it's got everything to do with it. A bit of snow (for instance) wouldn't cause a fraction of the problems it does without the accompanying population density.
Rubbish
The problem is that there is little or no preparation by whoever is responsible for keeping the roads clear Lots of traffic shifts snow faster than less traffic BTW
I will complain. Isn't that UKIP's raison d'etre. That the UK cannot accommodate a larger population.
Certain parts of the UK may be able to accommodate a larger population, but people don't (in general) want to live in those places. To a great extent they want to live in London, and other cities, and expect to be subsidised and assisted in doing so.
Some of the reasons why we shouldn't need a larger population are that
a) we have enough people here already to do the jobs that need doing and
b) there is no economic benefit from allowing non-residents to do such jobs and
c) we are unable to cope with increasing populations in certain areas.
As I say, that is UKIP's raison d'etre. It was also Cameron's stated aim in 2010, although he has clearly demonstrated his inability to deliver, for which we therefore need to leave the EU.
a) It depends on what those jobs are and whether enough of the resident population have the skills to do them.
b) There is if the incomers have skills that are in short supply – remember the brain drain? They could also potentially train others.
c) There might be a strain on the system in some areas, but I haven't seen any hard evidence that it can't cope. Are there children without schools to attend? People who can't get hospital treatment?
As for leaving the EU, that could likely cause far more problems for UK business and make us all worse off.
The real population density is the density of England, and in general the central swathe of England. I bet the density is getting on for 2000 per sq mile.
Ignore Wales, Scotland, and NI. Ignore the SW, and the East. Then compare. Which is why you can't drive 5 miles on the M1 without a traffic jam, and is why the slightest bit of bad weather causes major disruption.
Just look at all the great conurbations from London up to Leeds/Manchester. City after City.
Compare that with a drive through France from Calais to Marseille, say. All you see in France is agricultural land. 700 miles, and the only largish places are Reims Lyon and Dijon
Is this a joke? Ignore most of the UK, then compare my street to the fields near Marsaille to prove we are over populated. We are talking UK, not a little bit of it.
What the British National Party has been warning Britain about for years regarding limitless third world immigration changing whole areas of Britain out of all recognition, and especially the importation of islam, which was a taboo subject through people who did talk about it in public being branded all those made up names by the assorted left and MSM to shut them up, and that includes Gillian Duffy a life long Labour supporter and voter who Brown branded her as a "bigot" through her politely raising concerns to him publicly about the levels of immigration - probably witnessed by her in her area. Is now acceptable as UKIP has broken the ice, and the public is publicly expressing its concerns, and voting for the mirage that Farage and UKIP actually cares, but UKIP will not be around for ever, and when Farage goes UKIP to will disappear with him, so all the mugs who were taken [and voted for] in by Farage and UKIP's phony nationalism, will either go back the the LabConLibDem party which has caused the mess in the first place, or they will have nowhere else to go except the BNP.
I am not dismissive of them. It's just that the use of statistics to attempt to point out that the UK is not as densely crowded than other parts of Europe is unreasonable at best, and fraudulent at worst.
The average population density of the UK masks the fact (that is particularly unique to the UK) that certain parts of the UK are lightly populated and others are very densely populated.
Maybe we should direct citizens to particular areas of the UK, rather than allowing free movement. We used to do that.
Yes all these enrichers coming in via Dover and be 'directed' to all white Dorset. In fact the government could build a processing transit camp near Burton Bradstock, I'm sure Billy Bragg would be very happy to give a hand welcoming them to Britain by providing entertainment at how wonderful his version of multiculturalism is.
yes.. I do not believe that immigrants make a net contribution to UK finances. It's sure to be just me, though.
It couldn't be that they choose to distort the figures by leaving out many of the social costs involved in dealing with a large population, could it.
I imagine without unfettered immigration, the deficit left by labour would have been far higher, would it? Is that the argument? If so, fill the country till we can't move, and we will be in clover (metaphorically - as there won't be space to grow clover.)
Lucky Churchill trusted his instincts 75 years ago instead of relying on evidence.
The only thing that is stopping UKIP winning a landslide at the next election is the "fear" that people have of turning their backs on the status quo. That Conservative and Labour are the only sane choices, when they demonstrate every day that they are both part of the problem.
Does that mean you don't have any evidence at all?
Churchill, I am sure, would have relied on facts, rather than speculation.
so, if we allow full scale development of those fileds, hills and mountains, and put 10,000 houses and associated infrastructure there, i take it you won't complain.
No, why should I? It would mean ten thousand families now have somewhere to live; great news. It is estimated that only 13% of this country's land is built on, that includes roads, gardens and parks. Plenty of space to build more.
I will complain. Isn't that UKIP's raison d'etre. That the UK cannot accommodate a larger population.
Certain parts of the UK may be able to accommodate a larger population, but people don't (in general) want to live in those places. To a great extent they want to live in London, and other cities, and expect to be subsidised and assisted in doing so.
Some of the reasons why we shouldn't need a larger population are that
a) we have enough people here already to do the jobs that need doing and
b) there is no economic benefit from allowing non-residents to do such jobs and
c) we are unable to cope with increasing populations in certain areas.
As I say, that is UKIP's raison d'etre. It was also Cameron's stated aim in 2010, although he has clearly demonstrated his inability to deliver, for which we therefore need to leave the EU.
And when you have sent back all the foreigners and the population still keeps growing? Will you start forced sterilisations?
I'm sure that was intended as sarcasm, so what exactly is not "democratic" about it? EFDD no longer meets the criteria of having at least 25 MEPs from at least 7 member states. As such, it does not qualify for additional funding or additional speaking privileges or prominence in the hemicycle. Those rules apply to any group in the European Parliament, not just EFDD, so it is not as if EFDD has been singled out for special sanctions.
At the moment, we have two competing putative explanations for Iveta Grigule's departure.
According to EFDD, it was orchestrated by Martin Schultz - but Schultz has denied any wrongdoing, and this accusation does not appear to be corroborated elsewhere. Grigule herself has not, I think, made any public statement on the matter, and the primary source of this claim appears to be the EFDD Website itself, faithfully copied and pasted by one or two outlets such as "EU Reporter", which is the one the Party Faithful are dutifully publicising on Twitter and elsewhere (which raises the question of whether EU Reporter is a front or just a victim of extremely lazy and sloppy journalism).
According to some other sources it may have something to do with internal Latvian politics, and Grigule's position in EFDD being untenable if her party joins a governing coalition in Latvia, as EFDD is seen as being pro-Putin, a position anathema to most Latvians.
If EFDD cannot do better than cobbling together a few unreliable, maverick MEPs in order to scrape past the criteria for a European Parliamentary Group, then it only has itself to blame if one or more of those unreliable, maverick MEPs prove to be... well, unreliable. Of course, UKIP itself is no stranger to the problem of unreliable, maverick MEPs...
Them's the breaks. There's nothing "undemocratic" about expressing schadenfreude - for all that such expression may be a little undignified.
MEPs don't receive "pay", they receive allowances.
New major ComRes poll in tomorrow's Independent on Sunday (and shared with the Sunday Mirror) - with a difference:
This month, ComRes experimented with including UKIP in its main question, instead of listing it under “Other” parties, by splitting the sample and asking half of respondents, “would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP or some other party?” The results of this this experiment were as follows:
Con 29%
Lab 31%
LD 7% UKIP 24%
Green 5%
Other 5%
The poll also found a five-point increase since May 2012 in the proportion of Labour voters who would “seriously consider” voting for UKIP, up from 11 to 16 per cent.
New major ComRes poll in tomorrow's Independent on Sunday (and shared with the Sunday Mirror) - with a difference:
This month, ComRes experimented with including UKIP in its main question, instead of listing it under “Other” parties, by splitting the sample and asking half of respondents, “would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP or some other party?” The results of this this experiment were as follows:
Con 29%
Lab 31%
LD 7% UKIP 24%
Green 5%
Other 5%
The poll also found a five-point increase since May 2012 in the proportion of Labour voters who would “seriously consider” voting for UKIP, up from 11 to 16 per cent.
Exactly - most of the major pollsters do not prompt UKIP, the Greens or the nationalist parties. If you say who are you voting for Lab/Tory/LD or other you inevitably direct people to support one of the 3 you prompt - whereas on your ballot paper all parties are given in an election.
As this Comres poll shows prompt for UKIP and their support goes up nearly 50 per cent - than if you don't?
Given that UKIP have been getting double the LD vote in most polls for two years now and the Greens are nearly level with the LDs - isn't it about time the pollsters prompted for all five main UK wide parties?
True but they backed the wrong horse with Cameron and it's too late for David Davis to be put in now. It's their own fault they bought snake oil from Cameron and I will watch them tear themselves apart after they lose Rochester.
Comments
Rubbish
The problem is that there is little or no preparation by whoever is responsible for keeping the roads clear Lots of traffic shifts snow faster than less traffic BTW
a) It depends on what those jobs are and whether enough of the resident population have the skills to do them.
b) There is if the incomers have skills that are in short supply – remember the brain drain? They could also potentially train others.
c) There might be a strain on the system in some areas, but I haven't seen any hard evidence that it can't cope. Are there children without schools to attend? People who can't get hospital treatment?
As for leaving the EU, that could likely cause far more problems for UK business and make us all worse off.
What the British National Party has been warning Britain about for years regarding limitless third world immigration changing whole areas of Britain out of all recognition, and especially the importation of islam, which was a taboo subject through people who did talk about it in public being branded all those made up names by the assorted left and MSM to shut them up, and that includes Gillian Duffy a life long Labour supporter and voter who Brown branded her as a "bigot" through her politely raising concerns to him publicly about the levels of immigration - probably witnessed by her in her area. Is now acceptable as UKIP has broken the ice, and the public is publicly expressing its concerns, and voting for the mirage that Farage and UKIP actually cares, but UKIP will not be around for ever, and when Farage goes UKIP to will disappear with him, so all the mugs who were taken [and voted for] in by Farage and UKIP's phony nationalism, will either go back the the LabConLibDem party which has caused the mess in the first place, or they will have nowhere else to go except the BNP.
Yes all these enrichers coming in via Dover and be 'directed' to all white Dorset. In fact the government could build a processing transit camp near Burton Bradstock, I'm sure Billy Bragg would be very happy to give a hand welcoming them to Britain by providing entertainment at how wonderful his version of multiculturalism is.
Does that mean you don't have any evidence at all?
Churchill, I am sure, would have relied on facts, rather than speculation.
No, why should I? It would mean ten thousand families now have somewhere to live; great news. It is estimated that only 13% of this country's land is built on, that includes roads, gardens and parks. Plenty of space to build more.
And when you have sent back all the foreigners and the population still keeps growing? Will you start forced sterilisations?
I'm sure that was intended as sarcasm, so what exactly is not "democratic" about it? EFDD no longer meets the criteria of having at least 25 MEPs from at least 7 member states. As such, it does not qualify for additional funding or additional speaking privileges or prominence in the hemicycle. Those rules apply to any group in the European Parliament, not just EFDD, so it is not as if EFDD has been singled out for special sanctions.
At the moment, we have two competing putative explanations for Iveta Grigule's departure.
According to EFDD, it was orchestrated by Martin Schultz - but Schultz has denied any wrongdoing, and this accusation does not appear to be corroborated elsewhere. Grigule herself has not, I think, made any public statement on the matter, and the primary source of this claim appears to be the EFDD Website itself, faithfully copied and pasted by one or two outlets such as "EU Reporter", which is the one the Party Faithful are dutifully publicising on Twitter and elsewhere (which raises the question of whether EU Reporter is a front or just a victim of extremely lazy and sloppy journalism).
According to some other sources it may have something to do with internal Latvian politics, and Grigule's position in EFDD being untenable if her party joins a governing coalition in Latvia, as EFDD is seen as being pro-Putin, a position anathema to most Latvians.
If EFDD cannot do better than cobbling together a few unreliable, maverick MEPs in order to scrape past the criteria for a European Parliamentary Group, then it only has itself to blame if one or more of those unreliable, maverick MEPs prove to be... well, unreliable. Of course, UKIP itself is no stranger to the problem of unreliable, maverick MEPs...
Them's the breaks. There's nothing "undemocratic" about expressing schadenfreude - for all that such expression may be a little undignified.
Actually, MEPs do receive a salary.
This month, ComRes experimented with including UKIP in its main question, instead of listing it under “Other” parties, by splitting the sample and asking half of respondents, “would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP or some other party?” The results of this this experiment were as follows:
Con 29%
Lab 31%
LD 7%
UKIP 24%
Green 5%
Other 5%
The poll also found a five-point increase since May 2012 in the proportion of Labour voters who would “seriously consider” voting for UKIP, up from 11 to 16 per cent.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/10/18/Major-New-Poll-Puts-UKIP-in-Tory-Striking-Distance
Direct Indy link in above article.
:eek:
What a difference actually prompting UKIP makes!
Exactly - most of the major pollsters do not prompt UKIP, the Greens or the nationalist parties. If you say who are you voting for Lab/Tory/LD or other you inevitably direct people to support one of the 3 you prompt - whereas on your ballot paper all parties are given in an election.
As this Comres poll shows prompt for UKIP and their support goes up nearly 50 per cent - than if you don't?
Given that UKIP have been getting double the LD vote in most polls for two years now and the Greens are nearly level with the LDs - isn't it about time the pollsters prompted for all five main UK wide parties?
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/10/19/two-pollsters-three-polls-and-ukip-shares-between-16-and-24/
That would account for the Ashcroft poll at the Heywood by election and why it was out by about 17% against UKIP
One of the MPs told MailOnline that Mr Carswell was trying to win northern votes for Ukip by sitting with working class Labour members.
He said: ‘There’s no way we are going to let him sit with us and claim he is one of us. He is more Tory than the Tories.’
Another gleeful MP declared: 'There's no room at the inn for UKippers.'
Farce in the House of Commons.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/james-forsyth/2014/10/ukip-13-points-ahead-in-rochester-strood/
“By sending so many politicians to campaign in Rochester and Strood, the Conservatives are coming across as desperate”
Agree 66%
Disagree 30%
DK 4%
See: http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1296/rochester-and-strood-constituency-poll.htm
Thank you. That was an interesting read.
He said it is all over the media. I haven't seen any of it myself.
So, who is it? Do tell.
True but they backed the wrong horse with Cameron and it's too late for David Davis to be put in now. It's their own fault they bought snake oil from Cameron and I will watch them tear themselves apart after they lose Rochester.
They brought it on themselves.
Well, the person Dale named made this blogpost in August, being 'disappointed in Douglas Carswell's defection':
http://pressreleases.johnbaron.co.uk/archives/2447
Another Essex man - and MP for the home of Teresa Gorman, Gavin off Gavin and Stacey and the Mayflower.
Excellent if true - as that's a solid area for UKIP.
The only way is Essex?
Sky Press Preview being repeated now.
Hope I heard it right lol.
Yes, I did. Not sure if I believe Dale though.