Will UKIP win its first seat in parliament tonight?

Mr Jack said:
UKIP seem to have handled the matter well; certainly better than the LibDems managed with Rennard. You get skeezeballs in every party, it matters more that the party deals with the matter well than it avoids it completely.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree with you more

anything I don't mind said:
The damage is done, mission successful, job done, now she can crawl back to labour and probably get a promotion for her hard work playing a victim. As for Bird, lets just hope they don't gave in to pressure from the left on this one.
Click to expand...

Honestly this won't damage UKIP at all. As Mr Jack said they handled it well and actually have been investigated by an external 3rd party, coupled with how quiet the 3 main parties have been on this because they know they'd be hypocrites to make hey on this.
 
elmarko said:
From the article you linked.

"If the true numbers were revealed, the Little Englanders and xenophobes would come out in force about the evils of immigration. "
Click to expand...

So basically, instead of the 65m population official figures based on the 2001 census would have the UK at, more pragmatic estimates based on food consumption in this country would have the UK population at 77m. This is what I've been saying for a few years now - that the real population of the UK is much higher than what the establishment is saying it is.

As for your comment about Little Englanders and Xenophobes, here's the full statement:

If the true numbers were revealed, the Little Englanders and xenophobes would come out in force about the evils of immigration. But that's what made America great in the 19th century, and it's a driving force of our economy right now. It's also anti-inflationary.
Click to expand...

Firstly, would you not agree that there's a bit of a difference between 19th century USA and 21st century Britain - to state the obvious, they have more space there - even now! There was much mirth from the mainstream media this week when Farage appearing to blame immigration for a traffic jam on the M4, but if you look at what he actually said he was simply stating the obvious. Surely even the most blinkered ultra-liberal would have to agree that more people using the roads means more congestion on those roads. Secondly is the interesting point is about it being anti-inflationary - specifically (if you look later in the article) about keeping wage costs down. I said interesting because a few of the anti-UKIPpers keep trying to argue that immigration doesn't negatively impact wages, which makes no sense whatsoever to anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of economics.
 
robgmun said:
It's all a bit odd, and very much her word against his at this moment, he even claims they actually had a relationship, if he can prove that (texts, phone calls, n0rty photos) then he needs to come out with it pretty sharpish!

Still it's a laughably small deal compared to what the 3 main parties have been caught doing, especially if this pedo scandal explodes.


And if this is best a Labour plant can do then UKIP has nothing to worry about ;)
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...s-prove-relationship-with-Natasha-Bolter.html

In a series of texts passed to The Telegraph Ms Bolter says "I love u and miss u and think u r sort of perfect", while in another she says that her life was a "meaningless void" before she met him.

Throughout the dozens of text messages she calls him "Bird" as a nickname and in one asks if he is "cool with me leaving suitcase here and coming home with you".

Ms Bolter was unavailable to comment about the apparent discrepancy between the texts and her account of events.
Click to expand...

x66tPJV.jpg



Well well well!
 
OldCoals said:
Well well well!
Click to expand...

More embarrassed for them both for the grammar in those texts if they're real.

I'll await comment from her before passing judgement; if she really did send those texts then she's an astonishingly stupid woman. How could she possibly believe they wouldn't come to light?
 
OldCoals said:
x66tPJV.jpg



Well well well!
Click to expand...

Bang! Headshot!

Mr Jack said:
More embarrassed for them both for the grammar in those texts if they're real.

I'll await comment from her before passing judgement; if she really did send those texts then she's an astonishingly stupid woman. How could she possibly believe they wouldn't come to light?
Click to expand...

They can trace the number easily enough, Mr Bird wouldn't be stupid enough to fake texts right?

If these are real then the accusation that she's a Labour plant will be impossible to shake
 
Last edited:
scorza said:
So basically, instead of the 65m population official figures based on the 2001 census would have the UK at, more pragmatic estimates based on food consumption in this country would have the UK population at 77m. This is what I've been saying for a few years now - that the real population of the UK is much higher than what the establishment is saying it is.

As for your comment about Little Englanders and Xenophobes, here's the full statement:



Firstly, would you not agree that there's a bit of a difference between 19th century USA and 21st century Britain - to state the obvious, they have more space there - even now! There was much mirth from the mainstream media this week when Farage appearing to blame immigration for a traffic jam on the M4, but if you look at what he actually said he was simply stating the obvious. Surely even the most blinkered ultra-liberal would have to agree that more people using the roads means more congestion on those roads. Secondly is the interesting point is about it being anti-inflationary - specifically (if you look later in the article) about keeping wage costs down. I said interesting because a few of the anti-UKIPpers keep trying to argue that immigration doesn't negatively impact wages, which makes no sense whatsoever to anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of economics.
Click to expand...

The issue of road usage has nothing to do with immigrants though - more people own more cars and take less public transport.

There was a time when many people couldn't afford a car or to run it too often. Now a day the wife and husband have a car, plus their 18 year child has one of their own and they all drive everywhere. That is the single biggest change affecting congestion.


The solutions have nothing to do with limiting immigration which is already at incredibly small levels and far lower than most developed countries. Increase taxes on car ownership, fuel tax and road tax, implement charges for congested areas such as city centers. Use this to subsidize public transport and increase benefits for people who take alternative transportation methods such as walking/cycling to work.
On top of that we can introduce car share only roads and lanes to help people share lifts to work, something which has proved very successful in the US.

Then there is a load of social changes needed. We need to scrap the whole working in the office M-F 9-5 thing and move to a distributed work load that incorporates significant working from home time. have workers work when they are most productive and on schedules that is beneficial to both them and their employer. have people work through a rainy Saturday and take sunny Monday off in exchange - as long as work gets done at the required rate then people shouldn't commuting to offices at the same time but working when and wherever they want. This is the 21st century, not the 19th.

I work form home and I am far more productive and efficient here than at the office and above all I don't waste an hour driving.



Secondly we need to entice companies to set up offices outside London and the SE. The HS2 project is a great way to help this. We can also leverage increased taxation around the SE while give tax breaks away from London.


The UK actually has a very low population density. Most of Scotland is pretty much empty. The issue is the population density in SE England. That has nothing directly to do with immigrants. Moreover, most immigrants to the London area wont even own a car.
 
scorza said:
There was much mirth from the mainstream media this week when Farage appearing to blame immigration for a traffic jam on the M4, but if you look at what he actually said he was simply stating the obvious. Surely even the most blinkered ultra-liberal would have to agree that more people using the roads means more congestion on those roads.
Click to expand...

Maybe because blaming 0.4% increase of foreign born residents for 100% of traffic is just plain stupid?

It's interesting to watch how the evil foreigner myth self inflates from month to month, last month we were still using the "Poles/Romanians sleeping 10 per room" myth to explain how they possibly manage their finances on "steal them jerbs" wage of presumably national minimum an hour while being able to feed their families abroad. Now it turns out they all got bonuses, bought cars and gone on holidays to Wales in long motorcade on M4? ;)

Secondly is the interesting point is about it being anti-inflationary - specifically (if you look later in the article) about keeping wage costs down. I said interesting because a few of the anti-UKIPpers keep trying to argue that immigration doesn't negatively impact wages, which makes no sense whatsoever to anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of economics.
Click to expand...

The numbers compiled by office of national statistics (posted that picture enough times) and they show no support for "negative impact" regardless of your "rudimentary knowledge of economics". Hey, haven't we just read some story somewhere on this page how the foreign brickies are being paid half a gazillion per week because of labour shortages? Oh the UKIP parallel universe...
 
D.P. said:
The issue of road usage has nothing to do with immigrants though - more people own more cars and take less public transport.

There was a time when many people couldn't afford a car or to run it too often. Now a day the wife and husband have a car, plus their 18 year child has one of their own and they all drive everywhere. That is the single biggest change affecting congestion.


The solutions have nothing to do with limiting immigration which is already at incredibly small levels and far lower than most developed countries. Increase taxes on car ownership, fuel tax and road tax, implement charges for congested areas such as city centers. Use this to subsidize public transport and increase benefits for people who take alternative transportation methods such as walking/cycling to work.
On top of that we can introduce car share only roads and lanes to help people share lifts to work, something which has proved very successful in the US.

Then there is a load of social changes needed. We need to scrap the whole working in the office M-F 9-5 thing and move to a distributed work load that incorporates significant working from home time. have workers work when they are most productive and on schedules that is beneficial to both them and their employer. have people work through a rainy Saturday and take sunny Monday off in exchange - as long as work gets done at the required rate then people shouldn't commuting to offices at the same time but working when and wherever they want. This is the 21st century, not the 19th.

I work form home and I am far more productive and efficient here than at the office and above all I don't waste an hour driving.



Secondly we need to entice companies to set up offices outside London and the SE. The HS2 project is a great way to help this. We can also leverage increased taxation around the SE while give tax breaks away from London.


The UK actually has a very low population density. Most of Scotland is pretty much empty. The issue is the population density in SE England. That has nothing directly to do with immigrants. Moreover, most immigrants to the London area wont even own a car.
Click to expand...

bish bash bosh I vote for you!
 
OldCoals said:
I love the part when asked who is lying she says, "I, I think he, well I know he is lying"
Click to expand...

Someone who's telling the truth is confident in the facts, she was interviewed in a claim environment but still faltered, she only went on because Labour spin doctors panicked when the texts were released.
 
robgmun said:
Someone who's telling the truth is confident in the facts, she was interviewed in a claim environment but still faltered, she only went on because Labour spin doctors panicked when the texts were released.
Click to expand...

Tosh and piffle. This caricature has no basis in fact. There is no such simple way to tell if someone is lying or not.
 
You seem quite obsessed with her being planted by Labour, instead of the far more likely explanation that she's just a terrible politician.
 
scorza said:
It's a pretty shocking state of affairs though - how long does it take to train someone as a bricklayer? Are there any opportunities in this country to train as a bricklayer? You'd think that there'd be loads of poor sods on the dole or working on minimum wage in retail/catering/care sectors who'd jump at the chance.
Click to expand...

3 years and yes there's quite a few doing the apprenticeships

but not many people are cut out for hauling bricks round a site nor want to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom