to think it proves lots of people want change

[adsy]

That ukip are making such huge gains in the elections.
If mnetters could temper their hysteria of screaming racism, I think it is a clear indication that the fundamental principals of the party of no toEurope and no to continued mass immigration are very important to a lot of people

And if you are a gardener, electrician, whatever, then the £50 you might spend on plumbing in 10 years hardly compensates for the 30% you've had knocked off your wages by immigrants who are of course not merely plumbers, but many different trades, driving down wages in all.

where are these magical reliable houses that only need 50 pounds of plumbing maintenance in a 10 year period? I would like one.

When I said British builders, I meant companies.

Nobody likes competition. Be it plumbers, taxi drivers, lawyers and doctors. Competition benefits everyone who's not a worker in the field. So, while plumbers now have to compete with new plumbers, they benefit from competition in every other area. While your 30% numbers sounds alarming, I doubt it is based in reality.

And it isn't only plumbers and labourers. where do people get this idea? I don't think there is a british doctor at my local surgery. go to any hospital and you'll see it's staffed by a rainbow of people, including the doctors.

No-one owes you a living either BogQueen. The government is supposed to represent the interests of people in the country already, not people outside the country who want to come here to improve their lives. Working-class people have been betrayed by all 3 main parties, hence the rise of UKIP.

You think UKIP represent the poor? What do think the outcome of restricting the flow of labour will be when capital and jobs can move? A very real possibility is that if lower wage immigrants can't come here, jobs will move there. If I was an employer, why would I want to pay British wages here, when I can get a whole factory of Romanians in Romania? Whilst there are great advantages to staying in Britain, the lower wages there might be too attractive, especially if I can't lower my British costs by hiring the Romanians here. Now all those jobs are gone. Terrible for British workers, great for multinationals.

One of the main reasons that land is expensive is because we have so many immigrants and no more land available for building on. So if you admit 100,000 skilled labourers, that might reduce the cost of building your house by £5000, but it adds £50,000 onto the cost of the plot. Not a great idea is it?

if you look it up, very little of the UK is actually built on. of course, more of the southeast is. The problem is planning permission. The problem is the green belt, all the land in London that can't be used, the fact that if I change my windows I have to ask the council and they have to employ bureaucrats to decide this. NIMBYism etc, all of that makes housing expensive. what's UKIP saying about that? What are any of the parties saying about that?

Claig you do realise that Gordon brown hasnt been the prime minister or leader of the Labour party since 2010, why do you continual bring him up as if he is relevant in anyway to this debate?

or have you yet to find a witty take on Ed Millibands name?

Lord Glasman said

"I have come to the conclusion that Labour is in danger of losing England"

and instead of listening to Lord Glasman who gets it as near as dammit, what have One Nation Labour done, they have gone to an American strategist/spinner. Yes he knows how to spin and make ad campaigns, but do they underestimate teh British public so much that they think we can't see through spin. No country in teh world has suffered the spin that we have seen under New Labour. The Daily Mail will tear their spin apart with ease. They won't fool the British people.

They better start listening to Lord Glasman, who understands the people, who lives here, who gets it, because if they don't then as he rightly said

"You Ain’t Seen Nothin' Yet"

which is just another way of expressing what Winston McKenzie, UKIP strategist and thinker said

"There will be feathers everywhere".

Sorry, don't know why that posted again.

You're setting out the problem with grouping people into amorphous groups based on people you don't like ('elites') and people you do ('not elites'). It's inarguable that Nigel Farage comes from an elite background. It's equally inarguable that many politicians you class as the 'elite' do not, such as Alan Johnson and Patrick McLoughlin. So what I'm asking is - how does Farage, with his money and privilege, get away from the puppet strings of the EU, when you say anyone in any other party doesn't simply not want to, they are unable to?

It's an extraordinary statement.

What difference does it make to British workers whether a multinational company employs Romanians in Romania or in Britain?

Britain is already the most densely populated country in Europe, barring microstates. How much more people can we cope with? We can't feed the people that are already here without importing food. The infrastructure can't cope with anymore people. We need to reduce the population, not increase it.

'Claig you do realise that Gordon brown hasnt been the prime minister or leader of the Labour party since 2010, why do you continual bring him up as if he is relevant in anyway to this debate?'

Of course i realise that and I pray to Heaven in thanks every night for that blessing. I use it because just the thought of him sums up to me and many Tories what a joke that lot were. He sums up everything that was wrong with Labour and Lord Glasman sums up everything that is right.

I don't care who runs the country as long as they serve the people. I don't like the Bullingdon Club, I prefer Lord Glasman and I actually like Ed Miliband, but I want them to get the right policies, to serve the people and grow a backbone and stand up for truth and cut the spin.

StarGazey, I hope Scotland becomes independent, but I can't guarantee it. If I could, they'd make me head of Yes Scotland, and aside from all my expenses would be sorted out quick smart forever by grateful Yessers :D A Yes vote is not automatic, and it's not what we're talking about here. We are talking about Scotland, a mostly rural nation, remaining part of the UK.

So, in this debate, we are looking at a No vote. If that happens, what is the plan for English and Scottish regions which are heavily dependent on EU subsidies to farm? What's the UKIP idea for funding them? Just saying "it's wrong to depend on the EU" with no alternate plan won't work. And what about English and Scottish fishermen - how would our borders and fishing boundaries work without using the EU as a mediator?

Seriously interested, so come on. UKIP are our saviours, am I right? So they'll have an explanation for how this will all work. I just don't know it yet.

Outself - thank you for that very considered and thoughtful response.

I really appreciate it.

I don't think I've made myself entirely clear about why I detest the EU though. It's not the 'economic zone' I'm concerned with. It's the institution itself. How it is structured in terms of the democratic process. How commissioners are 'elected' (I use the term elected loosely), just the modus operandi of the whole bureaucratic edifice. That's what I hate.

In regards to the Eurozone itself, if that's what you mean by economic zone? (of which we are not a part, thank God) I have always known that a one size fits all currency can never work - and I say a little prayer of gratitude every day, that the UK never went down that route and we retained Sterling), and that sadly has been proved horrifically correct.

The European Union could be a marvellous thing. In principal it should be. But in its present form and the path its on, it is anything but.

And that is why I voted UKIP in the European elections. Will that vote translate to a General Election in a year's time? I don't know. They'd have to persuade me in terms of domestic policy, and I will wait to see the response of the other parties to what has happened this week.

I'm going to have to bale out of this discussion now I'm afraid. I'm self-employed and working all weekend, so I need to get back to it.

Thanks once again for your willingness to read what I wrote, and to attempt to understand where I, and others like me are coming from.

I really hope now that the insults can be set aside, and people of all political persuasions can start to discuss things in a more conciliatory way.

It doesn't make sense to Gordon Bennett

And I ask you again, politely claig why this is relevant, and to tell you that this repeated reference isn't funny.

he has the courage to make mistakes and admit he got things wrong in not vetting the idiots enough

Can you provide a link to that? You've already defended his silence on Hamilton - his party's deputy leader.

I frankly don't believe your description of Sainsburys either.

But it does your argument no favours. You are obviously passionate about UKIP, but constant referencing to feathers everywhere and gordon bennett is negating any argument you have and just making you look like you are parroting someones elses ideas.

I get that you want change Ii really do. I want change too. I dislike all 3 parties. labour isnt the Labour party I grew up with. The lib dems I just dont trust anymore. They would sell their granny for power and the Torys are just not an option for me. But it still doesnt make me want to vote UKIP as a protest as they have no policies.

I,m not prepared to vote for someone without a manifesto, the only evidence I have to go on are their 2010 manifesto which treats women,disabled and workers badly and the vile hatred some of their members and donors spew.
Why would I want to give them power? I just cant support the unknown

Tucson, it makes a great deal of difference. Where are the employees of the factory paying tax, buying goods and services, where is the factory paying corporation tax, where is the supply chain, who builds and maintains the factory, who supplies it with essential services?

Britain is already different by not being able to compete on cost of production with many other countries. Isolating ourselves from our biggest export market - or at the very least increasing the costs of what we export to them - doesn't feel like it would redress the balance of trade.

As an aside, Britain grows more of the food we eat that we are able to grow here than we have for years. The reforms of the CAP to date have actually been pretty positive in getting our farmers to produce more of what the market wants, not what quotas dictate. There's still a hell of a long way to go, of course. We import a lot, we also export a lot as we excel and producing high-value food and drink that attracts a premium. I'm of the view that having a diverse range is good for food security as it makes food supplies and prices less vulnerable to local shocks, such as the poor seasons we've had in recent years.

I use it because just the thought of him sums up to me and many Tories what a joke that lot were. He sums up everything that was wrong with Labour and Lord Glasman sums up everything that is right

The repeated mangling of his name just isn't funny.

JassyRadlett, you seem to know all the journaists and what schools they went to (apart from the Sun's political editor), so I guess you work in the media. You obviously are a Labour supporter, but don'tyou get out of your office and meet people who think differently to you? Don't you listen to them and try to understand them? Don't you even sometimes read the Daily Mail to see what other people think? I am explaining why there will be an earthquake tonight and you still don't get it. If you don't believe me because I don't like Gordon Bennett and because i read the Daily Mail, then read lord Glasman, he reads the Guardian.

I have explained that where someone went to school and how much money they have is nothing to do with being in the elite or the Bullingdon Club etc.

Paul Sykes, that fantastic working class man, worth £650 million, backs UKIP. He is worth far more than Bullingdon Cameron, Osborne and Johnson combined. Paul Sykes is not the elite. He is richer than the lot of them, but he is still one of us.

constant referencing to feathers everywhere and gordon bennett is negating any argument you have and just making you look like you are parroting someones elses ideas

It comes over as obsessive and weird. It certainly doesn't advance debate.

'The repeated mangling of his name just isn't funny.'

I am sorry, I apologise, I sometimes mix Gordon up with Gordon Bennett.

If you don't believe me because I don't like Gordon Bennett

Obsessive and rude.

claig- you are spot on on this thread. And hilarious. Keep it up.

Paul Sykes, that fantastic working class man, worth £650 million, backs UKIP. He is worth far more than Bullingdon Cameron, Osborne and Johnson combined

Oh well. They're not disadvantaged outsiders without access to the resources to run a slick publicity campaign then.

meddie, we live in a democracy. I want you to vote for who you believe is the best. I don't want to convince you to vote UKIP if you don't like them. There are lots of people voting UKIP because they do like them. All I am doing is explaining why it is happening and why the people voting for them are being caricatured as racists by the establishment but not by Lord Glasman who understands why voters are doing it and says that

"I have come to the conclusion that Labour is in danger of losing England"

Nope, I don't. Try again. I'll help, I don't work in politics either. I've no idea where James Chapman went to school but his LinkedIn profile says he went to Oxford.

I haven't voted Labour in a while and didn't vote Labour on either of my ballots on Thursday.

I've already said I read widely, including papers with political platforms I disagree with. That includes the Daily Mail, but I read it critically, including looking at the sources for what it says and being receptive to the idea that it may not be 100% truthful, like all papers. The Mail's record is worse than most, though.

But I'm confused. You were the one who originally brought up education and where people were educated. You've repeatedly talked about 'Etonians' and people from Oxbridge making up a 'powerless' elite, and now you're saying that it's irrelevant.

What you haven't done is give a definition of 'elite' that isn't 'people I disagree with'.

I understand that people are dissatisfied with the state of politics. I bloody well am myself. But that doesn't mean I need to accept UKIP as the only answer, or that I'm not allowed to ask questions of those who claim they are, just as I ask questions of anyone advocating a political party - particularly if they can't accept it has flaws. It's how I practise active citizenship in my adopted country, as I believe I have a duty to do.

The UKIP supporters don't seem keen on answering those questions on their merits, though. I'm not sure why.

In fact - I'm asking these questions because I want to understand UKIP supporters better. If people aren't being honest, obviously I'll challenge that, as you've challenged me when I've said things you don't think are right.

But very few UKIP supporters on this thread have done anyone the courtesy of answering any questions or engaging in any arguments that go beyond the UKIP talking points.

I understand that people are dissatisfied with the state of politics. I bloody well am myself. But that doesn't mean I need to accept UKIP as the only answer, or that I'm not allowed to ask questions of those who claim they are, just as I ask questions of anyone advocating a political party - particularly if they can't accept it has flaws

Absolutely.

'They're not disadvantaged outsiders without access to the resources to run a slick publicity campaign then.'

Yes, they have some money, but unfortunately, I do not think that Patrick O'Flynn is very good. But it doesn't matter because I don't think the Etonians in the media and elsewhere are much good either, so it all evens out.

But as UKIP grow they will become an established party. Pundits are saying that we are now in a 4 party system. Eventually independently wealthy backers will start backing UKIP when they understand how much support they will get from the public and UKIP will become more professional. But UKIP supporters hope that they wil never lose their straight-talking common sense approach and turn into spinners like all the rest.

But Farage won't do that. He will retire before that happens. But he will have caused the earthquake, started the revolution and set the UKIP fox loose in the establishment hen house.

"claig- you are spot on on this thread. And hilarious. Keep it up."

Thanks, mrsruffalo