This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
ukip (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
| Hoof Hearted 06 Dec 14 10.19am | |
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 06 Dec 2014 10.09am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Dec 2014 10.00am
It does make me laugh that there was a heartfelt plea from the left on the Russell Brand thread for the establishment not to try and discredit him and yet this thread is heavily punctuated with stories of gaffes and u turns etc about Farage and his party. Double Standards lads? UKIP are running for political office. Brand is not. Most of what is posted in this thread is about ukip policy, no one has actually said anything about what brand is saying by offering counter argument, they're just calling it (and I paraphrase) 'student nonsense' without getting to the crux of the argument.
Or is Brand commenting without bias?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
|
nickgusset  Shizzlehurst 06 Dec 14 12.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Dec 2014 10.19am
Quote nickgusset at 06 Dec 2014 10.09am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Dec 2014 10.00am
It does make me laugh that there was a heartfelt plea from the left on the Russell Brand thread for the establishment not to try and discredit him and yet this thread is heavily punctuated with stories of gaffes and u turns etc about Farage and his party. Double Standards lads? UKIP are running for political office. Brand is not. Most of what is posted in this thread is about ukip policy, no one has actually said anything about what brand is saying by offering counter argument, they're just calling it (and I paraphrase) 'student nonsense' without getting to the crux of the argument.
Or is Brand commenting without bias?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Kermit8  Hevon 06 Dec 14 5.32pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Having a well deserved pint Edited by Kermit8 (06 Dec 2014 5.37pm)
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
Attachment: Seth  On a pale blue dot 06 Dec 14 5.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Dec 2014 10.00am
It does make me laugh that there was a heartfelt plea from the left on the Russell Brand thread for the establishment not to try and discredit him and yet this thread is heavily punctuated with stories of gaffes and u turns etc about Farage and his party. Double Standards lads?
Sympathy for each on here is split between those who already support a left or right perspective. When they meet on QT next week it should be interesting.
"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| The White Horse 07 Dec 14 12.11am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
Point 1 - I would imagine that a lot of the white people are fed up with politicians letting them down and don't bother to vote in those areas. If you could provide any evidence of this, I'd be interested to see it. The Telegraph (certainly not a leftist publication) disagrees with you: "Seven per cent of white British people weren't registered to vote in 2010. For all other ethnic groups, the percentage not registered to vote was substantially higher – 28 per cent of black Africans weren’t registered. Ethnic minorities who are registered are almost as likely to vote as the rest of the electorate – but, because of the high numbers not registered, their electoral significance remains disproportionately low." Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
Point 2 - A couple of years is a very long time in politics and UKIP are getting a lot more traction than every other party (except the SNP) now. I imagine Bradford West is largely filled with Indian/pakistani/Bangladesh people, and I know for a fact Bristol East is, so no surprise on a Labour councillor being voted in. The census in 2011 said that in Bradford 67% were white, 27% were Asian. In Bristol, 84% of the population are white. Even if you excluded all Indian/pakistani/Bangladesh people from voting, UKIP would be obliterated in any election, since 96.6% of voters didn't support them in the last election. It's very easy to say that UKIP doesn't do well in areas with high immigration because immigrants don't vote for them, but some immigrants can't even vote in the general election and their white neighbours seem to invariably vote for parties other than UKIP, unlike those in areas with low levels of immigration on that map that started this discussion. Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
The main point I was trying to make (probably badly!) was that the rise in UKIP voters is more to do with personal hardships caused by overcrowding rather than a view on whether immigrants are good for the economy or are not entitled to benefits, ie our infrastructure is struggling to cope. Then why do those in "overcrowded areas" like London, Birmingham, Bristol and so on continue to vote for various parties (even the Lib Dems and the Greens!) ahead of UKIP? Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
The fact raised about only 7% of our land mass is built on is largely irrelevant. A lot of the alleged remaining 93% of land mass would be uninhabitable or prime farmland. And a lot of it would be neither. There doesn't seem to be a shortage of developers who think the land might make more money as housing. Besides, thanks to decades of industrial decline, there are various brownfield sites available for building housing on. And you know the beauty of that idea? The areas where industry is f*cked are usually areas with high unemployment and loads of UKIP voters. Given they're so worried about the "strain on the housing infrastructure", why not build more houses in their areas, creating jobs at the same time?
"The fox has his den. The bee has his hive. The stoat, has, uh... his stoat-hole... but only man chooses to make his nest in an investment opportunity.” Stewart Lee |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 07 Dec 14 10.15am | |
|---|---|
|
Quote The White Horse at 07 Dec 2014 12.11am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
Point 1 - I would imagine that a lot of the white people are fed up with politicians letting them down and don't bother to vote in those areas. If you could provide any evidence of this, I'd be interested to see it. The Telegraph (certainly not a leftist publication) disagrees with you: "Seven per cent of white British people weren't registered to vote in 2010. For all other ethnic groups, the percentage not registered to vote was substantially higher – 28 per cent of black Africans weren’t registered. Ethnic minorities who are registered are almost as likely to vote as the rest of the electorate – but, because of the high numbers not registered, their electoral significance remains disproportionately low." Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
Point 2 - A couple of years is a very long time in politics and UKIP are getting a lot more traction than every other party (except the SNP) now. I imagine Bradford West is largely filled with Indian/pakistani/Bangladesh people, and I know for a fact Bristol East is, so no surprise on a Labour councillor being voted in. The census in 2011 said that in Bradford 67% were white, 27% were Asian. In Bristol, 84% of the population are white. Even if you excluded all Indian/pakistani/Bangladesh people from voting, UKIP would be obliterated in any election, since 96.6% of voters didn't support them in the last election. It's very easy to say that UKIP doesn't do well in areas with high immigration because immigrants don't vote for them, but some immigrants can't even vote in the general election and their white neighbours seem to invariably vote for parties other than UKIP, unlike those in areas with low levels of immigration on that map that started this discussion. Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
The main point I was trying to make (probably badly!) was that the rise in UKIP voters is more to do with personal hardships caused by overcrowding rather than a view on whether immigrants are good for the economy or are not entitled to benefits, ie our infrastructure is struggling to cope. Then why do those in "overcrowded areas" like London, Birmingham, Bristol and so on continue to vote for various parties (even the Lib Dems and the Greens!) ahead of UKIP? Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Nov 2014 10.34am
The fact raised about only 7% of our land mass is built on is largely irrelevant. A lot of the alleged remaining 93% of land mass would be uninhabitable or prime farmland. And a lot of it would be neither. There doesn't seem to be a shortage of developers who think the land might make more money as housing. Besides, thanks to decades of industrial decline, there are various brownfield sites available for building housing on. And you know the beauty of that idea? The areas where industry is f*cked are usually areas with high unemployment and loads of UKIP voters. Given they're so worried about the "strain on the housing infrastructure", why not build more houses in their areas, creating jobs at the same time?
I can't be arsed to reply to all of your points and it would only encourage you to ask more. I will address the last point.... I said strain on infrastructure, not just housing infrastructure! Building loads of houses sorts out a short term need, but long term it doesn't. Shortages of Water, schooling facilities, GP's, Hospitals, Road Space, etc would still exist and take away prime farmland or recreational space for ever. Edited by Hoof Hearted (07 Dec 2014 10.56am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| The White Horse 07 Dec 14 2.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Dec 2014 10.15am
Your method of posting puts me off replying...... it's like looking at a chemistry A level exam paper after you've just turned it over or trying to understand a question about Binary Codes on "University Challenge". I can't be arsed to reply to all of your points and it would only encourage you to ask more. I will address the last point.... I said strain on infrastructure, not just housing infrastructure! Building loads of houses sorts out a short term need, but long term it doesn't. Shortages of Water, schooling facilities, GP's, Hospitals, Road Space, etc would still exist and take away prime farmland or recreational space for ever. Obviously the answer to your last point is that immigrants increase the size of the economy and are more often net contributors to the public finances, so they bring with them new schools, doctors, hospitals and so on. I'd suggest the reason you "can't be arsed to reply" on the white people not voting UKIP in mixed areas point is because it's pretty irrefutable. If UKIP are getting 3.3% of the vote and the population is 66% white, then at least 19/20 white voters aren't voting for them.
"The fox has his den. The bee has his hive. The stoat, has, uh... his stoat-hole... but only man chooses to make his nest in an investment opportunity.” Stewart Lee |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| legaleagle 07 Dec 14 2.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
As a result of EU freedom of movement, nealy 2m Brits live in the EU outside the UK. Because they tend to be older than the EU migrants coming here, the result is a net plus to the NHS in terms of reduced overall demand. So, if we leave the EU or reduce "benefits" available such as free health care and other EU governments then do the same in consequence of "treaty renegotiation", do we end up with more strain on the NHS not less? Edited by legaleagle (07 Dec 2014 2.26pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| sanitycheck 07 Dec 14 2.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote The White Horse at 07 Dec 2014 2.18pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 07 Dec 2014 10.15am
Your method of posting puts me off replying...... it's like looking at a chemistry A level exam paper after you've just turned it over or trying to understand a question about Binary Codes on "University Challenge". I can't be arsed to reply to all of your points and it would only encourage you to ask more. I will address the last point.... I said strain on infrastructure, not just housing infrastructure! Building loads of houses sorts out a short term need, but long term it doesn't. Shortages of Water, schooling facilities, GP's, Hospitals, Road Space, etc would still exist and take away prime farmland or recreational space for ever. Obviously the answer to your last point is that immigrants increase the size of the economy and are more often net contributors to the public finances, so they bring with them new schools, doctors, hospitals and so on. I'd suggest the reason you "can't be arsed to reply" on the white people not voting UKIP in mixed areas point is because it's pretty irrefutable. If UKIP are getting 3.3% of the vote and the population is 66% white, then at least 19/20 white voters aren't voting for them. It's come to something when you're slagged off for taking the time to provide factual information. Kudos to you for keeping your cool.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| legaleagle 07 Dec 14 9.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Nigel Farage blames heavy traffic last friday on the M4 on immigrants... Truly a towering political leader in a class of his own, even allowing for the strong competition.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Kermit8 Hevon 07 Dec 14 10.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote legaleagle at 07 Dec 2014 9.23pm
Nigel Farage blames heavy traffic last friday on the M4 on immigrants... Truly a towering political leader in a class of his own, even allowing for the strong competition.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Seth On a pale blue dot 08 Dec 14 12.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Kermit8 at 07 Dec 2014 10.20pm
Quote legaleagle at 07 Dec 2014 9.23pm
Nigel Farage blames heavy traffic last friday on the M4 on immigrants... Truly a towering political leader in a class of his own, even allowing for the strong competition.
They really are the gift which just keeps on giving
"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.