What do you think about UKIP?

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

I question the validity of that source. I've heard as much as 93% from more specific sources.

There's quite a bit of dissatisfaction with the system in Chile. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/10/world/americas/10iht-chile.html?_r=3&

New York Times? Really?

This article details the massive advantages it has over Social Security and other authoritarian models.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

There's quite a bit of dissatisfaction with the system in Chile. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/10/world/americas/10iht-chile.html?_r=3&

New York Times? Really?

This article details the massive advantages it has over Social Security and other authoritarian models.

We're full-on thread-jacking now. Let's get back on subject.

[Shove Piggy Shove]

No, it's quite correct. Pulling out of the EU would be terrible for the UK.

Indeed, the pulling out method never works

[Scholencia]

And what exactly makes you think that?

Norway and UK = Anglo
Ukraine = Slavic

Norway and UK= germanic

[Fordorsia]

They have a stance on gun control that I agree with, so that alone gets them in my good books.

[Afalia]

They are awful. However they will be destroyed come 2015 when nobody votes for them in the general so I don't worry about it too much.

[Greater Mackonia]

Well I dislike their ideology and policies, however respect them somewhat more then the other parties for actually sticking to their principles and not fighting over the centre.

Apart from that though I loathe them on a mitochondriac level.

[Imperializt Russia]

The UK will not grant free trade with an independent Scotland as it is not an EU member state nor a part of the Union. Northern Ireland is a part of the Union, and the Republic of Ireland is an EU member state.

Well my point about Norther Ireland and the Republic is that we had free movement of people and goods across the border before either the UK or ROI were members of the EU. My point was that bilateral free trade and travel arrangements can exist without political union between two countries. The UK would not be allowed to have free trade with an independent Scotland as the EU doesn't allow its members to have free trade deals that aren't on a EU wide basis. However their is no practical reason why we couldn't have free movement of peoples and goods within Europe without a political union. Aside from the fact it would take time to arrange those deals.

Well, leaving a visa-border between the north and the south wouldn't have made the UK any more popular during the troubles. Special historical reasons.

[Britannic Realms]

Let me expand more on my previous comment.

Whilst I do, for the most part, take a eurosceptic stance, I believe that UKIP are undermining Britain's chance to have a referendum on the EU by sapping Tory votes. Obviously, UKIP probably won't take any seats, but all of the vote splitting will seriously damage Conservative candidates across the country. I'm also opposed to UKIP because of their right wing, kind of populist policies.

In regards to Nigel Farage, I think he can be quite engaging and/or entertaining; but I do feel that he tries too hard to portray the 'common' image at times.

[The USOT]

They are awful. However they will be destroyed come 2015 when nobody votes for them in the general so I don't worry about it too much.

I wouldn't be so sure. Often, you actually can be far more effective as a party acting as a voting block rather than just being in power. UKIP and the Lib Dem parties are pretty close to eachother. UKIP has enough credibility (unfortunately) to potentially be a more significant voting block even if it comes to power, and can at least inform the debate.

[Pesda]

Norway and UK = Anglo
Ukraine = Slavic

Norway and UK= germanic

I'm not very germanic, thank you, despite having to be part of your united kingdom...

[Rabopari]

there all about Nigel Farage and no one else. narcissism

[Parti Ouvrier]

Just a note to the reactionary Eurosceptics, Norway isn't this independent paradise like you sceptics claim, its actually very integrated into the EU.
The independent - no pun intended.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 99849.html

[Afalia]

They are awful. However they will be destroyed come 2015 when nobody votes for them in the general so I don't worry about it too much.

I wouldn't be so sure. Often, you actually can be far more effective as a party acting as a voting block rather than just being in power. UKIP and the Lib Dem parties are pretty close to eachother. UKIP has enough credibility (unfortunately) to potentially be a more significant voting block even if it comes to power, and can at least inform the debate.

I'm skeptical of that to be honest. UKIP are filling a hole in the market as it were for the public's anti-EU sentiment. By the time 2015 rolls around both main parties will be more eurosceptic than they have been in recent years and promising referendums in all likelihood. UKIP's role will then be defunct. They may be able to hang on until 2017, (assuming a referendum takes place at that point), but after that they'll slowly blow away in the wind.

[Divair]

Care to expand on this?

They do not want to destroy white countries. Expanded.

What are white countries? Do we have blue countries? Can I move to one of those? Or maybe purple?

[Forsakia]

They do not want to destroy white countries. Expanded.

What are white countries? Do we have blue countries? Can I move to one of those? Or maybe purple?

British ones were traditionally pink if that's any good.

[Greater-London]

Well, leaving a visa-border between the north and the south wouldn't have made the UK any more popular during the troubles. Special historical reasons.

Perhaps, but why it happened was irrelevant. I was pointing out that on a practical level you CAN have two states with free movement of people and goods without a political union. It doesn't matter what the circumstances where in the past I was just showing how it could be done. Also I'm fairly sure the rules of moving between north and south were set in stone before the troubles took of.

[Greater-London]

Just a note to the reactionary Eurosceptics, Norway isn't this independent paradise like you sceptics claim, its actually very integrated into the EU.
The independent - no pun intended.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 99849.html

Challenging the EU isn't reactionary at all its revolutionary. Plenty of Eurosceptic parties are on the political left as well. Although I agree that the Norway situation isn't ideal and I really like your pun, I don't see why Britain or indeed anyone can't pursue a different sort of deal.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Britain's Tea Party and political cancer.

Things tend to be true when me and Estado Paulista agree.

[Parti Ouvrier]

Just a note to the reactionary Eurosceptics, Norway isn't this independent paradise like you sceptics claim, its actually very integrated into the EU.
The independent - no pun intended.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 99849.html

Challenging the EU isn't reactionary at all its revolutionary.<snip>

I have no problem with criticism and challenging the EU, I do take issue with the reactionary position of withdrawal from the EU.

Plenty of Eurosceptic parties are on the political left as well.

And shame on them for their left-nationalism, (SPEW, CPB,SWP,RMT supporting the hapless No2eu electoral front*). Shame on Bob Crow for putting British workers interests ahead of other European workers. I'm glad the CPGB doesn't take the same position.

* http://no2eu.com/

[Greater-London]

I have no problem with criticism and challenging the EU, I do take issue with the reactionary position of withdrawal from the EU. And shame on them fro their left-nationalism, (SPEW, CPB,SWP,RMT supporting the hapless No2eu electoral front*). Shame on Bob Crow for putting British workers interests ahead of other European workers. I'm glad the CPGB doesn't take the same position.

* http://no2eu.com/

Why is withdrawing strictly reactionary? Also if you have no problem with people criticizing or challenging the EU then surely you wouldn't have a problem leaving the EU as well, if through the process of debate the con's started outweighing the pro's? Only allowing debate and change within certain parameters rings of authoritarianism.

Your also suggesting that only nationalist want to leave the EU which isn't true either. What about people who see the EU as a threat to European democracy? or its rampant corruption? or its propping up of big business? there are so many reasons to be anti EU without using a nationalist argument. Also Bob Crow is paid to represent and protect the interests of his members from his perspective protecting British workers is the right thing to do.

[Arkinesia]

Why is withdrawing strictly reactionary?

It's a nationalist feeling not grounded in facts or statistics or any measurable data.

[Flanders-Holland]

I wish that UKIP never existed at all.

[Greater-London]

Why is withdrawing strictly reactionary?

It's a nationalist feeling not grounded in facts or statistics or any measurable data.

Perhaps from a UKIP angle, however there are legitimate reasons to be support withdrawing from the EU based in measurable date and facts. You don't have to be a nationalist to be anti - EU, its a common misconception and it dumbs down debate.

[The New Lowlands]

It's a nationalist feeling not grounded in facts or statistics or any measurable data.

Perhaps from a UKIP angle, however there are legitimate reasons to be support withdrawing from the EU based in measurable date and facts. You don't have to be a nationalist to be anti - EU, its a common misconception and it dumbs down debate.

If it's based in data and facts, why have I never seen them?