to wonder what UKIP have to offer the traditional labour voter

[crossroads3]

3 UKIP politicians on Newsnight last night. All saying how many of their supporters used to be Labour voters and how much of an opening there now is in politics for UKIP.

Leaving aside any personal feelings on the matter (), now that the referendum has gone the way they wanted, what can UKIP offer these voters in terms of real policies that can improve their lives?

Genuine question.

UKIP are targeting the disenfranchised who feel they've lost their voice. Sadly the voice they're providing is one that demonises other groups to make them feel better.

If my neighbour was an EU natiinal middle class doctor I would believe EU migrants were net contributors.

If I was a 50 year old man now on JSA previously working in the secondary sector living next door to a 23 year old EU migrant. I would resent the employer for undercutting me by age and nationality. If I was living with a wife and two children when next door lived two families both in the same setup they have fewer costs.

Then being told that next door who earns £10k pa is a net contributor when I know they can claim tax credits and they used the nhs for the births. I see the children go to school. I know what tax someone in £10k pays. I know what tax credits pay and I know the childbirth the HV and schooling aren't free.

That man will feel no mainstream political party is telling him the truth and he is being gaslighted. He knows what he sees is not a net contributor family.

Yes I agree, but now that we will apparently be leaving the EU, how will they support their voters in terms of real, concrete, socially minded policies.

And can a right wing party ever be the voice of the poor apart from on single issues like the free movement of people?

I don't think they actually have anything to offer. They come across as a mate but in reality they're a wolf in sheep's clothing.
classonline.org.uk/blog/item/dont-be-fooled-ukip-offers-nothing-to-britains-workers

(My post was a response to t4gnut).

I think there are 2 types of Labour voters. You've got your Islington elite & the hardcore traditional vote, who were historically working class, yet still liked the monarchy etc. I do struggle to see what Labour, since the sad death of John Smith have had to offer the traditional Labour voter from working class backgrounds. I can really see UKIP making ground here sadly

If labour support post brexit free flow of people they will lose the WC labour vote.

I think that that claim was intended not to attract UKIP voters to Labour, but to ensure Labour loose part of current voters' support at being associated with UKIP.

If Labour becomes the party of choice for UKIP sympathisers, it means something has gone very wrong with Labour.

Having said that, forget about UKIP, I cannot even understand what side is Corbyn with, so I am no longer voting for them anyway.

Labour today offers little to traditional working class Labour voters. It is increasingly seen as a 'leftie' party with Corbyn at the helm, full of fanciful ideas, little action, embracing mass immigration and decrying anyone who questions that as racist.

Working class people, who are often those feeling the negative impact of mass immigration most keenly, are sick of being called racist or bigotted (well done Gordon Brown, your outburst didn't help)

Aside from migration their policies would be a disaster for that kind of voter. But I don't really believe people vote for UKIP wanting them to get power. It's just a protest vote against immigration and the main parties unwillingness to listen.

I think that their main campaigning angle going forward will to be to ensure that Brexit terms don't include free movement of people.

I really wonder who are those experiencing the impact of mass immigration.

I have never felt resentment towards immigration in highly educated/affluent circles, even when there are quite a lot of immigrants in the sector, like banking and academia.

But I spent a couple of months stacking shelves at a major retailer last year. There, the resentment towards immigrants was huge. They really felt the country was being taken over by swarms of immigrants, who were stealing their taxes and jobs, even when the store was struggling to find enough people to hire and the only foreigner they had seen in their lives was... Me.

I blame it on the Daily Mail.

I blame it on the Daily Mail.

You aren't wrong there!

I don't disagree...

I really wonder who are those experiencing the impact of mass immigration

People living in poor areas? Cheek by jowl housing?

Hmos or housing that should be classified as an HMO but more than often isn't, can cause huge issues.

They have become very common now all over the country. That is for instance a terraced house with two/three bedrooms being turned over entirely to bedrooms, with multiple occupants in each. A couple of these houses on one road and its easy to see why it can become an issue. If too many people are using one house there are knock on issues of facilities, noise, rubbish and so on.

I have read many "personal impact" stories of people living next to such housing, with social issues, fighting, urinating on the street, rubbish pile up, rats, child truancy, constant noise, smoking and so on. As YourPerception has said, when your party is telling you these immigrants are a positive contribution to the UK and net contributors, I think one can understand why those people have been forced to turn to UKIP.

Obviously we cant put all immigrants into the same bracket, most are net contributors and are good neighbours and good positive members of society, but with such high volume of migrants and therefore high numbers of good and less positive, one can see how this experience can cloud a voters view.

Andi, my husband works in the construction industry and when Poland ascended to the EU his wages halved almost literally overnight. People work from contract to contract in that industry, not in perm jobs. The floor literally fell out of their wages and they have never recovered and also took a hit when Romania etc joined. Some jobs have been hit worse than others, for example concrete fixing is low skilled, but is a really dirty, nasty, unpleasant job so they used to have to pay a premium to get people to do it. Since ascension it has become a NMW job. Jobs in London also used to attract a premium because of the cost of living there, now they are generally about the same as Yorkshire, impossible for a family to live on and essentially poverty wages in many cases.

How anybody can claim that immigration has no impact on housing is beyond me. Our population is increasing by the size of Iceland annually with absolutely no coherent plan for housing. There's no real availability of social housing and temporary housing is often basically slum like Victorian conditions with a whole family living and sleeping in one room. The cost of private lets and the fact they are often subdivided and subdivided to cram more people in means conditions are often similar there. And of course the housing ladder is impossible for many to get onto, due to price rises associated with rising demand caused by a rapidly expanding population.

There's usually little resentment in academia or banking because they're rich enough to be insulated from those problems.

And we were net contributors before ascension. We're not now because the drop in wages means we now get tax credits. I suspect that the 'net contribution' immigrants make would in reality be a net deficit if the reduction in wages and therefore tax contributions for other workers was taken into account.

UKIP top ten policies at last year's election were:
Committing an additional £3billion of annual spending on the NHS in England and Wales.
Ensuring people on the national minimum wage do not have to pay income tax.
Introducing a new system of control for immigration using an equivalent of the Australian points-based system.
Cutting the amount spent by Government on overseas aid.
Holding an immediate referendum on whether or not the UK should be a member of the European Union.
Increasing spending on defence and the armed forces.
Abolishing inheritance tax.
Increasing the number of grammar schools.
Scrapping HS2, the planned high speed rail line between London, the Midlands and Northern England.
Removing “green levies” for energy companies which tax the sources of pollution or carbon emission.

I dont know what UKIPs policies are, but I would imagine some people will use it as a protest vote. I think, to some, they are a blunt instrument.
I dont really know what Labour offer the traditional working class either.

It's difficult to see how some of those pledges e.g. abolishing inheritance tax, increasing the number of grammar schools or scrapping HS2 would help people in say the north-east or Cornwall.

Scrapping HS2 and inheritance tax would appeal very much to the wealthy residents of Buckinghamshire. Bucks already has grammar schools; it's the Sec Mods there which need to be improved.

BillSykesDog I totally agree, DH is in a similar situation, he has seen an influx of primarily Eastern European migrants pretty much swarm his industry, from labourers, to dry liners, bricklayers etc. And he is outraged because loopholes are used to get past the fact many have an unsafe grasp of English. The 'rule' now is that as long as a group of 5 migrant workers have an English fluent 'translator' then it's fine, however on a building site those 5 are not always working side by side, they could be dotted all over, it is patently unsafe and he also sees larger 'groups' and it is overlooked because they are cheaper labour (will work for 4 or 5 pounds less and hour than a British worker).