John Buckley
- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#1
I totally agree with the guy, but then I`m obviously politically biased towards UKIP! I`m not aware of any of the other parties mep`s making much of a stance though, if any, on this situation.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#2
typical rant from the expert.got his numbers wrong again,its only 60,000 and not 600,000.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#3
Didn't sound like a rant at all Brian.
Why do you say ONLY 60,000. I bet we have more than 60,000 people from overseas claiming various benefits.
Why are you so much for letting the rest of Europe come here to bleed us dry and stretch our NHS, Education system, housing, employment - do you think we have a bottom-less pot of money to give out ?
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#4
He got his figures from the EU, Brian.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#5
Brian suffers from understanding problems
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#6
At what point does this become an advertisement to encourage the very thing complained of?
What is either so terrible about all the Countries that lie between the source of these concerns and the UK, or what is so damned attractive about the UK itself?
Surely, if an influx of inactive migrants was an issue across the EU there would be a more powerful argument for attending to the issue.
Such obvious determination to stand alone, to be the single voice of discontent, can only result in his (NF), UKIP's, and the UK's continued isolation?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
there are plenty of eurosceptic mep's from other member states tom.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#8
no they are government figures peter/roger.
kiethb its your problem to,you don't seem to understand any thing.
John Buckley- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#9
That`s actually just what we do want Tom, "isolation" from the EU`s foreign bureaucracy, their relentless churning out of directives, ( although they have to do that in an attempt to justify their jobs in the first place of course! ) restrictive red tape, being told what we can and can`t do whilst at the same time paying vast sums of money for that pleasure. However, we would not be isolated from europe itself of course as we would still trade with those european countries much the same as we have always done, similar to the way that Switzerland and Norway do now but without the restraints that the EU imposes.
You ask " what is so damned attractive about the UK itself? " If you mean to immigrants, then obviously that`s a better standard of living, either higher wages for those that work or benefits for those that don`t, free health care, schools etc., etc. and yes, even richer pickings for the criminal element that make their way here.
Perhaps the influx of inactive migrants is not quite such a big issue in some of the other european countries because a fair number seem to make their way here. The EU thinks that it has attended to this issue by just letting those concerned settle wherever they wish, but in my opinion that doesn`t actually do us any favours.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#10
Thank you for responding John...
"being told what we can and can`t do whilst at the same time paying vast sums of money for that pleasure"
It is something, to be told that there is no conversation to had other than 'OUT', this may save me many hours. As far as the statement I quote above goes, what you say John is true of all Governments:central and local.
As to the remainder of your first paragraph; it is often better to travel in hope than to arrive.
"If" I mean immigrants? This thread is all about inter-European immigration. I thought that was 'a given'.
A higher standard of living? If that were generally the case I have been miss-sold the situation on the Folkestone Road. I heard the rest from NF.
Things that 'seem to be' is the foundation of all conjuring tricks;now you see it, now you don't. No wonder the 'immigrant' NF and UKIP fit so neatly into the low standard of UK Politics, but there is often a runt in every litter.
As far as the peppering of 'us' and 'we' into the conversation goes. This must be done more in hope than in truth. Certainly, as far as UKIP and myself go, we are as chalk is to cheese. The coupling of isolationism with the tendency to speak for all brings to my mind Spike Milligan's impression of the restaurant in the 'Post-Office Tower':Spinning on the spot chomping on thin air.
Where will UKIP spend the money you say 'we' will save by being out of the EU? And who is to be sheriff of this new regulation-free Wild West show?
What is UKIP for?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
John Buckley- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#11
You are right on one thing Tom, "being told what we can and can`t do whilst at the same time paying vast sums of money for that pleasure" is somewhat true of all Governments, but I do not accept that we need a "secondary" form of government to dictate to us. As you will no doubt remember that I have said before, if our own government displeases us, for whatever reason, we have the option to remove them at the next general election. We have no such option with the law makers in Brussels.
Yes, surprise surprise, even the the conditions in Folkestone road are better than what some of them probably had in the countries that they travelled from and if it was really that bad then they wouldn`t stay would they? Oh, but of course, they have all the other benefits to offset any minor living condition discomforts so they will stay won`t they?
I think that you know well and truly what UKIP is for Tom and it`s blindingly obvious that you wouldn`t vote for them in a million years, which is ok of course, but that leads me to the question if I may be so bold as to ask.........which political party do you best think would tick most of your boxes, or are you apathetic to all of them?
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#12
Come out of the closet tom cat.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
i think tom is probably an anarchist on the quiet.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
On the quiet? Thanks for that Howard.
Which of them ticks my boxes? Perhaps, for now, it would be sufficient for me to admit to chuckling at your fairy 'naive' assertion, John, that the UK electorate are capable of voting-out a policy-thrust they don't agree with.
Has there been anything other than Thatcherism:pseudo/quasi or lite, since the late seventies?
Does UKIP offer anything different from that?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
John Buckley- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#15
I did not actually make an assertion Tom that "the UK electorate are capable of voting-out a policy-thrust they don't agree with", I said that we had an "option" to do that, not necessarily the "capability". That depends on the individual voter of course, but if they so choose to vote for the political party`s that you or I dislike for whatever reason then so be it, that`s democracy, which is something that we don`t have with the EU. That was the point that I was making. Anyway, perhaps many people would actually like more "Thatcherism" not less? Should their opinion count less than yours?
UKIP does not offer you anything Tom, but it does offer the rest of us a chance to regain our independence and control the running of our own country. If any UKIP policies do in fact contain an element of "Thatcherism" then so be it, I can live with that!