Some of it is taken from their policy documents... out of context.

For example - Yes they do want to cancel house building... on green belt land and switch to brown belt.
Yes they do want to raise the income tax level.... but raise the minimum tax threshold.

The legalising of rape within marriage claim is absurd, if you can find any policy or literature of any sort that says that is their intent, then not only will I eat my hat. I'll happily eat every piece of clothing that I own and also the wardrobes and drawers that contain them.

They have mentioned giving people the option to opt out of the NHS if they wish to pay private medical insurance and not pay the NHS element of their national insurance. Hardly privatising it, which both Labour and the Tories have made great inroads in to doing anyway (PFI's etc)

The only points on their that are actually true are the cancelling climate change and the fact they don't like multiculturalism. I disagree with them on both these issues, but they are well down my list of priorities to be fair.

In any event, they have only won the European elections and are a million miles away from gaining the ability to be able to implement ANY of their policies, so the point is rather moot imo.

Its back-of-a-beer-mat policies like that that make most party manifesto's a joke.

Its a great soundbite, give the population a choice, buy some private health insurance with the tax you pay for the NHS, never have to wait in a queue again, always have the very latest and best treatments from the elite staff employed in private healthcare, sounds good doesn't it ?

(BTW, those claims were made in a leaflet I received from Aviva Healthcare this very morning)

But it won't work.

It won't work because you can't buy a private healthcare policy that offers you unlimited care and treatment for any and all incidences that are ever likely to affect or infect a human being, for the same price that you will be paying towards the NHS in tax - I'll give you a starter for ten, which private hospital will send out a paramedic and a separate ambulance with two medics on board when you get hit by a bus ?

It won't work because you can't buy a private health insurance policy that doesn't get more expensive the older you get, private health insurance is not there to offer you healthcare from cradle to grave, its there to make a profit for its shareholders and the more risk you are the more they will charge you, which isn't an issue if you are 25, employed, single, fit and healthy, but try and get a quote when you're 40, married with dependants, overweight (according to their charts) and in a risk group for diabetes - you may be surprised at how their advertising blurb doesn't quite match their attitude towards you as a high risk client.

It won't work because you can't just ignore the vast majority of the population that remains when the private health insurers have cherry picked all of the low risk high earners, who will provide healthcare for the retired, the under 18's, the unemployed, the disabled, etc, etc, etc - the answer is of course the NHS who will be faced with lower income streams because of the diversion of tax away from them and a higher percentage of clients needing their valuable treatment.



See, that only took five minutes of thinking the manifesto policy through to its obvious conclusion so you do wonder who the hell writes this stuff for the political party's and whether or not in UKIP's case they all got too p1ssed with Farage in the chair that night to actually put any thought into their published web site promises.

Winston Churchill once said “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter”...and how right he is been proven to be. UKIP running the UK ? You democrats sure are a bunch of idiots.

Why should it not become a duty? We are compelled to do many things. It's illegal not to educate you kids. I will face a far bigger fine if I don't file my tax return by the due date than the equivalent of AUD $170.

Is it my democratic right to refuse to do either? No.



We all have numerous obligations despite living in a democracy. Having to vote is far less onerous than many other obligations. Look at the regime anyone unemployed has to endure currently.

I think you are so blinkered here it is untrue.

Not really, there is a massive difference between the examples you give and being forced to vote in my opinion.

Taxes are necessary in order to provide the public services that the majority of the country require to live a reasonable standard of life, you can't opt out or the whole country would grind to a shuddering halt.

Similarly if we don't educate our children, we would become a nation of illiterates and the country would grind to a shuddering halt.

Voting on the other hand is not essential, a non vote speaks as many volumes as a vote and not voting cause no loss harm or injury to the country or other citizens. Whether or not it is an onerous task or not is irrelevant.

Your final comment about the unemployed is absurd. They are not forced to take part in that regime, if however they would like government assistance during their unemployment, then they have to meet certain conditions in order to receive it.