UKIP party conference

[Pretty pink fairy]

To be fair he's probably looking into this scenario.
"Britain has been told to pay more than £10 million in unemployment benefit to eastern European migrants who have left Britain, returned home and now cannot find a job.
Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia have demanded that Iain Duncan Smith’s department funds their jobless citizens because they once worked and paid national insurance in the UK.
His department has refused because the migrants had not worked in the UK long enough to claim, but the three countries have threatened to issue a diplomatic protest"
Czech labour minister Michaela Marksova-Tominova said Britain owed her country £3million in these benefits under European Union rules.
Britain has already paid £800,000 under these rules, but she is writing to Mr Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, demanding another £2.2million
Good old EU eh.............

"demanding"
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Pretty pink fairy is well known round these parts for his insightful grasp of reality.

Thank you very much sir
regards
DR

 

[El Presidente]

If UKIP's policies could deliver higher economic growth, lower unemployment, a reduced government deficit for our children to pay off, better education and an improved NHS they would get my vote. But they don't seem interested in any of the above.

 

[dougdeep]

If you are not a socialist at the age of 18, then you haven't got a heart. If you are still a socialist at the age of 30, then you haven't got a brain.

Doesn't the author of those words deserve some credit?

 

[WATFORD zero]

If UKIP's policies could deliver higher economic growth, lower unemployment, a reduced government deficit for our children to pay off, better education and an improved NHS they would get my vote. But they don't seem interested in any of the above.

But he's got nice teeth

 

[Westdene Seagull]

If UKIP's policies could deliver higher economic growth, lower unemployment, a reduced government deficit for our children to pay off, better education and an improved NHS they would get my vote. But they don't seem interested in any of the above.

Just out of sheer interest - which party can deliver all of this ?

 

[Wellesley]

Doesn't the author of those words deserve some credit?

I couldn't remember who it was. Was it you?

 

[Kevlar]

If UKIP's policies could deliver higher economic growth, lower unemployment, a reduced government deficit for our children to pay off, better education and an improved NHS they would get my vote. But they don't seem interested in any of the above.

our forebears have not paid of our government debt for 400 years why on earth will
our children do so?
between 1725 and 1870 the debt to GDP ratio was higher than today
at times 3 times higher than today
before there was a Labour Party
This problem of the national debt is plain nonsense
governments spend into the accounts of firms and households
and tax money out of them
a government sector deficit = a private sector surplus
the uk private sector cannot be in surplus with itself
it can only have aggregate savings with the external sector or its
government sector it has a deficit with the external sector (imports more
than it exports) so if the government sector ran a balanced budget
this would not stop the "national" debt growing it would force it on
to the private sector .
when you hear someone say government sector deficits
think private sector surpluses
when they say national debt
think national savings
or more accurately aggregate savings in pounds sterling(some held by non Brits)

 

[Chicken Runner61]

If UKIP's policies could deliver higher economic growth, lower unemployment, a reduced government deficit for our children to pay off, better education and an improved NHS they would get my vote. But they don't seem interested in any of the above.

Immigration, immigration , immigration - by getting us of of the Eu they will solve everything - or so they tell us

 

[Chicken Runner61]

our forebears have not paid of our government debt for 400 years why on earth will
our children do so?
between 1725 and 1870 the debt to GDP ratio was higher than today
at times 3 times higher than today
before there was a Labour Party
This problem of the national debt is plain nonsense
governments spend into the accounts of firms and households
and tax money out of them
a government sector deficit = a private sector surplus
the uk private sector cannot be in surplus with itself
it can only have aggregate savings with the external sector or its
government sector it has a deficit with the external sector (imports more
than it exports) so if the government sector ran a balanced budget
this would not stop the "national" debt growing it would force it on
to the private sector .
when you hear someone say government sector deficits
think private sector surpluses
when they say national debt
think national savings
or more accurately aggregate savings in pounds sterling(some held by non Brits)

But our debts previously came about through financing wars we had to fight - not from social spending or bailouts, the only reason the borrowing hasn't stopped is that austerity measures haven't kicked in yet - that and interest rates being low. In a couple of years when rates start to rise and the employed full time workers start losing their homes and jobs like in Spain and Greece you will realise how stupid it all is

 

[sir albion]

If we stopped going to war we'd clear the national debt in a flash...Agree it's all a load of tosh though

 

[Chicken Runner61]

If we stopped going to war we'd clear the national debt in a flash...Agree it's all a load of tosh though

Yes there will be a few hospitals and schools being fired and dropped against Isis soon and that's to destroy the weapons we sold saddam when he was our friend against Iran

 

[El Presidente]

There are plenty of things we could do, that right wing parties (inc. Tories in that) wouldn't, that could massively help reduce national debt.

- Stop going to war
- Close corporate tax loopholes
- Do more to prevent use of offshore tax havens
- Increase tax for the richest 1%
- Legalise cannabis/end the war on drugs

Has UKIP got any of these things on their manifesto?
-

I don't think it's fair to increase tax on the richest 1%, but it isn't equitable for the government to have such poor legislation that tax is so easy to avoid.

 

[sir albion]

There are plenty of things we could do, that right wing parties (inc. Tories in that) wouldn't, that could massively help reduce national debt.

- Stop going to war
- Close corporate tax loopholes
- Do more to prevent use of offshore tax havens
- Increase tax for the richest 1%
- Legalise cannabis/end the war on drugs

Has UKIP got any of these things on their manifesto?
-

We're as corrupt as anyone trust me...No party touches the big corperate tax avoiding companys and that has never changed,you actually think labour or the conservatives will do this?
They are all shite scared or getting slipped a bulging wad of notes to keep things the way they're...If anyone is capable it's not the posh tits in labour and conservative's..In time ukip will grow and more policies will appear.Not long ago ukip had one policie and now they have half a dozen or so,patience pays.

 

[El Presidente]

The richest 1,000 people in Britain increased their personal wealth by £69bn (sixty nine billion pounds) in 2013. How is it not fair?

If they pay tax at 40% on that (I personally think 45% is too high), the Exchequer receives £27.6 billion, then everyone wins.

 

[El Presidente]

There are winners, but it's not everyone - its the 1%. Their tax should be closer to 80%, at least. This kind of inequality is unacceptable and terribly unfair, we are meant to be "in this together". Their increase in wealth is certainly going to be greater than £69bn in 2014 as well. So why aren't regular people finding their personal wealth increase by 16% every year? Why should these few people be able to claim billions of pounds as personal wealth, when it could save the economy?

The Exchequer gains plenty too, 80% tax rates are from the Dark Ages, and only encourage evasion.

There's nothing wrong with wealth, many rich people are very philanthropic and direct money to good causes, Bill Gates being a prime example. Often they do this in a more efficient manner than central government too.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

If they pay tax at 40% on that (I personally think 45% is too high), the Exchequer receives £27.6 billion, then everyone wins.

You can quote percentages of tax all you like but what you need to look at is how much they actually paid as a percentage of their income. If poor people could afford a tax avoidance lawyer or accountant many wouldn't pay as much tax either

 

[Czechmate]

Thought they did vote him out, albeit after he fled. He did a u-turn, then when people protested he sent out his heavy handed Police. Then claimed he had an agreement with the opposition before running.

As for the black box recordings, well have to wait and see but bearing in mind the black boxes weren't handed over immediately then it's a bit rich demanding the release of recordings. I believe the suggestion is that a Ukrainian jet was using the civilian plane as cover, which, if true, is disgusting, but it would still seem that the Russian backed forces shot it down!

Yes they did vote him out Drew , but could of done it long before any troubles happened . I don't know who shot the airplane down , it just seemed strange that the US said they would know within a few days more information as they have regular satellites going over the area and news reports saying the pilots voice recording would be known within a couple of days from receiving them at Farnborough . Last time I heard no information will be now available for another year yet ?

I agree it was disgusting whoever done it !

 

[Kevlar]

well Spain is a very good example of balancing the books
between 200-8 they ran a small govt surplus (it's own private sector
in deficit to it s government and the rest of the world falling ever more into debt)
the seller of goods and services cannot receive more money
than the buyer spends.We do not trade with extra terrestrials.
if some humans want to save others have to go into debt
unless there is a power which can spend without income
that power is the state backed up by jails and the army
and authorizing legitimate currency via a central bank.
Yes the government can spend money on war it can also spend money
on education.whether it spends money on
soldiers or teachers
bullets or books
tanks or schools
the money ends up in the account/pockets of the private sector
households and firms from which taxes are taken.
For as long as governments add more money than they take away
they add aggregate savings into the private sector
it is the only possible source for aggregate private sector savings

 

[El Presidente]

well Spain is a very good example of balancing the books
between 200-8 they ran a small govt surplus (it's own private sector
in deficit to it s government and the rest of the world falling ever more into debt)
the seller of goods and services cannot receive more money
than the buyer spends.We do not trade with extra terrestrials.
if some humans want to save others have to go into debt
unless there is a power which can spend without income
that power is the state backed up by jails and the army
and authorizing legitimate currency via a central bank.
Yes the government can spend money on war it can also spend money
on education.whether it spends money on
soldiers or teachers
bullets or books
tanks or schools
the money ends up in the account/pockets of the private sector
households and firms from which taxes are taken.
For as long as governments add more money than they take away
they add aggregate savings into the private sector
it is the only possible source for aggregate private sector savings

Excellent cutting and pasting sir!