UKIP - The Future - Volume 4
Discussion
ninjacost said:
every little helps ;-)http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/570952/Express-Newspapers-Chairman-Richard-Desmond-gives-1-3m-to-Ukip
Excellent news!Richard Desmond said:
Nigel Farage is not a PR man. He has given up the chance to earn himself millions of pounds and devoted himself to this job and this cause.
Cameron talks a good talk but we need someone at the centre of politics who will not only talk about the right issues but will follow them through.
To be fair to Desmond, he echoes the frustration expressed by many on here. He seems to be convinced that Farage is completely genuine.Cameron talks a good talk but we need someone at the centre of politics who will not only talk about the right issues but will follow them through.
Compare, and contrast Farage with Miliband. This is a link to a hilarious Miliband interview in 2011. It has gone viral this afternoon.
https://www.facebook.com/Jason.M00n/videos/1020646...
After watching this display of left wing honesty, integrity and sincerity you will wonder how anybody could be stupid enough to even consider voting for him.
However, stupid enough, they are.
Love the 'net:
'A bizarre new video shows a congregation of Pakistani Christians praying for Nigel Farage and Ukip in a bid to help them gain victory in the general election.'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/chris...
'A bizarre new video shows a congregation of Pakistani Christians praying for Nigel Farage and Ukip in a bid to help them gain victory in the general election.'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/chris...
Guam said:
Where are the usual suspects who were banging on about policies six months ago?
Plenty there for them to get their teeth into and yet the thread is noticeably absent their detailed analysis, of the document they were screaming for?
My concern is that in "policies for people" they say they'd negotiate a preferential trade deal with the EU but no details of what this would look like or how they'd achieve it with no free movement of people.Plenty there for them to get their teeth into and yet the thread is noticeably absent their detailed analysis, of the document they were screaming for?
In the manifesto I scrolled down to Brexit and it still doesn't really flesh this out. To me it seems to promise we'd have all the benefits of the EU (at a they say they'd negotiate a minimum a free trade agreement) with none of the drawbacks and the only explanation is because Britain is important to the EU.
Well yes it is but I'm just not convinced by that argument, I think they could just tell us to f
k off and trade elsewhere with no preference to the UK.OTOH I've been impressed with UKIP in recent weeks, less of the controversy and they're growing as a party into a solid contender. I don't agree with them on so many areas and could never see myself voting purple, but it's hard not to be impressed with their progression in such a short space of time.
Guam said:
Where are the usual suspects who were banging on about policies six months ago?
Plenty there for them to get their teeth into and yet the thread is noticeably absent their detailed analysis, of the document they were screaming for?
Only one thing worse than being talked about. My apologies, I have been away on business. In fact I haven't even had time to go through any of the manifestos in any detail. Plenty there for them to get their teeth into and yet the thread is noticeably absent their detailed analysis, of the document they were screaming for?
And I will be away after this evening for a few days relaxation.
From the highlights I have seen though, there did seem to be some big plums being pulled out of the hat. And all independently verified too.
Or not
FactCheck said:
CEBR has been asked to comment on the impact of selected policies here.
What they have not been asked to do is model the wider impact of Ukip’s biggest aspirations – pulling out of the EU and substantially cutting immigration. Both of these things could have a big effect on the future of the economy.
While it might be fair to say that Britain could save £9bn a year in EU membership fees, this is only one side of the equation. It does not take into account the potentially negative long-term economic effects of pulling out of Europe.
Selected policies only?What they have not been asked to do is model the wider impact of Ukip’s biggest aspirations – pulling out of the EU and substantially cutting immigration. Both of these things could have a big effect on the future of the economy.
While it might be fair to say that Britain could save £9bn a year in EU membership fees, this is only one side of the equation. It does not take into account the potentially negative long-term economic effects of pulling out of Europe.
Only considering the positive impact of leaving the EU and not considering the negative impact?
etc
This from the party of honesty & openness who are putting an end to all that political deception?
Imagine my surprise. So just £37bn pa to find to make the sums really add up
Edited by JustAnotherLogin on Thursday 16th April 22:16
JustAnotherLogin said:
Only one thing worse than being talked about. My apologies, I have been away on business. In fact I haven't even had time to go through any of the manifestos in any detail.
And I will be away after this evening for a few days relaxation.
From the highlights I have seen though, there did seem to be some big plums being pulled out of the hat. And all independently verified too.
Or not
fact check or fuced up?And I will be away after this evening for a few days relaxation.
From the highlights I have seen though, there did seem to be some big plums being pulled out of the hat. And all independently verified too.
Or not
FactCheck said:
CEBR has been asked to comment on the impact of selected policies here.
What they have not been asked to do is model the wider impact of Ukip’s biggest aspirations – pulling out of the EU and substantially cutting immigration. Both of these things could have a big effect on the future of the economy.
While it might be fair to say that Britain could save £9bn a year in EU membership fees, this is only one side of the equation. It does not take into account the potentially negative long-term economic effects of pulling out of Europe.[quote]
Selected policies only?
Only considering the positive impact of leaving the EU and not considering the negative impact?
etc
This from the party of honesty & openness who are putting an end to all that political deception?
Imagine my surprise. So just £37bn pa to find to make the sums really add up
What they have not been asked to do is model the wider impact of Ukip’s biggest aspirations – pulling out of the EU and substantially cutting immigration. Both of these things could have a big effect on the future of the economy.
While it might be fair to say that Britain could save £9bn a year in EU membership fees, this is only one side of the equation. It does not take into account the potentially negative long-term economic effects of pulling out of Europe.[quote]
Selected policies only?
Only considering the positive impact of leaving the EU and not considering the negative impact?
etc
This from the party of honesty & openness who are putting an end to all that political deception?
Imagine my surprise. So just £37bn pa to find to make the sums really add up
'could'
'potentially'
NicD said:
fact check or fuced up?
'could'
'potentially'
You have to be pretty biased not to realise that there is a reason the independent check was asked not to look at certain aspects of the UKIP move.'could'
'potentially'
Hell even the SNPs manifesto can be made to add up if you add up all the savings and don't take into account he negative impact of raising taxes through the roof or borrowing
JustAnotherLogin said:
NicD said:
fact check or fuced up?
'could'
'potentially'
You have to be pretty biased not to realise that there is a reason the independent check was asked not to look at certain aspects of the UKIP move.'could'
'potentially'
Hell even the SNPs manifesto can be made to add up if you add up all the savings and don't take into account he negative impact of raising taxes through the roof or borrowing
And I am not privvy to the facts behind your assertions
NicD said:
They are unknowable, just calling someone 'independent' doesn't give them divine powers.
And I am not privvy to the facts behind your assertions
Well in truth they are not independent of course. UKIP commissioned them and paid for them. So I doubt they are especially biased against UKIPAnd I am not privvy to the facts behind your assertions
And the facts are highlighted in the CEBR report that UKIP paid for and UKIP have published. See for example section 3.1 bullet 3:
this report does not comment on the change to EU policies that could occur as a result of Britain exing the European Union (Brexit) or any changes due to devolution from the EU.
or bullet 4
“withdrawal from the EU would leave a policy vacuum which the Government would have to ll in order to avoid certain regions and sector losing out. How it chose to do so would have important implicaons for the scal and broader economic consequences of withdrawal”
Nice of them to ensure Vicky Pryce (remember her?) has some money to pay her fines though
JustAnotherLogin said:
NicD said:
They are unknowable, just calling someone 'independent' doesn't give them divine powers.
And I am not privvy to the facts behind your assertions
Well in truth they are not independent of course. UKIP commissioned them and paid for them. So I doubt they are especially biased against UKIPAnd I am not privvy to the facts behind your assertions
And the facts are highlighted in the CEBR report that UKIP paid for and UKIP have published. See for example section 3.1 bullet 3:
this report does not comment on the change to EU policies that could occur as a result of Britain exi?ng the European Union (Brexit) or any changes due to devolution from the EU.
or bullet 4
“withdrawal from the EU would leave a policy vacuum which the Government would have to ?ll in order to avoid certain regions and sector losing out. How it chose to do so would have important implica?ons for the ?scal and broader economic consequences of withdrawal”
Well it all depends upon how people interpret those comments.
Policy vacuum? Not really sure about that. We are where we are with the business of running things and things will carry on carrying on. It could be that some , probably a fair bit of policy originally driven by EU is fit for purpose, that doesn't just vanish. Neither does the policy that ultimately we wish to change or remove. That's one of the things that will take time and expense to decide what is right for the UK and enact the changes.
That leads us into the issue that it's not all gains and there will be some expense, but until that work has been done then we don't know the overall effect.
On the wider fiscal issue and trade etc, there have been many studies which show positive and negative results based on various scenarios. As usual the antis automatically assume that any unknowns will always impact negatively, yet UKIP is often accused of negative campaigning and attitudes. Such one eyed approaches are repetitive and tiresome. The path would be difficult no one denies that.
Policy vacuum? Not really sure about that. We are where we are with the business of running things and things will carry on carrying on. It could be that some , probably a fair bit of policy originally driven by EU is fit for purpose, that doesn't just vanish. Neither does the policy that ultimately we wish to change or remove. That's one of the things that will take time and expense to decide what is right for the UK and enact the changes.
That leads us into the issue that it's not all gains and there will be some expense, but until that work has been done then we don't know the overall effect.
On the wider fiscal issue and trade etc, there have been many studies which show positive and negative results based on various scenarios. As usual the antis automatically assume that any unknowns will always impact negatively, yet UKIP is often accused of negative campaigning and attitudes. Such one eyed approaches are repetitive and tiresome. The path would be difficult no one denies that.
FiF said:
On the wider fiscal issue and trade etc, there have been many studies which show positive and negative results based on various scenarios. As usual the antis automatically assume that any unknowns will always impact negatively, yet UKIP is often accused of negative campaigning and attitudes. Such one eyed approaches are repetitive and tiresome. The path would be difficult no one denies that.
But what is surely wrong is for UKIP to ask the CEBR to build in the positives (which they have done by including the savings in payments to EU etc); but to exclude the negatives (which they have also done by specifically excluding any consideration of loss of industry to the EU, cost of tariffs etc). Whilst all the while claiming that their numbers are independently verifiedComplete con
Scuffers said:
After last night, I truly hope the wider electorate have a better grasp on reality than the audience last night, if not, we are shurley f**ked!
I wasn't surprised Nigel turned on the audience last night, it was quite clear that even though Dimbleby quickly put him straight he'd achieved his objective which was to appeal to those at home who believe all this LibLabCon conspiracy BBC bias McCarthyism nonsense. Luckily Farage is ever appealing to a narrowing section of the disaffected, it's quite clear he's taken the paranoia and conspiracy schtick too far and whilst it might appeal to his core his end game is going to be a strong cabal of crypto fascists and conspiracy nut jobs - which is where he was 3 years ago. Even the tacit support of Desmond now (an absolute disgrace of a man) I think Farage and UKIP will fall away to nothing before May 7th
FiF said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Complete con
Yes you are with your carefully selected quote. Shame om you. Yes that is with a carefully selected quote on my part. This is because not going to dignify anything you write with a reply. Bye.
Careful or you will lose your reputation for independent unthinking without bias towards UKIP
JustAnotherLogin said:
FiF said:
On the wider fiscal issue and trade etc, there have been many studies which show positive and negative results based on various scenarios. As usual the antis automatically assume that any unknowns will always impact negatively, yet UKIP is often accused of negative campaigning and attitudes. Such one eyed approaches are repetitive and tiresome. The path would be difficult no one denies that.
But what is surely wrong is for UKIP to ask the CEBR to build in the positives (which they have done by including the savings in payments to EU etc); but to exclude the negatives (which they have also done by specifically excluding any consideration of loss of industry to the EU, cost of tariffs etc). Whilst all the while claiming that their numbers are independently verifiedComplete con
We know what the payments to the EU are, so we can say with certainty what the savings will be. We don't know if an exit would have any costs.
I can tell you with certainty that EU compliance currently costs my company at least 5% of running costs. And that doesn't include "green" energy surcharges.
JustAnotherLogin said:
FiF said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Complete con
Yes you are with your carefully selected quote. Shame om you. Yes that is with a carefully selected quote on my part. This is because not going to dignify anything you write with a reply. Bye.
Careful or you will lose your reputation for independent unthinking without bias towards UKIP
End.
FiF said:
Let's make this clear. I have no problem with criticising UKIP or not as the case may be. The problem I have is with you. Several times now have read something you have written and thought that's interesting didn't know that. Go out to find more background for my own education only to discover someone, at best, being economical with the actualité.
End.
Go on, tell me what I am not being accurate about. End.
Guam said:
WTF, I seriously hope this not true, if it is what the hell are they thinking?
A grand a day to give away money we dont have.
Dear god I hope its actually bks!
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/571066/Overseas-a...
Yes I know, it's tragic that a mainstream Daily newspaper run by a xenophobic pornographer with an obsession for conspiracy has become the mouth piece for UKIP.A grand a day to give away money we dont have.
Dear god I hope its actually b
ks!http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/571066/Overseas-a...
But no surprise.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff