UKIP: UKIP fourth in Crewe by-election

Geoffrey Collier · 26-05-2008, 08:36 PM

At least my computer is really ill, to produce a posting like the previous one. It has lost all sense of duty.

Independence Now! · 28-05-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob FM

So the BNP want to bring back Grammar Schools, would not that be a little counter productive given the intellectual ability of many of their front line troops.

When you are ready to engage in rational and sensible debate I will debate with you. In the meantime, I think you will find that the BNP has quite a few members who are above average intellegence and that is proved by being in the party. After all, only thickos could think that either Labour or Tory have any real interest in improving Britain's state education system.

Many BNP members would have benefitted from a Grammar school education. At least we in the BNP want to improve social mobility by bringing these schools back rather than have a state education system with absymal standards at all schools which makes those parents lucky enough to be able to afford it have to pay twice over to send their child/children to a private school like David Cameron and friends want to see continuing.

mrabody · 28-05-2008, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millennium3

Not only costings, a recognition that a flat rate of tax of 33% will essentially benefit those on the highest rates of pay with the shortfall in tax revenue being met by a reduction in government services - which are generally for the benefit of the worse off.

Whereas I can accept that many taxpayers on earnings above £36,000 would support such a move, these will not make up a sufficiently large proportion of the voters and would not provide UKIP with enough votes to win a single seat at any GE [vital if our relationship with the EU is to change].

Most of the discussions on the result of the C&N election recognised that if UKIP want to get MP's, they must offer policies which appeal to a broad section of the electorate. This single policy will ensure that UKIP cannot progress. To put it into context, in the tax year 2004/05 the mean income in the UK was £22,800 - with around 25/26m earning less than £36,000 and less than 5m earning more.

It strikes me that once again UKIP are offering policies which appeal to the traditional Tory voter with the aim of pressuring the Tory leadership into policy changes rather than an honest attempt to build a party for government. Instead they will continue to create a honey trap for those vehemently anti EU in order to get members to give their precious time, energy and money to a cause the leadership knows cannot be won, whilst they enjoy an income of, probably, in excess of 10 times this mean income.

You are either completely ignorant of the details of the UKIP flat tax proposal or you are choosing to ignore key components of it. The personal exemption would be raised to £9000 which of course would remove many low paid workers from the tax rolls entirely, or nearly so. And even people earning say, 25,000 would benefit because the 33% rate is calculated on income over the personal exemption, and includes NI.

As for paying for it. I'm sure that in a £600 billion + budget and between 600+ Quangos there's a little fat can be trimmed.

I think this policy could have enormous appeal for people on lower incomes. For example - someone earning £12,000 per year would pay £2032.40 in tax and NI (£39.08 per week). Under UKIPs proposals that person would pay £990 in tax, saving them £1042.40 in the course of the year or £20.05 per week. Are you suggesting that the poor wouldn't support that policy. According to my calculations someone earning about £25,000 per year would save about 782.40 in tax and NI payments. Again, that is a fairly significant amount of money in a taxpayers pocket.

But of course, you know better, and you know that in a time of price inflation noone but the rich would be attracted to a policy that lets them keep more of their money to spend on food, petrol, and utilities.

mrabody · 28-05-2008, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millennium3

UI: The figures I quote are for Income and are from Wikipedia. UKIP's policy is set out here:

UK Independence Party - UK Independence Party Flat Rate Tax Policy : September 2006

In simple terms, the tax burden on those paying 40% tax will be reduced to 33%. According to UKIP's figures, there will be savings for lower earners to a maximum of £20pw. The comparative figures given by UKIP only show the benefits for those earning up £50,000 - and for a very good reason - to take this comparison further demonstrates who really benefits from such a change.

The highest income group in the UKIP table shows that someone earning £50k will be better off by around £30pw. It makes no mention of the 1.68m [2004/5 quoted by Wikipedia] who earn in excess of this figure. If we take for our example the income of an MEP, who by a conservative estimate based on TW's figure of 300k, earned £235,000, if all of this were paid as taxable income [which it is not as the majority is paid as untaxed expenses] the saving would be 7% of £200k - £14k pa - £280pw [would this cover an extra decent meal with wine and a high class prostitute each week?]. For those 6,000+ who earn more than £1m - the savings is likely to be £1,400pw+.

Many of the people earning over £50,000 per annum are NOT paying 40% tax on the margins. They are professionals or business persons who's business is run under a limited company and who consequently pay lower tax rates with the added benefits of being able to write off many expenses essentially lowering their taxable income.

Geoffrey Collier · 29-05-2008, 09:35 AM

Independence Now: At those grammar schools which the BNP want established, will they be taught to spell benefited in English or the American, benefitted? Not that it is important, but details should not be neglected.

Chip · 29-05-2008, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex McKee

If you take a look at the results, the bulk of that 2.2% came out of Labour's vote share. Labour dropped 18.2% and the Conservatives gained 16.9%. The only logical place for the remaining vote share to have gone is to UKIP.

Since we've not stood in this seat before, this is good progress in that seat.

I agree with what you say however during the 2006 / 2007 Council elections we were at around 10% of the vote (14% in one case) and rising and this was achieved without big money being spent and we worked on our own. Perhaps local candidates have a better appeal or perhaps, like me, everyone wants labour out and the Conservatives seem to be the only answer.

Independence Now! · 29-05-2008, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier

Independence Now: At those grammar schools which the BNP want established, will they be taught to spell benefited in English or the American, benefitted? Not that it is important, but details should not be neglected.

Ok I made a spelling error! They will be centres of educational excellence like many were in the past until Mrs Thatcher, Shirley Williams ect destroyed them.

Britannist · 30-05-2008, 03:49 AM

The results of the first opinion poll since the Crewe-Nantwich Parliamentary By-Election of 22.5.2008 have been published in today's Daily Telegraph - and the Cameron-Tories are down 2% in the new YouGov poll compared to one conducted by YouGov earlier this month:

Cameron-Tories down 2% in new opinion poll - but still well ahead of Labour

30-05-2008, 03:49 AM	#58 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 23,154	Cameron-Tories down in new opinion poll The results of the first opinion poll since the Crewe-Nantwich Parliamentary By-Election of 22.5.2008 have been published in today's Daily Telegraph - and the Cameron-Tories are down 2% in the new YouGov poll compared to one conducted by YouGov earlier this month: Cameron-Tories down 2% in new opinion poll - but still well ahead of Labour

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

26-05-2008, 08:36 PM	#51 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,323	At least my computer is really ill, to produce a posting like the previous one. It has lost all sense of duty.

29-05-2008, 09:35 AM	#55 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,323	Independence Now: At those grammar schools which the BNP want established, will they be taught to spell benefited in English or the American, benefitted? Not that it is important, but details should not be neglected.