correct me if I’m wrong, but won’t leaving the EU screw them over…?
UKIP prescribe to the view that if we leave the EU we will still be able to enjoy all of the benefits but be free of all the costs. A bit like the SNP in that respect, imho
I have been working since i was 16, and voting ever since.
In 33 years i have worked under the Tories,Labour,ConDem governments and i have to say i have no faith in any of them.It is all too institutionalised ,1 v 1 entrenched blame culture.
I am personally fed up with the lot of them so how should i vote?
All the comments about the bad things about UKIP ,well lets do some likewise digging into some of the Labour,Cons,LibDem candidates past and present –not so pretty either.
People died for the right to vote but the right to vote for a decent way just isn’t available [realistically].
So who do i vote for ? No vote won’t change anything so guilty of keeping things the gruesome same.
Personally I think you need to vote for whoever will give electoral reform. Remember, politicians care a great deal about keeping their jobs and for most of them they are in safe seats, so this isn’t a problem. All they have to do is tow the party line so they don’t get deselected, and all the parties have to do is preach to the converted in their constituencies. That and the party whip which means private organisations (political parties) can coerce MPs into voting one way or the other, politicians regulating themselves, and dozens of other things. But this can only be fixed by reforming the political system itself, which I think should begin with dumping FPTP:
Ongoing Program ? Meaning the P8 sold to the US Navy & India were all prototypes ?
Not exactly. Even when an aircraft reaches full production not all of the kinks have always been worked out, not the entire range of capabilities has been added. For years the RAF flew Tornados that didn’t have a radar that was up to scratch, aircraft get introduced to service before their full range of weapons have been integrated, things like that.
Whatever people think of UKIP, they are a far more credible party than The Liberals (under Clegg) will ever be.
Come the general election I think the Liberals will get a hammering, but I imagine they will still get an order of magnitude more seats than UKIP. We’ll see.
The tolerating of islamic schools which alienate muslim youth from their peers and the power of imrans is continuing the problem down the generations.
I don’t know how to change the extremists but we should not tolerate female mutilation, forced marriages, the aborting of female babies and those who cause or allow this to happen should be severly punished and if possible deported.
I partly agree, but then I’m not completely on board with religious schools in general. If there were schools with politically oriented themes we’d see it as a strange practice with rather sinister connotations, but for some reason religion is a bit different (though I’m not sure why).
As for those other points, I’m glad they are illegal, even if the enforcement of the laws leaves a lot to be desired.
So about this airfield that’s closing down?We as an island need to grow more of our own food so close it and return it to farming land,and all the other airfields no longer needed instead of turning them into industrial estates or new towns for our immigrants to live in.
I can’t help but notice your location is ‘Thailand’. You wouldn’t be an immigrant to Thailand by any chance?
I honestly believe that the BBC is, despite its problems, the finest public broadcaster in the world. Although it’s an imperfect system, I also think that the licence fee isn’t that bad a system for funding it, since the alternative is direct taxation, and all the government control that entails. At least the licence fee gives the BBC a degree of independence that it needs.
It seems to me that a lot of the attacks against the BBC are political in nature, and stem from the fact that a) Commercial television would like to have a few rivals as possible. b) There are people opposed to public ownership on principle and c) If there is a profit to be had in destroying the BBC there will be those that want to do it. For me, the Conservative party would tick several of these boxes, as well as gaining from the fact that without the BBC the media in the UK would be dominated by Rupert Murdoch and his companies, and this would probably help them.
On the other hand, why should it be okay for individuals to discriminate on the grounds of race, gender or religion, and not employers?
At present, individuals can choose who they consort with, who they buy goods and services from and who they want to give their money to. Are you saying that equality legislation should apply to all these interactions? I don’t approve of racism or the other types of discrimination occurring, but it’s the price of freedom. Unless you want to hand the state the power to meddle with people’s lives whenever someone disagrees with the hive mind then it’s just something we have to put up with. We can still campaign against it and tackle it when it happens, but I’d rather have to do that than have an all-powerful state with the means and authority to intervene against every infraction.
It does seem a little odd that the law seems to want to question the motives of those that write a will as much as what they are doing.
I think people should be able to leave their money to whomever they wish, so long as they haven’t been coerced into their decision. To their political party, to the RSPCA, to their children, whomever. Having the state intervene whenever the motives may be questionable or out of step with societal trends seems to be going way too far imho.
Sign In
