UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
Axionknight said:
FredClogs said:
Seems to be a perfectly reasonable idea to me, better than the system we have which penalises people for owning a car rather than driving it.
Not using it? SORN!Although I have to agree to an extent, personally I think it should be abolished and added onto the price of fuel, in my simplistic view of things, the more thirsty and polluting your car is, or the more you use it, the more you'll pay!
why use a simple adjustment to fuel duty when you can use a multi-billion £ satellite system that's going to cost ever more and put up the price of your car as well as charging you though the nose?
if (and it's a big if!) you believe in the carbon bulls
t, you will know that every litre of petrol/diesel burned puts out X CO2, so it;s actually an extremely accurate way to measure it.Problem is that this would be an additional tax rather than a replacement for existing taxes such is the politicians' desire for more money to fall under their control.
I don't know how things stack up in other countries but as it was shown on the war on the motorist thread road user taxes, whilst not being hypothecated, effectively 'pay' for all local and national government spending / subsidy on roads/ rail / buses / water transport and ports etc. The rest that's leftover they just waste.
I don't know how things stack up in other countries but as it was shown on the war on the motorist thread road user taxes, whilst not being hypothecated, effectively 'pay' for all local and national government spending / subsidy on roads/ rail / buses / water transport and ports etc. The rest that's leftover they just waste.
Galileo is just the EU's pet project to show that the US does not have the monopoly on GPS.
rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
Scuffers said:
Galileo is just the EU's pet project to show that the US does not have the monopoly on GPS.
rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
Alternatively, European countries don't want to be reliant on what the US choose to let us have access to (and could remove). rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
I understand the ire people have for elements of the EU, however to blindly criticise everything and anything simply because it has a European connection isn't necessarily a balanced approach.
allergictocheese said:
Scuffers said:
Galileo is just the EU's pet project to show that the US does not have the monopoly on GPS.
rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
Alternatively, European countries don't want to be reliant on what the US choose to let us have access to (and could remove). rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
I understand the ire people have for elements of the EU, however to blindly criticise everything and anything simply because it has a European connection isn't necessarily a balanced approach.
allergictocheese said:
Scuffers said:
Galileo is just the EU's pet project to show that the US does not have the monopoly on GPS.
rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
Alternatively, European countries don't want to be reliant on what the US choose to let us have access to (and could remove). rather than work with them, they had to make their own system, at vast expense to us.
Yes, it might well be technically better, in the same way an F1 is better than your everyday BMW, but that does not make it the right choice to take to work every day or do the shopping with.
I understand the ire people have for elements of the EU, however to blindly criticise everything and anything simply because it has a European connection isn't necessarily a balanced approach.
US GPS system was paid for on the understanding that it's a publically available service, congress saw to that, the idea they are going to turn it off are laughable, (yes they used to have programmed error in the system to prevent military use, but they gave up on that years ago).
only justification for another system is for military use to keep it independent, but that's pretty shaky in the context of the EU. even the russians have baulk at funding their own GPS system (GLONASS) until Putin put it at the top of the priority list.
does the world really need 3 GPS systems?
I am sure if you put it to the vote with the costs per head explained, nobody would go there.
Allies might not be allies forever. We know the US are protectionist politically, culturally and in commerce. From a strategic viewpoint it's unwise to rely on one partner for something so vital. Why should the US control and benefit from a sole source of Worldwide GPS? It's anti -competetive, discourages technological advancement and invokes an unhealthy reliance on an uncontrollable partner.
NicD said:
just reading the 'EU Real Agenda' piece and this caught my eye (note, my bold):
'Immigration
The next step in the EU's domination of the nation states, has had a major effect on most of the richer nations of the EU. The European Union decided that there should be "free movement of people". The thinking here was, with the quiet agreement of the EU member states to allow any person to be able to live, work and settle in any other EU country.
Under this "principle", an individual who moves to another country is legally entitled to the services and benefits of that country, including the right to vote. If enough people move to another country, they can vote to ensure that their wishes are maintained, even against the wishes of the "indigenous" population.'
do you remember the muppet outpouring of faux outrage when I used the term, in just the same way. God, such mouth foaming, just over a word.
The problem with your post is the facts are different.'Immigration
The next step in the EU's domination of the nation states, has had a major effect on most of the richer nations of the EU. The European Union decided that there should be "free movement of people". The thinking here was, with the quiet agreement of the EU member states to allow any person to be able to live, work and settle in any other EU country.
Under this "principle", an individual who moves to another country is legally entitled to the services and benefits of that country, including the right to vote. If enough people move to another country, they can vote to ensure that their wishes are maintained, even against the wishes of the "indigenous" population.'
do you remember the muppet outpouring of faux outrage when I used the term, in just the same way. God, such mouth foaming, just over a word.
EU citizens exercising their treaty right in another EU country have no right to vote in national elections, with the exception of Eire citizens who can vote in UK elections an anomaly which predates EU membership.
They can vote in local and EU elections and I think in Scottish elections but that a Scottish matter.
jogon said:
Zod said:
n the real world, unlike UKIP, Syriza led in every poll.
What happened in the last two by elections and European elections?Greece has ended the traditional 2 party system will we be next.
We have polls; UKIP is in third. Greece had polls; Syriza was consistently in first.
allergictocheese said:
Allies might not be allies forever. We know the US are protectionist politically, culturally and in commerce. From a strategic viewpoint it's unwise to rely on one partner for something so vital. Why should the US control and benefit from a sole source of Worldwide GPS? It's anti -competetive, discourages technological advancement and invokes an unhealthy reliance on an uncontrollable partner.
I agree with your post, except they're not our allies now, it's a myth. The 'special relationship' doesn't exist as most like to see it. The USA does what's in it's interest, which is not aligned with what is in our interest, and they're not interested in what's in our interest. Arguably they've done far more to consistently undermine the UK over the last 65 years than anyone else.Axionknight said:
Zod said:
You think UKIP is going to get the most votes in the GE?
We have polls; UKIP is in third. Greece had polls; Syriza was consistently in first.
Did he mention a time scale?We have polls; UKIP is in third. Greece had polls; Syriza was consistently in first.
Zod said:
Oh, silly me, I thought this year's general election was significant. So UKIP needs longer than Syriza, I see.
Of course they do since the party (Syriza) was only founded in 2012, and 2004 as an "alliance". That of course means they are also more succesful than the Tory party who have been established far longer than either UKIP or Syriza, since they polled 30.7% in 2001, 31.7% in 2005 and only managed 36.1% and no clear majority in 2010 (I voted for them) despite thirteen years of Labour mismanagement.
Zod said:
our logic escapes me. Syriza was founded more recently than UKIP and is now in power, but UKIP needs longer.Why? How long? Another five years? Ten?
Do I have a crystal ball? No. Maybe they'll never be in power, maybe one day they will, garnering votes is no easy thing, and turning that into seats is even harder, you're obviously a clever bloke and understand that.No comment on them out performing the Tories? I notice you ignored my comment about Heath the liar too.
Edited by Axionknight on Tuesday 27th January 11:42
Axionknight said:
Zod said:
our logic escapes me. Syriza was founded more recently than UKIP and is now in power, but UKIP needs longer.Why? How long? Another five years? Ten?
Do I have a crystal ball? No. Maybe they'll never be in power, maybe one day they will, garnering votes is no easy thing, and turning that into seats is even harder, you're obviously a clever bloke and understand that.No comment on them out performing the Tories? I notice you ignored my comment about Heath the liar too.
Edited by Axionknight on Tuesday 27th January 11:42
Not sure how, other than at the 2014 Euro elections and two by-elections, UKIP is outperforming the Tories. The opinion polls say not.
Zod said:
Axionknight said:
Zod said:
our logic escapes me. Syriza was founded more recently than UKIP and is now in power, but UKIP needs longer.Why? How long? Another five years? Ten?
Do I have a crystal ball? No. Maybe they'll never be in power, maybe one day they will, garnering votes is no easy thing, and turning that into seats is even harder, you're obviously a clever bloke and understand that.No comment on them out performing the Tories? I notice you ignored my comment about Heath the liar too.
Edited by Axionknight on Tuesday 27th January 11:42
Not sure how, other than at the 2014 Euro elections and two by-elections, UKIP is outperforming the Tories. The opinion polls say not.
A year and half ago nobody believed UKIP could gain a single MP. Nobody said they'd win the Euros (some did say they would be close again).
This coming GE is absolutely unpredictable. Sky this morning are predicting 10 LibDims and 2 UKIP. 2!!!
They really do need to poll some ordinary people. But if, like here, it is anything to go by, many are keeping mum. I know several who won't put their head above the parapet and come out clean that they will be voting Kipper. In one conversation at the local last week, a 'known' Tory voter who has changed his intentions (just a couple of us know) but won't let on, said he would still be putting up the board on his land (a Tory one!). His land is alongside a main route here. As the results come in he will be aghast, shocked, shake his head. Then go to bed laughing!!
A shock is coming. Wait and see!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff