reason this is an issue is that Britain currently provides many benefits far more generously than is the case in many EU countries.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
No, no:
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
I am not sure there is any evidence that this is not the case, isn't this exactly the sort of fabricated row that Lansley spoke of in August, lets Dave look tough because he eventually "wrestles" from the EU what they decided he could have months ago.
Well, I felt it was a good film in terms of effects, action and acting, but essentially it was a remake of the very first Star Wars from 1977. Without giving away spoilers, the plot was almost identical. And I guess I did feel a bit conflicted when I left the cinema. Reading through the reviews on IMDB (which I must stress I only started reading AFTER I watched it), I find myself agreeing with more of the negative points than the positive ones.
I do hope Episode VIII will be better and more original, plot-wise.
The Empire Strikes Back (1980) is still my favourite film in the Franchise.
Funnily enough, I left conflicted for similar reasons as you, but am feeling more positive about it since. I give it a 7 out of 10. Good, not great. Certain elements like look, tone and new cast are 9 out of 10. I think they decided to go full on nostalgic to reassure haters of the prequels a little too hard, so played safe plot wise to set things up moving forward. I understand it, and it's good, but still a small shame.
Of course films today are really just adverts for the ancillary toys/DVDs and other stuff where most of the money is made
Boo hoo Hoo - films in the olden times were so much better!!!
Plenty of movies today are not adverts for toys and ancillary stuff (I don't even understand why being an advert for the DVR would be bad, if the movie is good it is such a advert). Star Wars is one of those advertising ancillary stuff, but then very early on it always was. Superhero movies are too. But most are not.
Full on libertarianism is more than simply government not telling us what to do, it is tied in intimately with state reductionism in all areas of government and ideologically that should include defence and particularly border control. After all borders and border control are functions of big government whose main purposes are to limit the freedoms of individuals to go where they please.
Which is why when I see people flirt with the idea of a libertarian UKIP, I roll my eyes and wonder whether they really understand what this philosophy requires. It would be very interesting to see that logical leap being made within UKIP, but I don't see it somehow.
Personally, I see large scale state reduction with libertarian philosophy underpinning it as one of the major risks if we risk assess all the ways in which a Western Democracy might implode in the next 30-50 years. That is especially true of Anglophone democracies. The libertarian mindset is invidious in right-wing parties and, unlike Communist mindsets whose appearance immediately ring alarm bells with the electorate, the public don't have a clue about what libertarianism means.
I actually get on well with the radical libertarians I have encountered in my time, but I group them politically in the same idealistic nutter basket alongside some of Corbyn's fluffier fellow travellers.
Good post, as a libertarian I've wrestled with freedom of movement and come to the conclusion that it is only workable across countries of similar economic status, you might argue in that case discrimination is taking place. I'd call myself a pragmatic libertarian, its about where we're starting from.
The start point is small govt, low taxes and a strong judiciary, freedom of individuals goes hand in hand with the protection of citizens. I don't want you persecuted for your beliefs but I want you punished for violation of the law.
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
No, no:
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
I am not sure there is any evidence that this is not the case, isn't this exactly the sort of fabricated row that Lansley spoke of in August, lets Dave look tough because he eventually "wrestles" from the EU what they decided he could have months ago.
Well, I felt it was a good film in terms of effects, action and acting, but essentially it was a remake of the very first Star Wars from 1977. Without giving away spoilers, the plot was almost identical. And I guess I did feel a bit conflicted when I left the cinema. Reading through the reviews on IMDB (which I must stress I only started reading AFTER I watched it), I find myself agreeing with more of the negative points than the positive ones.
I do hope Episode VIII will be better and more original, plot-wise.
The Empire Strikes Back (1980) is still my favourite film in the Franchise.
Funnily enough, I left conflicted for similar reasons as you, but am feeling more positive about it since. I give it a 7 out of 10. Good, not great. Certain elements like look, tone and new cast are 9 out of 10. I think they decided to go full on nostalgic to reassure haters of the prequels a little too hard, so played safe plot wise to set things up moving forward. I understand it, and it's good, but still a small shame.
Of course films today are really just adverts for the ancillary toys/DVDs and other stuff where most of the money is made
Boo hoo Hoo - films in the olden times were so much better!!!
Plenty of movies today are not adverts for toys and ancillary stuff (I don't even understand why being an advert for the DVR would be bad, if the movie is good it is such a advert). Star Wars is one of those advertising ancillary stuff, but then very early on it always was. Superhero movies are too. But most are not.
OT but I've just done all my Christmas shopping online after a few hours of meandering through the various sites. Now sit back, and let the (newly privatised) mailman do all the heavy lifting. Ah it's good to be a PB Tory bastard
Mr Cameron began this "showdown" summit saying he wanted the right to discriminate against non-British EU workers receiving in-work benefits, but even before the dinner started, the demand had been unanimously rejected as impossible.
So that went well...
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
No - because he doesn't need the permission of the EU to enact it - nor could the EU stop him doing it. But surely you know that the only current problem with the British proposal relates to discrimination against non-British EU nationals. A blanket proposal solves the problem very neatly imho.
Hang on a minute, I want you to be clear here, are you saying Cameron could stop benefits to migrants without EU consent?
Yes. Of course he could - the only problem with the current proposal is that it applies ONLY to migrants. If the ban applied to everyone in the UK for 4 years without contributions the EU could do nothing about it as it would not be discriminatory. The reason this is an issue is that Britain currently provides many benefits far more generously than is the case in many EU countries.
Well it begs the question: if he could stop it why is he posturing about it?
I can't think of the last time I bought something in a shop. Maybe a year or more ago? IIRC my laptop charger broke and waiting a whole 24hrs was too much...before that? The last time a kitty chewed through another laptop charger or peed on the keyboard.
OT but I've just done all my Christmas shopping online after a few hours of meandering through the various sites. Now sit back, and let the (newly privatised) mailman do all the heavy lifting. Ah it's good to be a PB Tory bastard
I note that last night for the third time in a month the Conservatives won a council by-election on less than 30% of the vote in a four way marginal. They'd better hope that they're not using up all their luck.
They have had a good run, but tbf they also lost to the Liberals last night almost certainly because the Liberal Democrat didn't get their party description onto the ballot paper.
UKIP could become a euro-sceptic Blue Labour, with Nuttall as leader, and focus their efforts in working class seats, targetting disillusioned Labourites as well as "Alf Garnett".
I think that would be their best strategy to gain support, but I would much prefer them to become full-on Libertarians in the Carswell mould.
That would be their best option I think. To be honest it might be Labour's best option.
Its perfectly possible to be libertarian and blue collar, if you're a bricklayer you might not be a philosophical deep thinker but you don't want the govt telling you that you can't smoke in your van. Or that you have to file tax returns every 3 months.
Indeed anyone can be libertarian but not many people are.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
People are in general libertarian for themselves but tough for Others.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Ye-es, though I think we all accept that laws will apply to everyone. You can't actually ban collar ruffs for your neighbour but not yourself.
A fair point, I think. Not all, I would agree, but unsurprisingly people's actual views, when taken to their conclusions, often reveal they are not as libertarian/liberal/conservative/socialist as they might think they are.
Well, I felt it was a good film in terms of effects, action and acting, but essentially it was a remake of the very first Star Wars from 1977. Without giving away spoilers, the plot was almost identical. And I guess I did feel a bit conflicted when I left the cinema. Reading through the reviews on IMDB (which I must stress I only started reading AFTER I watched it), I find myself agreeing with more of the negative points than the positive ones.
I do hope Episode VIII will be better and more original, plot-wise.
The Empire Strikes Back (1980) is still my favourite film in the Franchise.
Funnily enough, I left conflicted for similar reasons as you, but am feeling more positive about it since. I give it a 7 out of 10. Good, not great. Certain elements like look, tone and new cast are 9 out of 10. I think they decided to go full on nostalgic to reassure haters of the prequels a little too hard, so played safe plot wise to set things up moving forward. I understand it, and it's good, but still a small shame.
Of course films today are really just adverts for the ancillary toys/DVDs and other stuff where most of the money is made
Boo hoo Hoo - films in the olden times were so much better!!!
Plenty of movies today are not adverts for toys and ancillary stuff (I don't even understand why being an advert for the DVR would be bad, if the movie is good it is such a advert). Star Wars is one of those advertising ancillary stuff, but then very early on it always was. Superhero movies are too. But most are not.
The original Star Wars film in 1977 was largely an advert for the various merchandising deals.
Comments
'Why can't a Nigel be more like a Nicola?'
That'll go down like a cup of cold sick in the bierkellers.
In 2004 pre Farage UKIP came third in the Euros polling a sixth of all votes 16% so if that in your eyes is Conference then please explain what Quarter Finals of the Champions League is ...
Look forward to seeing your posts in 2016.
There are far more votes in crackdowns and "tough action" than in freedom. Why that should be is another question.
"Why are you telling me what to do when you should be ..."
Allegedly the issue is that the data might reveal immigration is even higher than the official data show and thus boost support for leave.
Remember - 'unhelpful' to the PM's renegotiation in an official context means 'unhelpful to the PM's hopes of duping the voters'. He isn't interested in a deal that will actually change anything.
Overall Lab to Con swing pretty consistent at 3.5%. Long may it continue.
:eejits:
Rise in wealth inequality not a top 1% thing. (wealth share constant) It's a Lon & SE house price thing.
Try reading the whole article or indeed the accounts in other papers and you get a rather different view. Of course the EU could make him Santa Claus and then resign en masse and you still wouldn't be happy but there you go.
Good job UKIP got those 102 MP's at GE2015.
However, once this is pointed out - many will stop, think and go Okay. Goose and gander stuff. I gave a few quid to the old Libertarian Party before Devil's Kitchen was squished by Andrew Neil.
TBH, I think genuine Libertarians are just a bit more self-confident in themselves/don't want to be beholden to others/expect to fix their own woes. As ever, it all depends on how dogmatic you decide to be about where to draw the line.
Mr felix, what is your position on migrant benefits?
I did, he got two lines of waffle in the official communique and told that they might be able to make some progress in February, but I seriously don't expect you to criticise Cameron, you have made it perfectly clear that its only to colour of the rosette that matters. Must be nice to be so tribal, saves having to think about things.
I agree that Nigel Farage is responsible for the UKIP of today. A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party with only one MP who doesn't even respect Farage. Yes that is entirely Farage.
Many here are expecting a Bad Night For Labour in May, based on mainly the former. Given what happened in Oldham - I'm a bit sceptical about what's causing what. Very pleased as a Tory though whatever's going on
Might and impossible are two incompatible things. If something is impossible then there is no might about it
I would give no-one benefit entitlement for 4 or 5 years without contributions including UK nationals and returning ex-pats. I live in Spain where you get nothing till you contribute and then it is strictly time-limited. To put it bluntly I believe in people looking after themselves as long as they are able-bodied.
Rofl - the lack of self-awareness is staggering. Keep on trucking
Thanks, so if the PM doesn't get that will you vote to Leave?
He ain't too good on the nuances associated with actual reading of the article.
AAIB report is here https://goo.gl/7PQY0l
I'm really bored of the You're A Racist as a form of argument. I'd love it if everyone judged others they didn't know as individuals - but we don't. We make generalisations based on behaviour.
No - because he doesn't need the permission of the EU to enact it - nor could the EU stop him doing it. But surely you know that the only current problem with the British proposal relates to discrimination against non-British EU nationals. A blanket proposal solves the problem very neatly imho.
https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/677802537613975552
Of course there's racism in the country, but you said
A failed small minded racist BNP in blazers party
I'm curious to establish that if somebody votes Ukip you consider them to be racist.
Ukraine Defaults on $3 Billion Bond to Russia
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-18/ukraine-defaults-on-3-billion-bond-to-russia
Pfft you and Mr Thomspon wouldn't believe it was a No from the other EU leaders if Cameron came home with a bits of paper saying No signed by all of them and a black eye from Frau Merkel, you would think it was just a negotiation position.
Hang on a minute, I want you to be clear here, are you saying Cameron could stop benefits to migrants without EU consent?
Not trolling. I'm interested to know why it's such a hot-button issue.
No, no:
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
Next May will give us a better idea.
To paraphrase Mike, the Tories will be lucky every day Corbyn is leader.
Without this remaining item it will be very hard to claim the renegotiations are not a failure, where as it should be obvious to all that they are already a failure. Compared to what Cameron laied out in the Bloomberg Speech is absurdly timid, an in no way " fundamental, far-reaching change."
Cameroon's also hope if they jump up and down about this issue enough people will forget the other items he wanted, and be suitably impressed when he brings this small bit of tinsel home.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg
But it's a hot button issue because Cameron managed to convince the press that this was his way of limiting immigration because he knew the EU wouldn't let him negotiate on immigration. It was a master class in PR!
1. These people have not contributed to the UK through historic payments, and therefore are receiving without contributing.
2. If you assume that likelihood of people to emigrate/immigrate is based around economic factors (which is a reasonable assumption), then it will increase levels of immigration. Worse, it will likely encourage those people who have the lowest marginal utility to the economy.
Personally, I think all benefits should be contributory.
It's all a farce. Everything's been agreed in advance.
They went into the room, and they had a good laugh and a few bottles of wine. And decided to spin it as though they'd really had an argument.
I know this, because practically everyone on this site proclaimed that everything had been pre-arranged.
I'm still waiting for all 103 of you to say:
We're sorry rcs1000, we were wrong and you were right.
I am not sure there is any evidence that this is not the case, isn't this exactly the sort of fabricated row that Lansley spoke of in August, lets Dave look tough because he eventually "wrestles" from the EU what they decided he could have months ago.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/17/eu-referendum-cameron-will-fake-argument-with-french-to-win-says-ex-tory-minister/
I don't think everyone who votes for Conservatives is identical to Cameron.
I don't think everyone who voted for Labour is identical to Miliband.
I don't think everyone who voted for UKIP is identical to Farage.
There are probably a lot of people who voted for UKIP despite not because of the parties racism.
I haven't met a Big Issue seller that isn't Romanian either. I prickled with anger and felt I occupied the same Kipper space on a Venn diagram for quite a while after the show ended.
Which is why when I see people flirt with the idea of a libertarian UKIP, I roll my eyes and wonder whether they really understand what this philosophy requires. It would be very interesting to see that logical leap being made within UKIP, but I don't see it somehow.
Personally, I see large scale state reduction with libertarian philosophy underpinning it as one of the major risks if we risk assess all the ways in which a Western Democracy might implode in the next 30-50 years. That is especially true of Anglophone democracies. The libertarian mindset is invidious in right-wing parties and, unlike Communist mindsets whose appearance immediately ring alarm bells with the electorate, the public don't have a clue about what libertarianism means.
I actually get on well with the radical libertarians I have encountered in my time, but I group them politically in the same idealistic nutter basket alongside some of Corbyn's fluffier fellow travellers.
Yes. Of course he could - the only problem with the current proposal is that it applies ONLY to migrants. If the ban applied to everyone in the UK for 4 years without contributions the EU could do nothing about it as it would not be discriminatory. The reason this is an issue is that Britain currently provides many benefits far more generously than is the case in many EU countries.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/17/eu-referendum-cameron-will-fake-argument-with-french-to-win-says-ex-tory-minister/
Laughable
FPT Funnily enough, I left conflicted for similar reasons as you, but am feeling more positive about it since. I give it a 7 out of 10. Good, not great. Certain elements like look, tone and new cast are 9 out of 10. I think they decided to go full on nostalgic to reassure haters of the prequels a little too hard, so played safe plot wise to set things up moving forward. I understand it, and it's good, but still a small shame. Boo hoo Hoo - films in the olden times were so much better!!!
Plenty of movies today are not adverts for toys and ancillary stuff (I don't even understand why being an advert for the DVR would be bad, if the movie is good it is such a advert). Star Wars is one of those advertising ancillary stuff, but then very early on it always was. Superhero movies are too. But most are not.
The start point is small govt, low taxes and a strong judiciary, freedom of individuals goes hand in hand with the protection of citizens. I don't want you persecuted for your beliefs but I want you punished for violation of the law.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/17/eu-referendum-cameron-will-fake-argument-with-french-to-win-says-ex-tory-minister/
You're not the least bit paranoid - you know they're out to get you
Well it begs the question: if he could stop it why is he posturing about it?
This is a very very slippery slope...Trying to impose 21st Century values on those that lived 100's of years ago.
How far back is Carlotta going?