UKIP - The Future - Volume 4

Author
Discussion

TKF

6,232 posts

234 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
wolves_wanderer said:
Wow, I think we've reached peak kipper!
Terminal kipper?

TKF

6,232 posts

234 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
mrpurple said:
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.
Yeah the media totally made him into a BNP supporting anti-semite. Naughty media!!

Interesting that he was suspended on May 1st but still appeared on the ballot paper as a UKIP candidate as it was too late to cancel. And got 6000 votes! I'm not saying that makes some UKIP voters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
TKF said:
mrpurple said:
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.
Yeah the media totally made him into a BNP supporting anti-semite. Naughty media!!

Interesting that he was suspended on May 1st but still appeared on the ballot paper as a UKIP candidate as it was too late to cancel. And got 6000 votes! I'm not saying that makes some UKIP voters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
And just how many voters knew? Did you? I am not saying that makes some posters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.

mrpurple

2,624 posts

187 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
s2art said:
TKF said:
mrpurple said:
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.
Yeah the media totally made him into a BNP supporting anti-semite. Naughty media!!

Interesting that he was suspended on May 1st but still appeared on the ballot paper as a UKIP candidate as it was too late to cancel. And got 6000 votes! I'm not saying that makes some UKIP voters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
And just how many voters knew? Did you? I am not saying that makes some posters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
So we are about to get into another bout of trying to prove which party has got the most nasty / weird / obnoxious etc etc .... and some wonder why sensible debate has all but disappeared from this forum!!!!!!

TKF

6,232 posts

234 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
s2art said:
TKF said:
mrpurple said:
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.
Yeah the media totally made him into a BNP supporting anti-semite. Naughty media!!

Interesting that he was suspended on May 1st but still appeared on the ballot paper as a UKIP candidate as it was too late to cancel. And got 6000 votes! I'm not saying that makes some UKIP voters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
And just how many voters knew? Did you? I am not saying that makes some posters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
True I suppose it's not like it was reported in the media in the week before the election here, here, here, here or here. It's totally unfair to expect people to know anything about the candidate they're about to vote for.

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
mrpurple said:
TKF said:
rohrl said:
Has this been posted yet?

http://www.channel4.com/news/meet-the-national-soc...

Jack Sen, UKIP's general election candidate for Lancashire West, has come out as a Nazi. He says he's an admirer of Oswald Mosley and that UKIP, from which he resigned yesterday, has been taken over by "Jewish special interest groups".

Sen said "I know the way I think and it might be anti-Semitic, I'm not sure."

Sounds like a nice guy...
A post completely glossed over by Kippers. Surprise surprise. Just one of those rare bad eggs I suppose.

Anyway, back on topic, Hooray for UKIP!
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.

So having got it wrong before will CMD reduce immigration to 10's of thousands this time?
Who knows, but it must be fundamentally the right objective. Do you criticise him for having that as an objective?

We all know that the problem lies with too much free movement but its specious to blame him for that problem, its roots lie with Blair, Brown & co & legally it can't be corrected overnight either - as you well know. CMD is just trying to find a sensible solution for it but we are where we are, wouldn't start from here etc. etc... Meanwhile there is no point in ignoring the realities of life. Question is, how do we achieve the best possible position moving forward from this point?

IMO (and that of many others) the (kneejerk) Kipper solution of just pulling up the drawbridge overnight is neither practical nor sensible. We need something better that will move us to the right position on a long term basis. It is also undoubtedly the case that we need some immigration. We find ourselves having to run a two tier system with different rules for EU & non EU as an obvious by-product of EU membership. Simplistically that's easily solved by just removing ourselves from the EU but even the Chief Kipper never really discusses all the probable side effects of that - it ain't a simple thing in reality.

The solution CMD is trying to reach clearly involves setting the bar much higher in terms of the economic viability of anyone coming here. i.e. migrants will have to be able to sustain themselves for much, much longer without any kind of assistance or ability to draw on public services. If we do that then net migration will undoubtedly fall because there are only ever going to be a finite number of jobs that migrants can come and do. As they get harder to acquire/find so it will become harder and less attractive for people to come here. Its not a bad solution if we can make it work and, in theory it will largely self regulate according to the health of our economy. When the thing is growing it will draw in the necessary labour. When its contracting then migrants are more likely to have to leave if they have no work.



mrpurple

2,624 posts

187 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
TKF said:
s2art said:
TKF said:
mrpurple said:
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.
Yeah the media totally made him into a BNP supporting anti-semite. Naughty media!!

Interesting that he was suspended on May 1st but still appeared on the ballot paper as a UKIP candidate as it was too late to cancel. And got 6000 votes! I'm not saying that makes some UKIP voters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
And just how many voters knew? Did you? I am not saying that makes some posters mince thick, I'll leave that for others to decide.
True I suppose it's not like it was reported in the media in the week before the election here, here, here, here or here. It's totally unfair to expect people to know anything about the candidate they're about to vote for.
Clearly UKIP have struck some people's nerves much more than others.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

182 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
TKF said:
True I suppose it's not like it was reported in the media in the week before the election here, here, here, here or here. It's totally unfair to expect people to know anything about the candidate they're about to vote for.
AFTER the event wisdom! Previously, most folks were focused on other things, like having their time consumed by going to work and earning a crust. You obviously have a surfeit of time to seek out these things for whatever reason and be obsessively pedantic about it. Meantime thousands of others have a crust to earn and little surplus time for such pursuits. They probably caught some of our media's extensive coverage of NF in the run up to May 7th and that could be all they needed to vote firstly for UKIP and irrespective of their local man.

I used to actually admire some of the very public figures in the UK Political and Media scenes. That was until the excrement hit the circulatory ventilation device for more than one of two. Who knew? I didn't but some did.

mrpurple

2,624 posts

187 months

Thursday 21st May 2015
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
mrpurple said:
TKF said:
rohrl said:
Has this been posted yet?

http://www.channel4.com/news/meet-the-national-soc...

Jack Sen, UKIP's general election candidate for Lancashire West, has come out as a Nazi. He says he's an admirer of Oswald Mosley and that UKIP, from which he resigned yesterday, has been taken over by "Jewish special interest groups".

Sen said "I know the way I think and it might be anti-Semitic, I'm not sure."

Sounds like a nice guy...
A post completely glossed over by Kippers. Surprise surprise. Just one of those rare bad eggs I suppose.

Anyway, back on topic, Hooray for UKIP!
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.

So having got it wrong before will CMD reduce immigration to 10's of thousands this time?
Who knows, but it must be fundamentally the right objective. Do you criticise him for having that as an objective?

We all know that the problem lies with too much free movement but its specious to blame him for that problem, its roots lie with Blair, Brown & co & legally it can't be corrected overnight either - as you well know. CMD is just trying to find a sensible solution for it but we are where we are, wouldn't start from here etc. etc... Meanwhile there is no point in ignoring the realities of life. Question is, how do we achieve the best possible position moving forward from this point?

IMO (and that of many others) the (kneejerk) Kipper solution of just pulling up the drawbridge overnight is neither practical nor sensible. We need something better that will move us to the right position on a long term basis. It is also undoubtedly the case that we need some immigration. We find ourselves having to run a two tier system with different rules for EU & non EU as an obvious by-product of EU membership. Simplistically that's easily solved by just removing ourselves from the EU but even the Chief Kipper never really discusses all the probable side effects of that - it ain't a simple thing in reality.

The solution CMD is trying to reach clearly involves setting the bar much higher in terms of the economic viability of anyone coming here. i.e. migrants will have to be able to sustain themselves for much, much longer without any kind of assistance or ability to draw on public services. If we do that then net migration will undoubtedly fall because there are only ever going to be a finite number of jobs that migrants can come and do. As they get harder to acquire/find so it will become harder and less attractive for people to come here. Its not a bad solution if we can make it work and, in theory it will largely self regulate according to the health of our economy. When the thing is growing it will draw in the necessary labour. When its contracting then migrants are more likely to have to leave if they have no work.
I have a lot of respect for your opinions but I must say I am surprised by your apparent lack of understanding: (deliberate perhaps?)

I don't care what the level is as long as it is controlled, the infrastructure is in place, and most importantly migrants come in to fill positions that we can not fill internally... and if that means upsetting some of the workshy by use of stick rather than carrot the so be it.

I am not bothered by who is to blame..I am bothered by how immigration can be controlled all the time we are EU members... not pulling up the drawbridge ( a well worn strawman argument) EU / ROW should be totally irrelevant - we let in the best candidate to feel a genuine need and keep out those not needed.

Points system with health insurance a la Oz will go a very long way to resolve most of the problems IMO.... which we can't do all the time we are in the EU and no amount of pretend / faux or going through the motions of negotiating will provide the control I feel we need.

ps unfortunately my opinions are not helped by the fact I do not trust / like / respect CMD any more than you do NF.

ETA hows about this for a suggestion?

CMD forcefully and openly tells Brussels he wants to introduce Oz style immigration policy regardless of country of origin...he wants agreement by X date if not he will have referendum and recommend UK leaves..... IMO naive opinion he won't get it fully but he may get enough to make a difference and shoot UKIP's fox

getting a bit late (couple of ciders as well) so please excuse if I have typed an absolute crock of st.... by the same token I want recognition if CMD does this and it works wink

pps he could do worse than get Victoria Coren Mitchell into the negotiating team, brains, looks, sexy voice and one hell of a poker player I believe...... nitey nite byebye

Edited by mrpurple on Friday 22 May 00:02


Edited by mrpurple on Friday 22 May 00:14

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
mrpurple said:
Wombat3 said:
mrpurple said:
TKF said:
rohrl said:
Has this been posted yet?

http://www.channel4.com/news/meet-the-national-soc...

Jack Sen, UKIP's general election candidate for Lancashire West, has come out as a Nazi. He says he's an admirer of Oswald Mosley and that UKIP, from which he resigned yesterday, has been taken over by "Jewish special interest groups".

Sen said "I know the way I think and it might be anti-Semitic, I'm not sure."

Sounds like a nice guy...
A post completely glossed over by Kippers. Surprise surprise. Just one of those rare bad eggs I suppose.

Anyway, back on topic, Hooray for UKIP!
Round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows...are we really going back to the mudslinging comparisons once again? NF / UKIP are striking a few more nerves methinks, both on here and the media.

So having got it wrong before will CMD reduce immigration to 10's of thousands this time?
Who knows, but it must be fundamentally the right objective. Do you criticise him for having that as an objective?

We all know that the problem lies with too much free movement but its specious to blame him for that problem, its roots lie with Blair, Brown & co & legally it can't be corrected overnight either - as you well know. CMD is just trying to find a sensible solution for it but we are where we are, wouldn't start from here etc. etc... Meanwhile there is no point in ignoring the realities of life. Question is, how do we achieve the best possible position moving forward from this point?

IMO (and that of many others) the (kneejerk) Kipper solution of just pulling up the drawbridge overnight is neither practical nor sensible. We need something better that will move us to the right position on a long term basis. It is also undoubtedly the case that we need some immigration. We find ourselves having to run a two tier system with different rules for EU & non EU as an obvious by-product of EU membership. Simplistically that's easily solved by just removing ourselves from the EU but even the Chief Kipper never really discusses all the probable side effects of that - it ain't a simple thing in reality.

The solution CMD is trying to reach clearly involves setting the bar much higher in terms of the economic viability of anyone coming here. i.e. migrants will have to be able to sustain themselves for much, much longer without any kind of assistance or ability to draw on public services. If we do that then net migration will undoubtedly fall because there are only ever going to be a finite number of jobs that migrants can come and do. As they get harder to acquire/find so it will become harder and less attractive for people to come here. Its not a bad solution if we can make it work and, in theory it will largely self regulate according to the health of our economy. When the thing is growing it will draw in the necessary labour. When its contracting then migrants are more likely to have to leave if they have no work.
I have a lot of respect for your opinions but I must say I am surprised by your apparent lack of understanding: (deliberate perhaps?)

I don't care what the level is as long as it is controlled, the infrastructure is in place, and most importantly migrants come in to fill positions that we can not fill internally... and if that means upsetting some of the workshy by use of stick rather than carrot the so be it.

I am not bothered by who is to blame..I am bothered by how immigration can be controlled all the time we are EU members... not pulling up the drawbridge ( a well worn strawman argument) EU / ROW should be totally irrelevant - we let in the best candidate to feel a genuine need and keep out those not needed.

Points system with health insurance a la Oz will go a very long way to resolve most of the problems IMO.... which we can't do all the time we are in the EU and no amount of pretend / faux or going through the motions of negotiating will provide the control I feel we need.

ps unfortunately my opinions are not helped by the fact I do not trust / like / respect CMD any more than you do NF.

ETA hows about this for a suggestion?

CMD forcefully and openly tells Brussels he wants to introduce Oz style immigration policy regardless of country of origin...he wants agreement by X date if not he will have referendum and recommend UK leaves..... IMO naive opinion he won't get it fully but he may get enough to make a difference and shoot UKIP's fox

getting a bit late (couple of ciders as well) so please excuse if I have typed an absolute crock of st.... by the same token I want recognition if CMD does this and it works wink

pps he could do worse than get Victoria Coren Mitchell into the negotiating team, brains, looks, sexy voice and one hell of a poker player I believe...... nitey nite byebye
I am afraid what you are missing is the inextricable link between the freedom of movement of labour and the freedom of movement of capital across the EU. Its a link seldom mentioned but you really can't do one without the other and if you start restricting movement of capital then you open up a huge can of worms and other problems.

It is also simply not credible that the freedom of movement (of either) can be fully restricted within the EU because it would make the EU largely pointless (irrelevant whether you think that is a good or bad idea in itself). Assuming it is considered that there is a wider point and wider benefits to having the EU (aside from these two things) then freedom of movement of both capital and labour are fairly central to it.

An Australian style "points" system is incompatible with the basic concept of the EU in this respect. Whether you agree with that basic concept is another matter, but the incompatibility of that system with it is not in doubt. If there are specific tests you HAVE to pass in order to gain entry to another EU state then you do not have "freedom of movement", regardless of what those tests are.

The trick therefore is to make it (the flow of labour) much better self regulate and self adjust and that key to that would seem to be pretty much as I have described - in essence "set the bar much higher" in terms of whether it is an attractive proposition for an individual to migrate or not. If you do that you do not need any form of "tests" . With the right controls in place (and the removal of a lot of the safety nets) migrants will make their own decisions as to whether to come here (or indeed to go anywhere) and the system can be made to self regulate (in terms of the numbers and types of people that come).

Edited by Wombat3 on Friday 22 May 01:34

FiF

43,959 posts

250 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Aren't some getting freedom of movement confused with freedom and right to settle?

PRTVR

7,072 posts

220 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
I am afraid what you are missing is the inextricable link between the freedom of movement of labour and the freedom of movement of capital across the EU. Its a link seldom mentioned but you really can't do one without the other and if you start restricting movement of capital then you open up a huge can of worms and other problems.

It is also simply not credible that the freedom of movement (of either) can be fully restricted within the EU because it would make the EU largely pointless (irrelevant whether you think that is a good or bad idea in itself). Assuming it is considered that there is a wider point and wider benefits to having the EU (aside from these two things) then freedom of movement of both capital and labour are fairly central to it.

An Australian style "points" system is incompatible with the basic concept of the EU in this respect. Whether you agree with that basic concept is another matter, but the incompatibility of that system with it is not in doubt. If there are specific tests you HAVE to pass in order to gain entry to another EU state then you do not have "freedom of movement", regardless of what those tests are.



Edited by Wombat3 on Friday 22 May 01:34
But why does does it have to be linked? capital moves all over the world without the same connection to the movement of people, the only reason it is linked is to further the idea of a united states of Europe, could we not just have a common market, where goods are traded with reduced interference from government ?

Axionknight

8,505 posts

134 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
PRTVR said:
But why does does it have to be linked? capital moves all over the world without the same connection to the movement of people, the only reason it is linked is to further the idea of a united states of Europe, could we not just have a common market, where goods are traded with reduced interference from government ?
What was voted for, you mean? That sounds shamefully democratic. redcard

mrpurple

2,624 posts

187 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
PRTVR said:
Wombat3 said:
I am afraid what you are missing is the inextricable link between the freedom of movement of labour and the freedom of movement of capital across the EU. Its a link seldom mentioned but you really can't do one without the other and if you start restricting movement of capital then you open up a huge can of worms and other problems.

It is also simply not credible that the freedom of movement (of either) can be fully restricted within the EU because it would make the EU largely pointless (irrelevant whether you think that is a good or bad idea in itself). Assuming it is considered that there is a wider point and wider benefits to having the EU (aside from these two things) then freedom of movement of both capital and labour are fairly central to it.

An Australian style "points" system is incompatible with the basic concept of the EU in this respect. Whether you agree with that basic concept is another matter, but the incompatibility of that system with it is not in doubt. If there are specific tests you HAVE to pass in order to gain entry to another EU state then you do not have "freedom of movement", regardless of what those tests are.



Edited by Wombat3 on Friday 22 May 01:34
But why does does it have to be linked? capital moves all over the world without the same connection to the movement of people, the only reason it is linked is to further the idea of a united states of Europe, could we not just have a common market, where goods are traded with reduced interference from government ?
Nail on head...give that man a coconut.

I know it's been here before a few times but it is so relevant to this EU scam (common market) that I was about 6 months too young to vote for.

ps Womby - please stop using the ridiculous "drawbridge" term as it really only used by scaremongers and comes across as a bit dim just like the guy on QT that thinks 4 million voters are xxxxxxxxxxxxr's.

Off to devolved Manchester in a bitfor the Bank hols and so glad the train strike is cancelled.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

182 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
mrpurple said:
pps he could do worse than get Victoria Coren Mitchell into the negotiating team, brains, looks, sexy voice and one hell of a poker player I believe...... nitey nite byebye
Plus, fills her Bra most adequately. Gets my thumbsup ... thumbup

... wink

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
mrpurple said:
PRTVR said:
Wombat3 said:
I am afraid what you are missing is the inextricable link between the freedom of movement of labour and the freedom of movement of capital across the EU. Its a link seldom mentioned but you really can't do one without the other and if you start restricting movement of capital then you open up a huge can of worms and other problems.

It is also simply not credible that the freedom of movement (of either) can be fully restricted within the EU because it would make the EU largely pointless (irrelevant whether you think that is a good or bad idea in itself). Assuming it is considered that there is a wider point and wider benefits to having the EU (aside from these two things) then freedom of movement of both capital and labour are fairly central to it.

An Australian style "points" system is incompatible with the basic concept of the EU in this respect. Whether you agree with that basic concept is another matter, but the incompatibility of that system with it is not in doubt. If there are specific tests you HAVE to pass in order to gain entry to another EU state then you do not have "freedom of movement", regardless of what those tests are.



Edited by Wombat3 on Friday 22 May 01:34
But why does does it have to be linked? capital moves all over the world without the same connection to the movement of people, the only reason it is linked is to further the idea of a united states of Europe, could we not just have a common market, where goods are traded with reduced interference from government ?
Nail on head...give that man a coconut.

I know it's been here before a few times but it is so relevant to this EU scam (common market) that I was about 6 months too young to vote for.

ps Womby - please stop using the ridiculous "drawbridge" term as it really only used by scaremongers and comes across as a bit dim just like the guy on QT that thinks 4 million voters are xxxxxxxxxxxxr's.

Off to devolved Manchester in a bitfor the Bank hols and so glad the train strike is cancelled.
Re freedom of movement of capital. There are capital controls in effect all over the shop and they are introduced as and when governments feel like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

The whole point of the EU is to allow freedom of movement between member states.


PRTVR

7,072 posts

220 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
Re freedom of movement of capital. There are capital controls in effect all over the shop and they are introduced as and when governments feel like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

The whole point of the EU is to allow freedom of movement between member states.
But capital control can come in many forms, the EU proposed Tobin tax is one, I am sure in the future there will be more if the coffers become bare, free movement between states but you have to pay for it.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
Re freedom of movement of capital. There are capital controls in effect all over the shop and they are introduced as and when governments feel like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

The whole point of the EU is to allow freedom of movement between member states.
And it looks like the EU is on the wrong side of the argument for both free movement of people and capital. Basically UKIP have it right, there needs to be some control on free movement. In addition macroprudential controls on capital movement need to be implemented for the sake of stability.

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
PRTVR said:
Wombat3 said:
Re freedom of movement of capital. There are capital controls in effect all over the shop and they are introduced as and when governments feel like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

The whole point of the EU is to allow freedom of movement between member states.
But capital control can come in many forms, the EU proposed Tobin tax is one, I am sure in the future there will be more if the coffers become bare, free movement between states but you have to pay for it.
That seems very confused to me

WTF does a transaction tax (aimed at the boys in the city) have to do with freedom of movement of capital? I very much doubt there will be any such tax on the basic transfer of capital from one place to another within the EU. If there was then there is no longer freedom of movement of capital, much as a points based immigration system destroys the whole concept of freedom f movement of people/labour.

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
s2art said:
Wombat3 said:
Re freedom of movement of capital. There are capital controls in effect all over the shop and they are introduced as and when governments feel like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

The whole point of the EU is to allow freedom of movement between member states.
And it looks like the EU is on the wrong side of the argument for both free movement of people and capital. Basically UKIP have it right, there needs to be some control on free movement. In addition macroprudential controls on capital movement need to be implemented for the sake of stability.
UKIP only have it right if your basic belief is that we should leave the EU under all circumstances.

On the one hand there are immense benefits for functioning businesses and economies to be had from both freedom of movement of Capital and labour, but the system as it is now needs significant change to make it work. The labour part is probably the easy bit.

On the other hand, quite how you stop people moving their money out of places like Greece is another matter (and there is no doubt that the significant capital/asset flight from Greece is not helping in that instance). Much as we need changes to the freedom of movement of labour, there may well have to be some changes made to help situations like that.

Not easy to do, but nor is it impossible & if it can be made to work the benefits are significant so we should not just write the whole thing off just because its not working right now.