Poll: General election voting intentions poll

[Mr Jack]

Irreverent as Scotland is part of the UK, if they were left to their own devices they'd probably would have never have known anything about Oli in the North Sea

Yes, because them Scottish folk they're clearly all too drunk to search for Oil

 

[scorza]

I was referring to the balance of payments as robgmum claimed Scotland was bleeding England dry.

In my view no region should get extra money based on its contribution to the exchequer but, instead, the income should be based on need. Where I live government spending is half what it is in London.

But this is what UKIP's suggested manifesto policy is about - ending the unfair favourable treatment Scotland gets under the Barnett formula. I'd prefer the Union stays as it is, but it has to be a union of equals - you can't say "these people in Scotland are more important than everyone else so we'll give them more in terms of cash and democratic representation". Yes, this also means diverting investment away from London to other UK cities, but fat chance of that ever happening.

 

[Mr Jack]

But this is what UKIP's suggested manifesto policy is about - ending the unfair favourable treatment Scotland gets under the Barnett formula.

I'm all for ending the Barnett formula; but I'm not for doing it on the back of England vs. Scotland rhetoric.

I'd prefer the Union stays as it is, but it has to be a union of equals - you can't say "these people in Scotland are more important than everyone else so we'll give them more in terms of cash and democratic representation".

It's pretty disgraceful that Scotland not only gets its own parliament but also more representation in the overall UK parliament. In terms of cash, the picture is less clear but the rigid terms of the Barnett formula are clearly unreasonable.

 

[clv101]

What makes it even less impressive is that the reductions that the Tories have achieved have been by slashing the numbers of foreign students - yes, that's right, the Tories have managed to drive people off from paying large amounts of money to be educated in our country and, while doing so, helping build strong links between our country and rapidly developing nations such as India *slow clap* - and changing things so that British Citizens actually have less right to live in this country with their family than people from the EU.

Indeed, higher education is major export in the short term and is likely to being long term benefits also. Bad move.

 

[Mr Jack]

Speaking of immigration: yet more evidence that immigration drivers neither increased unemployment nor a fall in wages

 

[platypus]

Thats from a biased source, clearly.

 

[TheSkateyBird]

Literally opposite my flat, brought out a lot of the crazies to support their dear Führer. Also brought the more sane side out in people as several hundred people turned up with anti-UKIP banners etc.

I know it's the daily mail and their claims of a "WWII Tank" but still, the video is great.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-stepping-Margate-Second-World-War-tank.html

 

[nitram100]

Literally opposite my flat, brought out a lot of the crazies to support their dear Führer

Why do you say things like that? Why are you so angry with what other people think or who they vote for?

 

[platypus]

Why do you say things like that? Why are you so angry with what other people think or who they vote for?

Perhaps he perceives UKIP to be dangerous? I certainly do.

 

[Danthus]

The idea that mass immigration has not had a detrimental effect on employment and wages seems to completely fly in the face of basic supply and demand.

 

[TheSkateyBird]

Perhaps he perceives UKIP to be dangerous? I certainly do.

I've been living in Thanet for the past 8 months and the way so many people have responded is incredibly worrying in comparison to where I used to live.

 

[D.P.]

Why do you say things like that? Why are you so angry with what other people think or who they vote for?

Why do you say that? Why are so bothered about what other people think of such a ridiculous part?

 

[Caged]

The idea that mass immigration has not had a detrimental effect on employment and wages seems to completely fly in the face of basic supply and demand.

Only if you genuinely think that the people who come into the country have no effect on demand at all. They can't simultaneously be a huge burden on infrastructure, housing, employment etc. and also not be consumers of services. In the same way they can't simultaneously be here to take jobs and scrounge benefits. Pick your position.

 

[Mr Jack]

The idea that mass immigration has not had a detrimental effect on employment and wages seems to completely fly in the face of basic supply and demand.

How so?

I mean no-one thinks that small countries are inherently likely to have higher wages and lower unemployment or argues that population growth from other sources than immigration has these detrimental effects. In fact, we broadly accept that increases in population generate new jobs at about equal rate to the rate at which people take up those jobs. This shouldn't surprise anyone because, almost by definition, production requires someone to consume that production if it is to be useful so we should expect average demand created by new individuals to match their average supply of labour.

 

[robgmun]

Perhaps he perceives UKIP to be dangerous? I certainly do.

I think what is more dangerous are the anti-kipper protests that are really pushing the boundaries of stopping free democrat speech of other legitimate parties and paid for by Socialist unions.

 

[Caged]

Explain how a protest that you don't agree with is affecting whether freedom of speech exists or not. If the anti-UKIP lot want to shout louder than the UKIP supporters then so be it, it has no bearing on freedom of speech.

 

[robgmun]

I think it does, protesting is fine.

Blocking people from walking about and shouting through megaphones continuously stopping you from having your say is not fine by any stretch of the imagination, it's undemocratic, you're only ok with it because it's a party you don't like, if the tables were turned i bet good money your view would change in an instant.

 

[Caged]

If you say so. Shouting over someone is not a limitation on freedom of speech, though.

 

[Danthus]

You only have look at UAF to see a glaring irony.

 

[robgmun]

If you say so. Shouting over someone is not a limitation on freedom of speech, though.

Clearly it is I'm not sure how this is even up for debate!?

Elections needed to be conducted on a level playing field, for a lack of better description it's unfair and not in the spirit of democracy, but then Socialists are famous for being undemocratic