Breaking the mould - it took 100 years!

[MrGongGong]

I support the party because I passionately believe in leaving people to live their lives how ever they want, so long as they don't harm others; and minimal government and a minimum state is vital to that. The UKIP is the only party that does not seek to 'control how people are'.
.

That's all very well
BUT they don't stand for that
A simple look about finds this

http://the-libertarian.co.uk/ukip-issue-gagging-order-over-woolwich/

and

http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2014/03/06/19735/ukip_tires_to_shut_down_comedy_tour

and so on

Personally I don't trust dodgy ex stockbrokers or capitalist moguls to look after the most vulnerable in our society (or even safeguard our cheese !)

Go off grid if you want BUT don't expect to be protected when something bad happens or you need a hospital, police etc etc

Unfettered capitalism DOES harm others particularly the most vulnerable
The alternative isn't necessarily "socialism" (you know there are more types of music that "Classical" and "Pop")

For all the red faced bluster the kippers want to control us just like the rest of em.

[Beef Oven!]

That's all very well............don't expect to be protected when something bad happens or you need a hospital, police etc etc

UKIP BANS HOSPITALS!

Now who's a scare-monger!!!?

[ahinton]

The EU is overplayed by both the UKIP and the media.

I support the party because I passionately believe in leaving people to live their lives how ever they want, so long as they don't harm others; and minimal government and a minimum state is vital to that. The UKIP is the only party that does not seek to 'control how people are'.

Of course the EU as it has become, is the most distressing, vulgar example of undemocratic state-control, so it'll figure high in my mind. I do not throw around terms like 'fascist' as some forumites do, but to me, the EU is an undemocratic fascist state.

Well, at least you make your views clear here.

That said, is it really reasonable to suggest that "both UKIP and the media" "overplay" EU given the level and extent of its importance? In so asking, I am not suggesting that EU is perfect by any means, but it is there and it covers 28 states with a substantial nine-figure total population, so to seek to downplay it or ignore it would surely be to sacrifice some credibility, wouldn't it?

I understand why you support UKIP but must challenge your reasoning on the grounds that, whilst it might leave you and others to live their lives however they want, it will no more do that for the majority of Britian's population than will any other of the country's political parties and it would be woefully disingenuous even to imagine, let alone claim, otherwise. UKIP doesn't seek to "control how peopole are?" Maybe not, but then rmuch the same can reasonably be said of the other political parties. What I think you really mean here (but by all means correct me if I'm wrong on this) is that, in your view, it doesn't seek to control how people live their lives, yet I suspect that, at the very least, many nationals of other EU and non-EU countries currently living in Britain would likely disagree with you on this.

You claim not to throw around terms like "fascist" as you complain that others do here, yet in the same sentence you do just that by describing EU as "an undemocratic fascist state"! It's not even a "state" in any case; it's a union of 28 of them (so far), a total that might rise to at leat 30 if Scotland, England and Wales become independent from one another as EU members and more still whenever other states join (and there's no shortage of those that seek to do so).

[MrGongGong]

UKIP BANS HOSPITALS!

Now who's a scare-monger!!!?

Naked Capitalism of the kind they stand for will destroy many things that the less well off rely on

The point is that YOU can get rid of the state, go and live in the woods in the Boondocks if you like

[Anna]

I had a look at UKIP's local elections manifesto. It's a bit light on detail. Main points are: lower council tax for all; reduction of tax and business costs; no to windfarms, solar farms and drop the EU Landfill Directive and restore weekly bin collections; more police; more grammar schools; referendums on all planning and service; no mass house building. Most of it was taken up by crime statistics relating to Romanians and immigration. Their general election manifesto will be launched later this year (don't know if anyone read the 2010 manifesto - described as drivel by Farage and ordered to be shredded, it had some very quaint proposals such as returning the circle line to a complete circle, painting trains in their original livery colours and a strict dress code for concert and theatre goers)

However, what is scary is this. Farage's hope of winning seats in future elections are likely to have been boosted by doubling its MEPs in Brussels, as they will be eligible for millions of pounds in funding from the EU over the course of a parliament. In total, the 24 MEPs could claim a maximum of around £44m in salaries, allowances and staffing costs over the next five years if their attendance is exemplary, according to calculations based on figures from OpenEurope.

They will be allowed, and perhaps even expected, to donate some of their £78,000-a-year wages to Ukip for campaigning. And while they are not meant to use expenditure allowances for party business, the extra money for staffing and offices is likely to help the MEPs to professionalise their political operation.

I think if you scratch the surface of the so called cheery cheeky chappie there is something very nasty indeed lurking underneath.

Edit: An interview with Alan Sked, the original founder of UKIP is enlightening

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster

[ahinton]

I had a look at UKIP's local elections manifesto. It's a bit light on detail.

That's the problem (or at least one of them).

Main points are: lower council tax for all

Great, but funded by what?

reduction of tax and business costs

Again, great, but funded by what?

no to windfarms

With a few exceptions, perhaps not such a bad thing...

solar farms

Why? And would UKIP replace its subsidies for wind and solar farms with help for individuals wanting to have their own installations? - after all, they're supposed to be all for helping the individual, aren't they? But that's not clarified.

and drop the EU Landfill Directive and restore weekly bin collections

And replace the former with what and fund those extra refuse collections (in those places that, unlike where I am, such collections are less frequent) from what?

more police

Paid for by what? - and would this in any case be guaranteed always to let everyone live as they want to or would it be intended mainly to frighten the Romanians, Bulgarian, newly independent Scots or other nasty immigrants into considering their position as residents of England?

more grammar schools

Again, funded how?

referendums on all planning and service

Held by whom, with what right of appeal by whom and why? after all, UKIP wants UK (if there is one) out of EU without any referendum, so it would seem to want referenda for some things but not others!

no mass house building

So where will people live? OK, I accept that there's a whole lot of property that could be renovated for housing at somewhat less cost than might be involved in having to purchase land on which to build new homes but, unless that's specifically and clearly what they advocate (which also seems unclear), such a policy seems to be of little use.

Most of it was taken up by crime statistics relating to Romanians and immigration.

Neither of which are "policies".

Their general election manifesto will be launched later this year (don't know if anyone read the 2010 manifesto - described as drivel by Farage and ordered to be shredded

Which doesn't give much confidence in the new one, does it?!

it had some very quaint proposals such as returning the circle line to a complete circle, painting trains in their original livery colours and a strict dress code for concert and theatre goers)

What? UKIP have not only heard of such things as concerts and theatres but include provisions for them (hgowever unhelpful and irrelevant) in their manifesto? I'm going to vote UKIP, then!

Not.

However, what is scary is this. Farage's hope of winning seats in future elections are likely to have been boosted by doubling its MEPs in Brussels, as they will be eligible for millions of pounds in funding from the EU over the course of a parliament. In total, the 24 MEPs could claim a maximum of around £44m in salaries, allowances and staffing costs over the next five years if their attendance is exemplary, according to calculations based on figures from OpenEurope.

They will be allowed, and perhaps even expected, to donate some of their £78,000-a-year wages to Ukip for campaigning. And while they are not meant to use expenditure allowances for party business, the extra money for staffing and offices is likely to help the MEPs to professionalise their political operation.

Fair comment, but is this worse than it is for any of the other parties that would presumably benefit similarly?

I think if you scratch the surface of the so called cheery cheeky chappie there is something very nasty indeed lurking underneath.

If I were to scratch his surface I'd be concerned as to whether there'd be an NHS hospital upon whose services I could call to deal with any infection that I might thereby sustain (or, failing that, whether treatment for it would be convered under my PHI policy)...

[MrGongGong]

Good points
Though it does seem to me (and others) that there really isn't much point in having "policies" , "manifestos" or anything that suggests that if one votes for a particular person they will actually DO what they propose.
So all we are asked to do is to vote for the "character" that we would like to be in the next series !
Good news for Boris, Nige and would probably be good news for Denis Skinner if he was planning to continue.

[ahinton]

Good points
Though it does seem to me (and others) that there really isn't much point in having "policies" , "manifestos" or anything that suggests that if one votes for a particular person they will actually DO what they propose.
So all we are asked to do is to vote for the "character" that we would like to be in the next series !
Good news for Boris, Nige and would probably be good news for Denis Skinner if he was planning to continue.

Fair comment, of course, except that if other parties are prepared to go the sufficient trouble at least to formulate and publish reasonably comprehensive manifestos so that the electorate can stand some chance of making its mind up about them even if the contents turn out in the end to include lies and fals promises whereas UKIP thinks that it can wing it to the extent of issuing a handful of bland and unsupported claims while being seen to concentrate most of its energies on haranguing whoever might listen to it about the perils of continued British EU membership and of rampant immigration into Britain, its carelessness and arrogance will seem pretty transparent to most and will do it few if any favours.

[Beef Oven!]

Naked Capitalism of the kind they stand for will destroy many things that the less well off rely on

You are being hysterical - pack it in.

[MrGongGong]

You are being hysterical - pack it in.

You trust a man with a very dodgy past far too much IMV

Actually what I said is based on personal experience of what is happening NOW the Kipper vision is much more extreme than Dave's

Sadly Geoffrey Clark's views are much more widespread than one might imagine.

Fair comment, of course, except that if other parties are prepared to go the sufficient trouble at least to formulate and publish reasonably comprehensive manifestos so that the electorate can stand some chance of making its mind up about them even if the contents turn out in the end to include lies and fals promises whereas UKIP thinks that it can wing it to the extent of issuing a handful of bland and unsupported claims while being seen to concentrate most of its energies on haranguing whoever might listen to it about the perils of continued British EU membership and of rampant immigration into Britain, its carelessness and arrogance will seem pretty transparent to most and will do it few if any favours.

Indeed
It would be nice to think that they had actually bothered to spend 5 minutes thinking about it I agree !

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Re ahinton's Post 51, I'm sure was intended this way, but on first reading, it gives the impression that Anna is responsible for the views of UKIP. A more detailed study shows this not to be the case, so let's not tar poor Anna with this brush. :smiley:

[ahinton]

Re ahinton's Post 51, I'm sure was intended this way, but on first reading, it gives the impression that Anna is responsible for the views of UKIP. A more detailed study shows this not to be the case, so let's not tar poor Anna with this brush. :smiley:

Well, I'm certainly not doing that; I read her post as displaying grave reservastions about what she perceives - quite rightly, I think - as the comparative emptiness of UKIP's published policies and the undue emphasis that it appears to place upon (a) having UK secede from EU without subjecting such a move to a referendum and (b) seemingly disproportionate and distastefully selective obsessions about immigration into UK.

[Serial_Apologist]

Well, I'm certinly not doing that; I read her post as displaying grave reservastions about what she perceives - quite rightly, I think - as the comparative emptiness of UKIP's published policies and the undue emphasis that it appears to place upon (a) having UK secede from EU without subjecting such a move to a referendum and (b) seemingly disproportionate and distastefully selective obsessions about immigration into UK.

Of course, the other 3 main parties - 4 if one adds the Greens - aren't affected by the EU issue in the light of Scotland and/or Wales going independent, since all 4 are in favour of EU membership. I must admit, I hadn't considered this before.

[ahinton]

Of course, the other 3 main parties - 4 if one adds the Greens - aren't affected by the EU issue in the light of Scotland and/or Wales going independent, since all 4 are in favour of EU membership. I must admit, I hadn't considered this before.

Well, I cannot help but be duly conscious of the fact that what any party might claim to feel about the virtues or perils of continued UK EU membership is only relevant as long as UK remains in existence and can continue or terminate that membership.

[Anna]

I'm so glad no-one thought I was a Farageista!! <unavailable horror emoticom>
In fact, as I mentioned prior to the election, I voted Plaid. It was a tactical vote as it seemed certain UKIP or perhaps (but it seermed unlikely) Labour would gain a second seat, and Plaid would lose theirs. In the end there was no change here, (1 Con, 1 Lab, 1 UKIP and 1 Plaid) What is worrying, and having studied the results from each area, Labour only pipped the Kippers by 0.2% and in the Valleys of S. Wales, the traditional Labout stronghold, a miserly turnout of 27% - where are the party faithfuls - and Kippers nearly taking it in Merthyr and Blaina. Even The Vale of Glamorgan - the most Conservative place on earth - voted them into first place.

(As to the B*P vote collapsing and N. Griffin losing his Manchester seat, those votes went to UKIP and, on Sunday morning, roving reporter on tv in Essex asking why people had voted for them lots said it was because B*P weren't standing in their area, others seemed to have no idea why they voted but that it would now end immigration immediately. Honestly I do despair of some people.)