UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
Part of the issue surely is that this reportonly cconsiders things centrally. The money goes into the Treasury.
However the money to finance the needs of the migrants eg schooling, housing, medical is doled out based on old and inaccurate information used to fund tthrough business rates, central grants for local government. At the same time local government is prevented by central from raising their income above limits which are set quite arbitrarily.
When an attempt is made to rationalise the various bits of data for certain areas, and Lincolnshire is a prime example, then things don't add up. Part of this is because some of the data is wrong, not just a big margin of error scenario, but officials admit it is just guessimetric time.
Yet disappointingly when people try to get to grips with it in a well we are where we are scenario and let's sort this out in a fair way, it immediately starts up the racist and xenophobic cries from the usual suspects.
You really do not do yourselves or the national, nor residents nor incomers any favours with this approach.
Such funding anomalies exist in areas that have virtually no migrants for a whole number of reasons. It needs to be sorted.
But whilst we have the London and metropolitan centric attitudes driving things then significant and nationally important parts of our nation don't get a fair crack of the whip. Migrants just complicate it and make it more difficult to resolve a situation by making things more fluid.
However the money to finance the needs of the migrants eg schooling, housing, medical is doled out based on old and inaccurate information used to fund tthrough business rates, central grants for local government. At the same time local government is prevented by central from raising their income above limits which are set quite arbitrarily.
When an attempt is made to rationalise the various bits of data for certain areas, and Lincolnshire is a prime example, then things don't add up. Part of this is because some of the data is wrong, not just a big margin of error scenario, but officials admit it is just guessimetric time.
Yet disappointingly when people try to get to grips with it in a well we are where we are scenario and let's sort this out in a fair way, it immediately starts up the racist and xenophobic cries from the usual suspects.
You really do not do yourselves or the national, nor residents nor incomers any favours with this approach.
Such funding anomalies exist in areas that have virtually no migrants for a whole number of reasons. It needs to be sorted.
But whilst we have the London and metropolitan centric attitudes driving things then significant and nationally important parts of our nation don't get a fair crack of the whip. Migrants just complicate it and make it more difficult to resolve a situation by making things more fluid.
mrpurple said:
This passed by almost totally not commented upon yesterday:
"The 5,000 small boats operated by the traditional UK fishing families are increasingly marginalised – holding just 4 per cent of the entire UK quota between them. Whereas A single Dutch vessel, operating out of Hull under a British flag, accounts for almost a quarter of the entire English catch and about 6 per cent of the total UK quota, worth £17m and is landed in Holland."
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/half-of-e...
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/04...
I am not saying there are not good reasons for this or that the Greenpeace report is not without any bias but when you get quotes like this then it really needs to be discussed, debated and highlighted far more than it is IMO:
“It’s unjust – we’ve been beaten, and beaten and beaten down since the quotas came in and robbed us, and it’s been a downward spiral ever since,” said Kirk Stribling, a small-scale fisherman operating out of the coastal town of Aldeburgh in Suffolk.
“You can just about get an existence out of it if you’re in your fifties or sixties and have paid for your house. But we can’t employ any youngsters because they need money.”
I think UKIP should focus on this a lot more. The uncontrolled immigration is out of the bag, and in MSM. "The 5,000 small boats operated by the traditional UK fishing families are increasingly marginalised – holding just 4 per cent of the entire UK quota between them. Whereas A single Dutch vessel, operating out of Hull under a British flag, accounts for almost a quarter of the entire English catch and about 6 per cent of the total UK quota, worth £17m and is landed in Holland."
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/half-of-e...
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/04...
I am not saying there are not good reasons for this or that the Greenpeace report is not without any bias but when you get quotes like this then it really needs to be discussed, debated and highlighted far more than it is IMO:
“It’s unjust – we’ve been beaten, and beaten and beaten down since the quotas came in and robbed us, and it’s been a downward spiral ever since,” said Kirk Stribling, a small-scale fisherman operating out of the coastal town of Aldeburgh in Suffolk.
“You can just about get an existence out of it if you’re in your fifties or sixties and have paid for your house. But we can’t employ any youngsters because they need money.”
Edited by mrpurple on Wednesday 5th November 17:58
The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
steveT350C said:
I think UKIP should focus on this a lot more. The uncontrolled immigration is out of the bag, and in MSM.
The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
To be fair, farage has been highlighting their cause ever since he went to Brussels.The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
Scuffers said:
steveT350C said:
I think UKIP should focus on this a lot more. The uncontrolled immigration is out of the bag, and in MSM.
The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
To be fair, farage has been highlighting their cause ever since he went to Brussels.The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
DC now wants to shift emphasis and attention towards showing immigration as being positive, in financial terms at least, because as we knew all along (and he did I suspect) he can't deliver on his empty promises of renegotiating.
IMO time for UKIP (with their soon to be 2 MP's) to restart wagging the dog and lead it onto other issues. now.
Scuffers said:
steveT350C said:
I think UKIP should focus on this a lot more. The uncontrolled immigration is out of the bag, and in MSM.
The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
To be fair, farage has been highlighting their cause ever since he went to Brussels.The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
I fear that a few fisherman on the East Coast of England are never going to generate the headlines that the immigration debate, with all it's racist undertones, has seen.
The fact that about 10,000 fishermen are now out of work as a direct result of the EU common fisheries policy needs to be highlighted. 10s of thousands, and their families....
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
steveT350C said:
Scuffers said:
steveT350C said:
I think UKIP should focus on this a lot more. The uncontrolled immigration is out of the bag, and in MSM.
The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
To be fair, farage has been highlighting their cause ever since he went to Brussels.The raping of the UK's fishing industry is appalling, and should be highlighted as an example of how the EU is anti-UK.
I fear that a few fisherman on the East Coast of England are never going to generate the headlines that the immigration debate, with all it's racist undertones, has seen.
The fact that about 10,000 fishermen are now out of work as a direct result of the EU common fisheries policy needs to be highlighted. 10s of thousands, and their families....
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
We visited Grimsby last year on a tour of the East coast... docks area was almost a ghost town and we were the only people in, the very interesting, fishing heritage museum....such a shame.
steveT350C said:
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
I'd love to hear the views of Wombat3, Zygalski and CameRon on that article.don4l said:
steveT350C said:
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
I'd love to hear the views of Wombat3, Zygalski and CameRon on that article.Deep sea fishing comes at or near the top of the toughest jobs going, and its not highly paid given how tough it is. Why not concentrate on aerospace; space; pharmaceuticals etc which are all much nicer jobs and pay better. Hard to get anyone into the fishing industry except from family ties or desperation.
Anyone on here like to work in the fishing industry? I doubt it somehow.
So fishing has declined but the attractive industries I mentioned go from strength to strength. Sounds like a good exchange in my view.
don4l said:
steveT350C said:
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
I'd love to hear the views of Wombat3, Zygalski and CameRon on that article.
t as far as the old man is concerned. Is the rule targeted at him or is it just a case of a blanket ban primarily designed to stop any kind of commercial activity which has caught up him & his ilk as well?
I'd suggest the latter. No doubt something can be amended to sort the thing out (and probably will be now its hit the press).
Was it directly the fault of the Prime minister & did he lie to us all about the rights of pensioners to fish that beach ? Indeed was he one of the beaurocrats in a high vis vest that told the old boy to take his nets down? Unlikely.
Does it mean that UKIP is the only thing left that can save us all? Even more unlikely.
Wombat3 said:
A bit st as far as the old man is concerned.
Is the rule targeted at him or is it just a case of a blanket ban primarily designed to stop any kind of commercial activity which has caught up him & his ilk as well?
I'd suggest the latter. No doubt something can be amended to sort the thing out (and probably will be now its hit the press).
Was it directly the fault of the Prime minister & did he lie to us all about the rights of pensioners to fish that beach ? Indeed was he one of the beaurocrats in a high vis vest that told the old boy to take his nets down? Unlikely.
Does it mean that UKIP is the only thing left that can save us all? Even more unlikely.
These are the key phrases to my mind:t as far as the old man is concerned. Is the rule targeted at him or is it just a case of a blanket ban primarily designed to stop any kind of commercial activity which has caught up him & his ilk as well?
I'd suggest the latter. No doubt something can be amended to sort the thing out (and probably will be now its hit the press).
Was it directly the fault of the Prime minister & did he lie to us all about the rights of pensioners to fish that beach ? Indeed was he one of the beaurocrats in a high vis vest that told the old boy to take his nets down? Unlikely.
Does it mean that UKIP is the only thing left that can save us all? Even more unlikely.
"It’s about how we are governed, how short-term political obsession takes priority over people’s best interests, and how our way of life has been changed irrevocably by our membership of the European Union.
The bye-law which bans Bubs from casting his net for Dover sole may have been signed by a British civil servant but it will have had its origins in a directive from Brussels."
So unless renegotiation of the EU fishing regulations are on Dave's agenda, which I doubt, being the only party that truly wants us out of the EU, then yes UKIP is the only thing that can save us all.
Edited by mrpurple on Wednesday 5th November 23:56
Edited by mrpurple on Thursday 6th November 00:03
Guam said:
Marie Le Pen has jumped on the Cameron non fight with Brussels over EU migration!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2820859/Ca...
That's a bit rich given the stats. France is targeted by very few EU migrants compared to the UK and Germany. All the "native French" complain about the Arab immigration, which is largely Francophone North Africa, nowt to do with the EU. To each country their colonies, and Marine knows that.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2820859/Ca...
I recall the warning horror stories used when the French delay on EU immigration was coming to an end, the obsession with the Polish plumber who would emigrate there to take French jobs. In reality the bigger problem was contracting companies based outside France who didn't have to respect French employment law to work there. The EU labourers involved were not moving to France as such, they were just going there to work for longish stints, not quite the same as the UK.
JustAnotherLogin said:
Well you didn't invite me, but I have a view if I may. If we are going to put effort into jobs, shouldn't we put that effort into industries where the jobs are actually attractive to people?
Deep sea fishing comes at or near the top of the toughest jobs going, and its not highly paid given how tough it is. Why not concentrate on aerospace; space; pharmaceuticals etc which are all much nicer jobs and pay better. Hard to get anyone into the fishing industry except from family ties or desperation.
Anyone on here like to work in the fishing industry? I doubt it somehow.
So fishing has declined but the attractive industries I mentioned go from strength to strength. Sounds like a good exchange in my view.
And poorly educated, low income areas are going to be heaving with medical, engineering and biotech graduates right?Deep sea fishing comes at or near the top of the toughest jobs going, and its not highly paid given how tough it is. Why not concentrate on aerospace; space; pharmaceuticals etc which are all much nicer jobs and pay better. Hard to get anyone into the fishing industry except from family ties or desperation.
Anyone on here like to work in the fishing industry? I doubt it somehow.
So fishing has declined but the attractive industries I mentioned go from strength to strength. Sounds like a good exchange in my view.
If ever you needed a demonstration on how out of touch a large section of society is with working class people, that's it right there. And it's exactly that attitude that will allow ukip to mop up those votes, for better or worse.
On another note, a good piece from the guardian for once on how ukip has changed since Farage took over again
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/nov/...
JustAnotherLogin said:
don4l said:
steveT350C said:
Littlejohn, in the wail... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2663177/...
I'd love to hear the views of Wombat3, Zygalski and CameRon on that article.1) Clearly, you have NOT read the article.
2) This isn't about a job. It's about a hobby.
3) We don't need to put any effort into support of this hobby. In fact, we are paying people to prevent this hobby.
JustAnotherLogin said:
Deep sea fishing comes at or near the top of the toughest jobs going, and its not highly paid given how tough it is.
Dear God! You really are very good at being absolutely wrong.If you had read more than the first paragraph of the article, you would know that it is not about "deep sea" fishing. It is about "estuary" fishing.
Article said:
His daily exercise consists of walking 60 yards out into the estuary to inspect a net tethered on the mud-flats to catch fish on the incoming tide. It’s a method which has been used by locals on the banks between Grimsby and Cleethorpes for generations.
Deep sea fishing requires a boat. The guy in this article does his fishing on foot.Once again, it isn't a job. It's a hobby.
AJS- said:
Well I'm a free marketeer and a UKIP supporter so I'll take it on and say it's exactly the same for the labour market as for any other market in goods or services.
One of the worst aspects of protectionism is the distortion it creates. Making EU nationals massively more "competitive" than those from outside for example. When our government then decides to go and reduce immigration it means that they are going to reduce immigration from outside the EU, as this is the only type they can actually control. So the market is distorted in favour of employing EU nationals regardless of whether there are better people available from elsewhere.
Exactly as with protectionist tariffs for goods and services.
Of course the logical conclusion of that is that we should just drop all immigration controls and let everyone who wants to come here in. Obviously an election loser but it would be the principled and free market position.
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
Or we could just have an egalitarian single world nation, where the hegemony of "nation states" is ridiculed as the nonsense that it is. We could then please more of the people more of the time.One of the worst aspects of protectionism is the distortion it creates. Making EU nationals massively more "competitive" than those from outside for example. When our government then decides to go and reduce immigration it means that they are going to reduce immigration from outside the EU, as this is the only type they can actually control. So the market is distorted in favour of employing EU nationals regardless of whether there are better people available from elsewhere.
Exactly as with protectionist tariffs for goods and services.
Of course the logical conclusion of that is that we should just drop all immigration controls and let everyone who wants to come here in. Obviously an election loser but it would be the principled and free market position.
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
FredClogs said:
AJS- said:
Well I'm a free marketeer and a UKIP supporter so I'll take it on and say it's exactly the same for the labour market as for any other market in goods or services.
One of the worst aspects of protectionism is the distortion it creates. Making EU nationals massively more "competitive" than those from outside for example. When our government then decides to go and reduce immigration it means that they are going to reduce immigration from outside the EU, as this is the only type they can actually control. So the market is distorted in favour of employing EU nationals regardless of whether there are better people available from elsewhere.
Exactly as with protectionist tariffs for goods and services.
Of course the logical conclusion of that is that we should just drop all immigration controls and let everyone who wants to come here in. Obviously an election loser but it would be the principled and free market position.
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
Or we could just have an egalitarian single world nation, where the hegemony of "nation states" is ridiculed as the nonsense that it is. We could then please more of the people more of the time.One of the worst aspects of protectionism is the distortion it creates. Making EU nationals massively more "competitive" than those from outside for example. When our government then decides to go and reduce immigration it means that they are going to reduce immigration from outside the EU, as this is the only type they can actually control. So the market is distorted in favour of employing EU nationals regardless of whether there are better people available from elsewhere.
Exactly as with protectionist tariffs for goods and services.
Of course the logical conclusion of that is that we should just drop all immigration controls and let everyone who wants to come here in. Obviously an election loser but it would be the principled and free market position.
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
It's called utopia not eutopia for a very good reason.
Tea bags will rule the world when proper tea is theft.
AJS- said:
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
That sounds like a good idea, so it'll never happen while we're in the EU.FredClogs said:
Or we could just have an egalitarian single world nation, where the hegemony of "nation states" is ridiculed as the nonsense that it is. We could then please more of the people more of the time.
Considering that you have previously supported and justified physical assaults on Nigel Farage because you don't like him, I suspect your state of peace and harmony would involve silencing dissent through more than attempted ridicule. For the greater good.. turbobloke said:
AJS- said:
With that not being possible the next best thing in my view is to have a regime that is transparent and even handed, so that it's as easy to employ a specialist from Australia or Brazil as it is to employ a specialist from Spain or Italy. Again exactly the same as with goods and services.
That sounds like a good idea, so it'll never happen while we're in the EU.I have a cleaner in my villa is spain, I like her, trust her and above all she's a good cleaner. If she fell on hard times or needed a change in her life why should she not be able to come and work for me at my house in the UK? Who decides who's special enough and on what criteria?
What is it that UKIP fear from competition in the labour market?
FredClogs said:
So "special" people get "special" treatment - doesn't sound very egalitarian. I mean we're all a bit special aren't we, in our own ways... (obvious gags are obvious)
I have a cleaner in my villa is spain, I like her, trust her and above all she's a good cleaner. If she fell on hard times or needed a change in her life why should she not be able to come and work for me at my house in the UK? Who decides who's special enough and on what criteria?
Can i go live in your villa in spainI have a cleaner in my villa is spain, I like her, trust her and above all she's a good cleaner. If she fell on hard times or needed a change in her life why should she not be able to come and work for me at my house in the UK? Who decides who's special enough and on what criteria?
for free
As i fancy a change
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff