British Politics Thread.

[Wolfshade]

The ukip winning of seats is quite predictable. It is common that when a person swithced party affiliation that that person will be re-elected at a by-election and at the next election it will revert to the original party. These things are quite common place.

[Denzark]

I think the level of irrationality displayed by people who automatically castigate UKIP and all their voters is as irrational, as the small proportion of UKIP voters and members who are with UKIP for purely racist reasons.

You can't write off the genuine concerns of people in rural areas with heavy immigrant populations.

The original make up of the EU as originally voted for some 40-50 years ago, was massively different and it is not unreasonable for people to consider change that they have never previously been in a position to influence.

[Wolfshade]

Yes, we have never had a say on the Mastrict treaty.

[Mr Mystery]

Yes, we have never had a say on the Mastrict treaty.

John Major's fault that one.

And that to me is the greatest issue in UK politics, especially when it comes to Europe. Nobody gives facts. Just yes or no opinions. The plebs are kept in the dark and fed poop. We're mushrooms.

[Psychosplodge]

The problem I have with them is they are like the libdems in that they try to be everything to all people and don't really stand for anything past a couple of core items.

[Wolfshade]

John Major's fault that one.

And that to me is the greatest issue in UK politics, especially when it comes to Europe. Nobody gives facts. Just yes or no opinions. The plebs are kept in the dark and fed poop. We're mushrooms.

The trouble is that the "facts" aren't know.

Look at the row over the 1930's NHS spending levels.

[Wolfshade]

Fun times ahead: [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-30703528[/url]

An interesting factoid floated around yesterday.

Conservaties estimate that Labour spending plans would cost an additional £23Bn, which is to be expected, the party in power estimates what the proposals the opposition are doing and makes a guess at how much funding that will cost. Usually, the assumptions made are quite unflattering and inflate the costs to make it seem worse.

But bizarely, the Labour figure was £47Bn extra.

[Mr Mystery]

Tories hit the poor, Labour hit the rich. Everyone wallops those trying to make headway.

[Wolfshade]

It isn't so simplistic.

Take the train fare rise. The cost of rail subsidy is felt by everyone who pays tax, yet only 5% of the population uses the trains. So there is an argument that only those who use trains should pay for them.

[Psychosplodge]

I thought everyone just picked on those in the middle not on tax credits that pay PAYEE these days?