UKIP Thread

[Red]

The point of British law and the British state is to serve British nationals first and foremost, so it seems eminently sensible to me to allow for British businesses to operate likewise. I certainly can't see any reason to legislate against it, and you haven't offered any.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you a supporter of affirmative action?

In some capacities it might be the point to to serve British nationals first, but not in employment. We live in a free market. You might think nationalistic sentiment is more important in employment, I think whoever is best suited to the job is more important.

I'm not in favour of affirmative action, but you seem to be in this particular case, quite ironic really as I suspect if we were talking about affirmative action in a way that didn't favour British nationals you'd be opposing it.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

In some capacities it might be the point to to serve British nationals first, but not in employment.

Absolute nonsense. The government implements policies to help get Britons into work all the time. Besides, this isn't a restriction placed on employers we're talking about, it's an absence of one.

We live in a free market. You might think nationalistic sentiment is more important in employment, I think whoever is best suited to the job is more important.

More important to who? And how and why?

I'm not in favour of affirmative action, but you seem to be in this particular case, quite ironic really as I suspect if we were talking about affirmative action in a way that didn't favour British nationals you'd be opposing it.

What we're talking about is not affirmative action.

 

[Red]

Absolute nonsense. The government implements policies to help get Britons into work all the time. Besides, this isn't a restriction placed on employers we're talking about, it's an absence of one.



More important to who? And how and why?



What we're talking about is not affirmative action.

The government implements policies to get everyone who is of working age and capable of work into work. I don't recall saying it was a restriction on employers. Where did I say that? I didn't. The only people it would place restrictions on is non-British nationals, which naturally is why you support it.

More important to who? The employer, the person who is most capable of the job. How? Because any sensible employment recruitment policy will be based on employing the person is is best suited for the job irrespective of their nationality. Why? Because that system is logically and morally superior to some idiotic policy based on a person's nationality.

It is affirmative action. Affirmative action is taking action to change procedure ensuring that one group has a better chance of attaining something than other groups. If UKIP, or the BNP or Britain First had a policy which stated there is no obligation for employers to give all applicants an equal chance to apply for a job that is affirmative action because it would place British Nationals at an advantage over non British Nationals. You probably only think it's not affirmative action because it's not blatantly creating legislation that prohibits all non British Nationals.

Without getting into a game of semantics. Do you think it's better that the person who is best suited for a job gets it, or a British National?

Farage isn't content with going for the Labour and Tory voter's, he's now targetting BNP voters.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

The government implements policies to get everyone who is of working age and capable of work into work. I don't recall saying it was a restriction on employers. Where did I say that? I didn't. The only people it would place restrictions on is non-British nationals, which naturally is why you support it.

I feel like I end up having to say this every time we discuss anything, but if you'd just stick to what people say they think, rather than what you imagine they think, then you'd get much less confused much less often.

More important to who? The employer, the person who is most capable of the job. How? Because any sensible employment recruitment policy will be based on employing the person is is best suited for the job irrespective of their nationality. Why? Because that system is logically and morally superior to some idiotic policy based on a person's nationality.

The employer? That makes no sense. The employer would still be able to pick the best person for the job regardless of nationality, they just wouldn't be forced to. As for what's moral and logical, why would the British government, with a mandate to help the British people, place restrictions on private businesses that would hamper them from doing just that? The state's foremost obligation is to it's own people, not economic migrants. They're here for our sake, not the other way around.

It is affirmative action. Affirmative action is taking action to change procedure ensuring that one group has a better chance of attaining something than other groups. If UKIP, or the BNP or Britain First had a policy which stated there is no obligation for employers to give all applicants an equal chance to apply for a job that is affirmative action because it would place British Nationals at an advantage over non British Nationals. You probably only think it's not affirmative action because it's not blatantly creating legislation that prohibits all non British Nationals.

Affirmative action is positive discrimination designed to help a disadvantaged group. The reason affirmative action is different to this, and the reason it is wrong, is because with affirmative action the state is necessarily discriminating against some of it's own citizens.

Without getting into a game of semantics. Do you think it's better that the person who is best suited for a job gets it, or a British National?

Better for the employer? No. Better for the country and the British public on the whole? Yes.

 

[Red]

In what way better for the country as a whole? Just because a person isn't a British citizen it doesn't mean they're not part of the British public. Anyone who lives in Britain is part of the British public.

Let's suppose this ridiculous policy came to pass. The primary purpose of a business is to make profit. Do you think employers would reject a person who is not a British national, but will be more productive in favour of a British national who is less productive and who yields less profit? Profit and competitiveness is the primary motivator isn't it, not some mis placed sense of nationalism?

 

[Tilbury]

Employers should always employ someone based on ability and qualification alone. Their nationality shouldn't come into it. The idea that an employer would 'need someone British' is complete rubbish.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

In what way better for the country as a whole? Just because a person isn't a British citizen it doesn't mean they're not part of the British public. Anyone who lives in Britain is part of the British public.

I've already said that I don't think the state has the same obligation to foreign nationals as British nationals, I'm not going to quibble over what "British public" means.

The primary purpose of a business is to make profit. Do you think employers would reject a person who is not a British national, but will be more productive in favour of a British national who is less productive and who yields less profit? Profit and competitiveness is the primary motivator isn't it, not some mis placed sense of nationalism?

I never said they should or would do that, only that they should be allowed to.

The idea that an employer would 'need someone British' is complete rubbish.

Nobody here has suggested that as far as I can see.

 

[Tilbury]

Farage has, otherwise he wouldn't want to repeal these anti-discrimination laws.

 

[Red]

I've already said that I don't think the state has the same obligation to foreign nationals as British nationals, I'm not going to quibble over what "British public" means.



I never said they should or would do that, only that they should be allowed to.



Nobody here has suggested that as far as I can see.

I didn't ask whether they should do that. You're very good at wheedling your way out of answering direct questions from people aren't you?

I asked you Do you think employers would reject a person who is not a British national, but will be more productive in favour of a British national who is less productive and who yields less profit? Profit and competitiveness is the primary motivator isn't it, not some mis placed sense of nationalism? You singularly avoided the questions.

Would you prefer it if no foreign workers were allowed to come to the UK? A non evasive and non verbose answer will suffice.



Farage says he's quitting if he doesn't get elected to parliament. South Thanet the country is depending on you.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

I asked you Do you think employers would reject a person who is not a British national, but will be more productive in favour of a British national who is less productive and who yields less profit? Profit and competitiveness is the primary motivator isn't it, not some mis placed sense of nationalism? You singularly avoided the questions.

Some will, some won't. It's not a particularly useful question to ask though, because presumably in the vast majority of cases in which this will be applicable the difference between the two is going to be negligible, if not none-existent. Nobody is expecting a firm to employ a local amateur over a foreign expert, but might a patriotic employer rather see blue-collar jobs go fellow Brits? I can see that.

Would you prefer it if no foreign workers were allowed to come to the UK?

Nope.

 

[Red]

In the cases where the difference is negligible perhaps patriotism would win over sometimes. However, there are quite a few employers who prefer to take on non British citizens in low skilled jobs because they perceive them has having a better work ethic.

I watched a programme a couple of years ago where 2 employers, one a farmer and the other a restaurant owner each took on 3 eastern Europeans and 3 British citizens. In the restaurant the eastern Europeans settled in fine and worked hard. The British citizens didn't do so well. One of them didn't even turn up and the others were moaning all the time. The farm work was similar with the eastern Europeans getting a lot of praise from the employer and the Brits not so. I'm not saying this is wholly indicative of how things are and it's stereotyping on their part, but it would explain why some employers opt for non-British citizens.

 

[sl1k]

Migrants that come from poorer countries with lower living standards and quality of life, do tend to work harder as they're motivated and want to build a life for themselves. They also do many jobs that the 'typical' Brit wouldn't want to do, even those who lack skills and/or qualifications.

I guess there's a feeling of entitlement or saink.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

It's something we don't really talk about, but there is I think this racist undercurrent from the Labour types that not only do British people not want to do those jobs, but we shouldn't encourage them to either, they're 'beneath' us and would be better off left to a migrant class that will work for pennies, which in itself just perpetuates the immigration pyramid scheme as the next generation are given different aspirations.

 

[Alty]

It's something we don't really talk about, but there is I think this racist undercurrent from the Labour types that not only do British people not want to do those jobs, but we shouldn't encourage them to either, they're 'beneath' us and would be better off left to a migrant class that will work for pennies, which in itself just perpetuates the immigration pyramid scheme as the next generation are given different aspirations.

Indeed. Working all the hours God sends for poor pay while living in a two bed flat with 7 other people is an appalling existence. Some migrants are willing to do it because of their circumstances back home. But it's not a desirable situation and the unwillingness of British people to do the same certainly doesn't make them lazy. They rightly expect better.

 

[Red]

It's something we don't really talk about, but there is I think this racist undercurrent from the Labour types that not only do British people not want to do those jobs, but we shouldn't encourage them to either, they're 'beneath' us and would be better off left to a migrant class that will work for pennies, which in itself just perpetuates the immigration pyramid scheme as the next generation are given different aspirations.

In the example I cited it was the capitalist business owners saying the British people didn't want the jobs. You think there's a racist (don't know why you used that term), undercurrent from the Labour types regarding this? What are you basing that on?

 

[Modernist]

So sad that people actually want to vote for these loons who are set it seems on taking the UK back to the dark ages, culture changes times move on, but people...some people don't want to. Weird.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

So sad that people actually want to vote for these loons who are set it seems on taking the UK back to the dark ages, culture changes times move on, but people...some people don't want to. Weird.

People want a sensible approach to immigration and a referendum on the EU. What's sad is that a party like UKIP is the only one prepared to offer both of those things.

 

[Red]

Did you see my question EG?

 

[merseyboyred]

https://twitter.com/GoodallGiles/status/578659793675685889

 

[Alty]

https://twitter.com/GoodallGiles/status/578659793675685889

They're in a bit of trouble, actually. The drip-drip of nutters every few weeks was manageable, perhaps even to be expected of a party that's gone from nowhere to 30,000+ members in no time. But having to suspend 2 in a day and another leaving citing open racism just looks fucking awful.

I still think there's a blindingly obvious space for a centre-left Eurosceptic party in the UK. It's an open goal for Labour but they're refusing to take the shot.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Because mass immigration is a core Labour party policy, whether they'll dare admit it or not.

 

[Alty]

Because mass immigration is a core Labour party policy, whether they'll dare admit it or not.

Well yes but things can and should change. People seem totally oblivious to the fact Labour were advocating European withdrawal well into the 1980s. There's nothing in traditional social democratic thinking that says mass immigration is necessary or even desirable. And the bulk of the Labour base certainly don't want it.

 

[sl1k]

would be better off left to a migrant class that will work for pennies

Which would have been fine if we had enough skilled workers to slot in other areas of the economy, but we don't. While the migrant class drive down value of labour.

Politicians are either thick, or seriously fucking with us. Most probably both.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

I think the "bigoted old woman" comments perhaps give us an insight into what the Labour bourgeoisie think about the poor.

 

[Alty]

I saw the Trevor Phillips documentary earlier today, btw. Really quite interesting. I'd recommend it.

As suspected, from Farage's comments it's clear he's making an error, albeit one that isn't geared towards blocking ethnic minority access to work as some rather disingenuous commentators have claimed.

 

[Red]

He's basically talking about British jobs for British workers, isn't he? Could swear I've heard that before...

Can't say I think this is a wise move, but the widespread misrepresentation is pathetic and once again makes it look like the establishment are engaging in a smear campaign.

Not just Gordon Brown either

"
We want British jobs for British workers and will make sure that our workers come first."

https://www.britainfirst.org/mission-statement/

I also like this bit from their mission statement
"We will make Britain a beautiful country once again where you can leave your door unlocked and your children can play in the streets."

 

[Alty]

Reading the mission statement...I always find it interesting how these racist groups bang on about the importance of Christianity. Maybe I'm exposing myself as ignorant here, but how many BNP/Britain First supporters actually have the slightest interest in going to church?

I also find it puzzling that even racist groups make this 'zero immigration' pledge. So no foreign footballers? No room for a white university lecturer who'd like to move to remote St Andrews to teach a few courses? Just seems too bonkers even for the intellectually feeble.

 

[Alty]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32009961

Well that's nice.

 

[SUTSS]

I don't get that style of protest. All you do is entrench views on one side and paint yourself in a bad light. If all you can do to fight an idea is to shut it down then you don't belong in the discussion.

 

[.V.]

I can't stand Farage, but I don't think that's on when he's having a meal with his family. Bit different If it was a political event.