Any UKIP supporters on here? What exactly are you voting for?

[chicaguapa]

I confess I don't know what the UKIP policies are, but wondered if the people voting for them could explain to me what they are please. Thanks.

'Dawndonna Sun 05-May-13 17:07:07

And if you cant?
Starve presumably. Because there are plenty of carers who are not in a position to work for their benefits. But if you posit that in this place you'll get shot down in flames. Even by people who provided a service for children with a disability. Apparently because they are yours/mine we should just get on with it and support them, be damned grateful for any help we do get and stop acting in such an entitled fashion.
It matters not whether or not you 'put into the pot' before children/partners/parents developed illnesses or disabilities.
Working for benefits is not an option for many, but people can find ways around that. Xenia once suggested plenty that I could do with the six hours broken rest I get in every twentyfour.'

Actually you can work for benefits AND look after a loved one.

It's rather simple.

We class your care as 'work' and pay you accordingly.

They want to scare the hell out of the main parties and make them address the stuff that matters to them ? not spend time on the Leveson Report or arguing about gay marriage or hand wringing over things that have no relevance to most people?s lives at a time people are struggling on the bare basics of just surviving month to month

^ This.

Tiggy- just because someone is willing to hold a populist rhetoric does not mean they should be voted for quite the opposite in fact. I just hope that those 1 million people who voted UKIP looked beyond the rhetoric to actual policies, and thought through the ramifications of potentially voting in this party.

If a majority of the electorate thought that killing unwanted children should be allowed (to pick an extreme and unlikely (I hope) to be found policy in any of the political parties decent enough to run), would that make it a good policy? Would it make it a policy worthy of consideration and debate?

isn't carer's allowance only £58.45 a week?

i can't think of the adjective i want here, maybe someone can help me out but

We class your care as 'work' and pay you accordingly

in the context of £58.45/week

yowza.

accordingly, indeed

George83 - yes, but a lot of UKIP's manifesto just sounds too good to be true. They are promising simple solutions to complex economic issues. The numbers aren't adding up.

It works out at £1.49 per hour based on a 39 hour week.
NMW anyone?
Oh, and I would love to only do a 39 hour week. Doesn't work like that.
I used to be a lecturer. Piece of cake by comparison.

And, the UK is not going to be overrun by Romanians and Bulgarians. We are paying into the EU, but we also get lots back. I kept seeing the UKIP posters around here: Enough is enough! Stop Immigration or something.

There is a slogan Hitler used in the late 1920s or ealy 30s: Enough now! Vote Hitler! Refering to being exploited and taken over by jews. Only 1% of the German population was Jewish! He gathered votes by promising solving local issues and he promised quick fixes to the economy.

that is totally shitty dawndonna and wrong

"If a majority of the electorate thought that killing unwanted children should be allowed"

I think the stats for elective termination when Downs has been established by test were given near the start of this thread (or possibly a similar one).

Sadly, a figure of 90% termination rate rings a bell. Clearly, a vast majority of people exposed to this horrible dilemma think it should be allowed.

I meant born children- not wanting to start a pro-choice/anti-abortion debate. Not the right forum. I hoped that that's one policy that 99% of people would agree was an abhorrent one.

there is a far cry between what people choose, when given the choice, and making it mandatory

many people choose not to test at all

i didn't, with either pregnancy

neither did several friends

Jesus tap dancing Christ.

You lot don't half jump before you understand.

I think a work for benefits scheme has many advantages over the current scheme.

I recognise carers can't work for their benefit so we class their care as benefit (in this totally new system).

I would say 24/7 full time care should attract a pay of a good £20k a year. This would go to the carer, extra cash could be pad as neccesary to offset costs of special adaptions etc.

Added to that, working for benefits should attract leave time and education (ie credits towards courses), a holiday for a carer would be thus have to be covered by a suitable care replacement. Unless the cared for went too...

Have a good scan f the above, I'm sure you can fine something to wail about.

I don't like any of the major parties at the moment and I like their leaders even less. So UKIP have probably come along at a good time to give them a shake up. Labour get rid of Millliband but please not Harriet Harman. And then they might have a better chance of election.

" I hoped that that's one policy that 99% of people would agree was an abhorrent one."

Duchesse, please accept my apologies. I misunderstood the point you were making.

tiggy, you misunderstand me. I was using my example to illustrate the fact that there are limits to the the power of the people. To say that if a majority of people wanted something awful, that wouldn't make it worthy of debate and considerations. I suppose that what I'm trying to work out is the outer limits of democracy- of course we all want democracy, but at what cost? And how much of it? In uncertain economic times, when life is frankly a lot more shit for many people, it's sadly only human to try to find someone to blame- does that natural urge to find the scapegoat really need to be aired in public and debated? How much of people's primal fears really should be brought out into the open and debated? Genuine questions.

Gabsid I think Nazi Germany is not a good comparison. The immigration population make up alot more than 1% and in the Times recently there was an article about the indigenous population being in the minority in 50 years' time - great.

I think immigration does need sorting out and the politicians haven't been listening. This issue has been a problem for the past 10 years' and politicians should have addressed it instead of continuing with it.

'We class your care as 'work' and pay you accordingly.'

yes please Lazarus. Carers generally work 140 hours a week. At NMW that would be roughly £1000 a week (done in my head so rough)
Yes please. And can we have 5 weeks paid leave a year too.

i think about this sieglinde

chibi, it's interesting that only we, the Auslanders, see the risk. Maybe it's a remote one. But it IS there.

You may all know this from Martin Niemoller

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

They did indeed come for Niemoller and he spent seven years in concentration camps, regretting his own antisemitism.

" we all want democracy, but at what cost? And how much of it? "

Now, I suspect, we get to the meat of the matter................

My first instinct is that there should be no limits on democracy. If a democratic majority voted for the unspeakable however, who has the right to deny it ? And where would any such denial leave democracy ?

alemci - Jews in living in 1920s Germany were 1% of the population, that didn't stop Hitler to make them responsible for the country's dire economic situation. There were many other reasons but it wasn't the Jews.