After Scrapbook exposed sick comments from a UKIP councillor on banning unemployed people from voting, the party’s most high-profile new recruit has rushed to his defence, claiming Cllr Tom Bursnall “has a point”, going on to say it is “dangerous” to let unemployed people vote.
Having defected from the Tories, 23 year-old Alexandra Swann was the star turn at UKIP’s recent conference in Skegness — with party leader Nigel Farage proudly declaring that “the Swann has migrated”.
But appearing to agree with Cllr Bursnall, who as the former chair of Conservative Future is also a defector from the Tories to UKIP, she continued:
“allowing people to vote on how other people’s money is spent — if they dont contribute — is dangerous”
With these views, Scrapbook was unsurprised to learn that Swann idolises anarcho-Libertarian philosophers and is completing a PhD in social Darwinism.
120 Comments
As a sociology PhD student what exactly does Ms Swann contribute?
“Anarcho-libertarianism” um, you mean Anarcho-capitalist. Anarchists believe in no state, libertarians believe in absolute minimal state.
Has she heard of VAT?
Total disgrace. 23 and totally ideologically aligned against those who need democracy most!!
And, may I add, many University degree students come out and for a few months are unemployed…? Why do these people think that the “unemployed” is a new term for “the great unwashed”. TOTAL FACIST!
Goodbye UKIP!! You’ve just lost my vote. UKIP = TORY
VAT is paid by the unemployed, firstly. Voting is not just about tax and spend but about how the govt boosts the economy, creates jobs, the justice system, immigration, foreign policy and the welfare state. Unemployed people deserve a say in these issues just as much as anybody else. As someone who has just been made redundant I would feel utterly sickened if I couldn’t vote in the local elections. I’ve contributed for years to the tax system. Heartless and vicious comments.
I agree with her. Voting for government largesse whilst being a non-contributor is nothing but thievery by ballot box.
No Representation without Taxation.
That’s going to deprive a few rich bastards their vote then
There is absolutely nothing libertarian about denying any group or individual the vote.
They should both get a serious carpeting for this.
By ‘other people’s money’ I assume she means state funds. You don’t get to keep what you contribute. That is what makes it giving. And if she doesn’t want to support the society that supports her, and credits her with a voice of her own, then she should go and live on a freakin’ boat.
hmmm guess whos just cost their party quite a few votes. what an idiot.
next time engage brain before opening mouth.
That same logic could be used to ban retired people from voting.
Does this mean that company directors who have claimed that their only income is in the form of investments from dividends would no longer be entitled to vote according to the Gospel of UKIP?
Does this mean that company directors who have claimed that their only income is in the form of dividends from investments would no longer be entitled to vote according to the Gospel of UKIP?
It is a valid point, and not a new one. When the poll tax was introduced people on benefit had to pay, as the argument was that everybody who could potentially vote in local elections should pay local taxes. Of course millions did not agree, refused to pay their poll tax and it was defeated.
I was unaware that the unemployed were excempt from paying VAT. And the tax on fuel. And cigarettes. And alcohol. And Inheritance tax. And Road tax. And Insurance Premium tax. And Airport tax. And… … …
She was the uni bike and broke a few hearts. Sure a few stories will come out over the next few years!!
1. I did not defend Cllr Bursnall. I said he raised interesting points. My comment about dangerous was in reference to national debt through excessive public spending – I have NEVER advocated reducing the franchise or abolishing one man one vote.
2. My PhD is on Herbert Spencer and 19thC land tenure reform, not Social Darwinism.
3. I’m 24.
Please in future contact me before taking my comments out of context. I said Tom raised interesting points from a theoretical perspective, I wasn’t saying it should be UKIP policy.
So then, Alexandra, which bit of Bursnall’s comments on did you find “interesting”?
And in which way exactly are voters on benefits dangerous?
AlexandraLouiseSwann
@AlexandralSwann
Follow
@GarethJAnderson no,allowing people to vote on how other people’s money is spent-if they dont contribute-is dangerous.wouldnt reverse reform
9:12 PM – 17 Apr 12 via Twitter for BlackBerry®
Yet another UKIPPer who’s never held down a real job in life.
Let’s take the little pink stripey blue people. First we decide they are not suitable types of people, perhaps, like many graduates with PhDs because they are over-qualified (as PhDs are often told when they are looking for work in UK PLC).
Then we decide they can’t possibly be allowed to vote, because since they pay no income tax, their voting would be dangerous.
Then we end up where?
We end up in the place we were that resulted in the creation of the UN Convention on Human Rights.
Article 21
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Anyone care to remember WHY this was written? Why it was agreed?
Just what does the UK stand for? If the electorate, particularly in England take this ladies route then not only will we be in dire straits, then the UK as a nuclear power….
Now, what precisely does this young person think the word dangerous means, I wonder? I think we can guess, we’ve seen it all before, too many times in our life times.
Be careful for when you don’t defend the weak of society because they are not part of your group who will support you when they come to attack you?
ukip political speak for arsehole
What a cunt, maybe we should think about taking the vote away from dumb fucking airheads, that should hit the tory and ukip vote pretty hard.
Reading these comments I have to chuckle. I recall in March 2011 hearing UKIP party chairman Steve Crowther tell the Spring conference that as our popularity grew then so would the malicious attacks from those vested interests wishing to stifle our rise.
Alexandra is young and inexperienced and an easy target for a pack of wolves like you lot. It would be naive to believe that UKIP can grow and prosper without bringing in the best new talent, political thinkers and policy people, but I can assure you that 99% of UKIP candidates are all people with careers who have worked hard and we have our share of the unemployed and the retired.
We unequivocally are NOT dominated by career politicians and it is perhaps this single fact which sets us aside so clearly from the establishment parties and makes us a fresh choice. What is clear from those of you who tribally support the Tories and Labour is that this is what you fear the most.
Wow! A comment from one person in UKIP and the whole party gets labelled instantly here. I’d love to know what parties all of you support because I’m willing to bet there have been some significant blunders (and likely many crooks exposed and then promoted – if we are talking about the 3 mainstream parties) over time. After seeing this knee-jerk reaction and some incredibly rude comments, I’m more proud than ever to be a member of UKIP. I’ve worked hard all of my life and am tired of seeing my tax money squandered on a government that has grown far beyond its remit and on a totally unaccountable EU regime that props up failed banks while destroying its own member states. The 45 million per day wasted on EU fatcats could house and care for all of the elderly in this country who are robbed of decent pensions or treated like cattle in third rate care. You’ll just keep propping them up though, won’t you?
I think history proves that compared to unemployment, Fascist views like this win hands down on the danger front
Dangerous… meaning unsafe, likely to cause harm. That is an interesting word to use.
It is dangerous (unsafe, likely to cause harm) to allow children to live in poverty, as we know this can cause emotional and physical problems, which can only be tended to through the…
NHS! And so it is dangerous (unsafe, likely to cause harm) to marry healthcare to profit as an obvious first step towards private healthcare insurance, through making charities compete with big business in a fight to cut costs through cutting corners on things like equipment, hygiene, staff, training (very unsafe, very likely to cause harm).
To date, I have yet to see a pound coin that bleeds, a cheque that suffers from clinical depression or a bank account with diabetes. The inability to put living, breathing sentient people before inanimate, man made objects and concepts speaks not of the difference between ‘left wing’ and ‘right wing’, but instead perfectly describes the distinction between a normal person and a psychopath.
A Reply to UKIP Comments.
When speaking at a party conference she represents the party so in effect she is speaking for you all. Conferences are after all the place where you discuss and make known what your party policies are and set your political agenda, comments there are known to be taken as such by political commentators.
If someone is ‘inexperienced and naive’ after having been involved in politics for the past 8 years (she started campaigning for the conservatives at 16) then perhaps they are not all that qualified to be the ‘Future face of UKIP’. If she is an easy target then it is her own doing, part of politics is making your position defendable.
These comments have perhaps less to do with ‘vested interests wishing to stifle’ the ‘rise’ of UKIP and more to do with the naivety of the comments of Miss Swann. To claim that a point is ‘interesting’ usually is a subtle form of support for it if it is not followed by comments to suggest otherwise. It at the very least suggests that because of the interest the point is being considered in some form or another.
Alexandra claims she’s been misquoted.
Does anyone have a link to the original source so we can see for ourselves what was actually said?
Oooops – link to twitter was in OP.
https://twitter.com/#!/AlexandralSwann/status/192271270484770817
Although you didn’t go as far as to outright support his call for unemployed to be disenfranchised, comments calling his points “interesting” and calling the influence of unemployed people “dangerous” was effectively giving public support to his extreme views.
Perhaps it is also dangerous for MPs to have a vote on how tax is spent when they live on taxpayers money. A conflict of interest perhaps?
Oh, we have already been through this – in MPexpensesgate.
@ MiaowMiaow clapclapclapclap well said…
maybe you have seen this…
http://documentaryheaven.com/i-am-fishead-are-corporate-leaders-psychopaths/
Alexandra’s point-by-point refutation above of the whole content of this misleading article tells you all you need to know about its unnamed author.
You may have seen the YouTube video of her speech at UKIP’s Spring conference in Skegness. What is doesn’t show is how she walked to the lectern. She is absolutely gorgeous.
Um… Keith?
The article links directly to her twitter where the comments were made.
She said that giving the votes to unemployed was dangerous. No misleading at all.
She might be “gorgeous” but that doesn’t change the fact that she’s supported fascist views here. Politics is about voting for who’ll be running the country, not for who’ll look prettiest striding on to the stage.
Several commentators here seem to have got the wrong end of the stick. Alexandra was simply ruminating about an issue. She was not setting out a UKIP policy, and indeed is not in a position to do so. You can disagree with her opinion if you want, but for my part, I’m not going to condemn a young political activist for coming up with a few wild ideas from time to time. I’m not for denying votes to the unemployed, but I did have rather a down on Gordon Brown’s rather transparent attempt to make a majority of voters dependent on state hand-outs so they’d always vote for more.
Daniel Henry, you seem to have misunderstood what she wrote. To quote her above: “My comment about dangerous was in reference to national debt through excessive public spending – I have NEVER advocated reducing the franchise or abolishing one man one vote.”
So she’s 24, fucking hell, thanks soooo much for clearing that up…!
i get a form to sign from fife council for the electoral register does this mean they will check with the dwp before sending out these forms so that the unemployed are deleted from the electoral register?
also dont forget if your not on the electoral roll you cant prove your identity if you dont have a driving licence or passport an example of this is if you are stopped by the police and they do a person check they check the electoral register to confirm your home address
people like this woman should be put up against a wall and shot
in reply to steve milliband no doubt your employment advisor will “insist” you work 8am to 6pm seven days a week and also that you work in a job outwith the area where you stay mainly because these employment advisors see the unemployed as pests and the answer is force them into a min wage job outwith the area where they live so that at the end of the week they only have £3 left in their pocket after all outgoings
my view is that if i work locally(which i have always done when in employment) and am damned if at the age of 54 that am working 8am to 6pm seven days a week in the likes of dundee and forking out £30 for a weekly bus ticket besides which what my idiot advisor doesnt realise is that employment law states that you can only work 48 hours per week and the eu are currently debating lowering working hours in britain to 36 hours anything over 36
its all right for jcp workers finish friday 5pm and the weekend is free to socialise while the rest of us plebs have to work seven days a week 8am to 6pm being paid min wage
I wouldn’t even care if Swann is the ace-smile model in politics: she represents a political party that is now seemingly demonstrating itself as potentially hazardous hotspring by not challenging the beliefs and values of someone far from egalitarian. First impressions (always) count when a growing support for a political set emerge decisive of its core agendas.
I had absoloutely no idea that Cllr Bursnall or any of those UKIP candidates were so capitalist in their views until very recently – assumed them entirely democratic with an integral passion to empower the disadvantaged massess towards a ‘fairer’ society function and inclusion. Regardless of the author of this news article, the flesh of the truth has terrifically peeled to reveal something that can only be described as despairingly dangerous, if statement is true.
In defence of the commentators on this blog, where are they being ‘informed’ otherwise by UKIP about their actual political objectives that concern the unemployed? – their manifesto is not free online to gather necessary contrary evidence from the Swann attack. This, and the fact that they rarely broadcast their political agendas to any real extent in the media.
Inevitably people are reactionary to young and inexperienced high-profile political candidates if their views are somewhat naive – not merely because they are just young and naive, but precisely because they threaten to mature in their current social, moral and economic beliefs once they climb the power ladder. No one in this debate is ignorant or benign to the reality of this – it is just an inevitable next step.
I do not see how anyone is packing like wolves on this average beautiful; the only clear statements are about the real objectives behind what is seemingly elusive as a whole package: the advertising cover speaking volumes without talking if you get my meaning.
I do not know what UKIP represents anymore than anyone else on here other than pulling out of the european parliment. Until their goals, values and objectives become more audible by the entire voice of UKIP, everyone will be left questioning and contemplating their inherent qualities
as a political unity.
Seriously though – If a party OF the people and FOR the people could be found – NOT Conservascum NOT Labour NOT Liberal – A NEW party OF the people FOR the people who WONT privatise the NHS and attack people for just being unemployed – Then and only then will this country move forwards – The entire time people who know nothing of real life and only know life in eton on mummys squillions, that is not REAL LIFE. They are millionaires and dont give a fig for the people who are CARRYING this ocuntry! If every single person who carries these people went on strike – Then they would HAVE to listen! They dont know how to live without their ‘staff’ doing it all for them on minimum wage. So……. We all go on bloody strike until they stop attacking the NHS, STOP attacking the disabled, and STOP being such bloody morons only out to line their own pockets and the pockets of their Eton chummies”!
For starters – Ditch PIP DLA only has a 0.5% fraud rate – Mps hate a 99.5% fraud rate! Leave the NHS alone. And if the country wasnt being attacked left right and centre – Maybe there would be some bloodyjobs out there that actually pay some money that is more than friggin $6 an hour! (Plus i would make MPs live on jobseekers – they wouldnt last half a day!)
And yet Cameron says that the NHS wont be privatised? Why did I just read the below then????? Very very scary ro be honest, not only are disabled people being attacked left right and centre – Now we will have no NHS to help us out wqith our illnesses. Scared? No = PETRIFIED THANKS TO THIS GOVT (who actually promised not to wreck the NHS – Claire Rayner would be turning in her grave)
OK this stuff is big and i’ve sat on it for a couple of days now…to start with does anybody remember this guy Mark Britnell and this horrendous comment ?
“The NHS will be shown no mercy” Mark Britnell advisor to David Cameron
He’s the infamous advisor and private lobbyist who Cameron said he never knew anything about but had invited to several very high profile meetings about the future of t…he NHS before coming to power- http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/05/david-cameron-mark-britnell/
A bit more about the chap on wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Britnell
And a further article about him and his connection to Andrew Lansley – http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/14/david-cameron-adviser-health-reform
Well what I am about to show you is a scarey document from a meeting that took place in New York talking about the global privatisation of th NHS… and guess who’s one of he key speakers a Mr Mark Britnell….. so much for the NHs changes not being about privatisation as he seems to genuinely think they are…….. can someone tell the cabinet then??? – http://www.powerbase.info/images/f/fe/Apax_Healthcare_conference_2010.pdf
The details were found fom here – http://www.spinwatch.org/blogs-mainmenu-29/tamasin-cave-mainmenu-107/5435-the-nhs-will-be-shown-no-mercyq-says-cameron-health-adviser
When i mean global privatisation of the NHS… i mean that the whole of the globe is being “harmonised” to fit within a standardised privatised structure/network……
We all knew about this, we all suspected it but here’s the actual information that proves it
I hope you can do something with this informationSee more
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/05/david-cameron-mark-britnell/
politicalscrapbook.net
How many tory dicks does she suck?
Wonder how much ass she gave to Harry Cole #lockuppedocole
Little Tory Cocksucker on TUC:
https://twitter.com/AlexandralSwann/status/245499866095181825
Someone find this bitches email/ip address.
The problem about taxation, in that in at least a minimal-state it has to be raised by agreed methods to pay for minimal things the State might do, is that it has to be raised _from_ people who are at least able to pay it.
If someone is unemployed, in the classical sense, which is to say: he/she has no job and no income, then he/she cannot be asked to pay taxation. This is reasonable, and every Libertarian would go along with this.
The real problem arises when a State decides that it ought to pay benefits of some sort – which are a cost – to the unemployed. If these are to come out of tax revenue and not war-booty (for example) then it is also reasonable to suppose that “the unemployed” will most likely vote for whichever party(parties) promise to maximize the benefits out of taxation of other people. That way lies socialism, and we know, for the past 100-odd- years, that it always and invariably fails not only to benefit the unemployed and the “workers”, but also reduces powerful and potentially-productive nations’ economies (such as Russia under the USSR) to the size of Wales.
The point of Parliament, originally, was for those from whom taxes might be raised, voluntarily or otherwise, to be able to debate the matter with the State regading the said taxes’ justice or even necessity: initially this was the King, and later the King just rubber-stamped (she still does) the decisions of Parliament.
If you let people vote who have no stake in producing the taxes demanded by the State betimes, then you will get higher taxes, and mostly to pay for things the non-earning voters want to vote for, such as income for themselves if this is “offered” by the State.
So Alexandra Swann is right. I’m not clear that she actually said “the unemployed ought not to be able to vote”: this sounds like the media trying to do a “Rivers Of Blood” mooment, as they did to Enoch Powell. But she has raised a relevant point, which is the corollary of “no taxation without representation”: it is “no taxation will imply no representation” in a society where the State tries to pick up the tab for those who have no income.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alexandraswann/100194870/welfare-cash-cards-can-help-reduce-the-benefits-bill-and-stop-people-buying-booze-and-fags-with-taxpayers-money/ …
Stupid Nazi UKIP cocksucker
Miss Swann is absolutely right. I’m a former UKIP branch chairman, and I have had similar thoughts over the years. Why should long term, unemployable layabouts have a right to vote? Unemployable scroungers will ALWAYS vote for more taxpayers’ money to be spent on them. Look at the unemployed mother of 11 (and her unemployed ‘partner’) who is about to have a mansion built for her, at the taxpayers’ expense. The welfare state bred this underclass of loathsome, parasitic Eloi who live off the backs other people’s labour.
She can’t help it. She’s blond.
In the photo his hand can be seen on her waist meaning he has his arm around her. What necessitates this?
Ukip or Tories same difference!
Bob I noticed that too and thought it was a little creepy.
Ms Swann, far better that you disassociated yourself from any such comments, the fact that you didn’t think this necessary is in itself “dangerous”!
Exactly!! VAT!! Eveyone pays vat!
Maybe anyone who doea not pay uk corporation tax should be exempt too?
1. Alexandra Swann is a fucking idiot, but there’s loads of ways to express this without being sexist. her gender is not linked to her being a fucking idiot.
this is proven by:
2. oh look, right there in the comments section – it’s Roger Helmer MEP, the vile rape apologist. That UKIP aggressively recruited this man after his record of disgusting views on sexual assault shows better than anything why UKIP aren’t a respectable party. It’s not just the council candidates that they haven’t bothered to vet properly, it’s their MEPs. As well as Roger, the rapist’s friend, 2 of the 12 UKIP MEPs elected in 2004 were jailed for fraud. All the major parties also have had criminals within them of course, but 1 in 6 of their top people is a truly alarming ratio even before you get into the hordes of ex-BNP and NF council candidates, activists etc.
Iain.. Your surname isn’t Duncan Smith is it?
they tend to forget? who put most of the ppl on benefits? so we should all vote! and if farage agrees with them? then i mite chose another candidate?
It appears to me that there are a minority (dumb, blonde elitist scumbag included) that despise the Welfare State and it’s fundamental purpose. They will think of any cherry picked reason to discredit it. It’s ironic that the same people wave Union Jacks around, when in all fairness, we should be forcibly exiling them. Probably to the Falklands.
1. A social darwinist should never get elected
2. All people have the right to vote, this should be constitutionally protected in the UK
3. Welfare should be limited to those who really, really need it, such as those who cannot work.
4. Libertarians believe in personal responsibility, how can people be personally responsible if they can’t vote, ergo: she is not a libertarian but a socialist -as are all politicians today.
This is essentially more of the same ilk gaining power, within the next 30 years we are going to see a real massive push for totalitarianism in this country like 100x more than we have done before.
What scares me is the people will likely support it as well.
Wow – look at all the misogyny being spewed.
She might be odious, but she’s certainly not the only one with fascist sentiments as the comments attacking her demonstrate.
OMG @ Kris. Stop speaking out your backside! I have just recently graduated with an MSc in Science with the OU, I have been unemployed for well over two years and when I harp on about getting experience, I get no answer. I am offering my skills to employers for free even to get experience. Do I hear anything? no!
I am sick and tired of wankers like you complaining that the unemployed are scroungers, I have a universiy degree and have tried to get jobs well below what I am qualified for and I NEVER get an interview for. I am not a scrounger, I was one told in a recent job interview that there were 30 people applying for ONE post. 4 Interviews, so 3 people are going to miss out on this. Try living unemployed and at home with your folks and having twats like you preach that we’re money grabbing scroungers who deserve everything we get as we are lazy good for nothing slobs who deserve to be trodden on.
And Ms Swann, Social Darwinism (http://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is-social-darwinism-faq.htm) is actually the crap you are spouting out, or maybe I would like to direct you to eugenics and I was also looking for another theory I had read about but can’t find it. Wake up and smell the truth, outwith the 1% (illumati) these morons want the population down to 500, 000 thousand people in a great big cull, if you don’t believe me, look at the Georgia Stones, it is all there!
UKIP, the tories rebadged! Jeesh!
So let me get this straight, if this woman had her way back in 2010 when I was unemployed, I would not have been allowed to vote? Even though I had paid NI and tax for the previous 14 years (thus paying for my own JSA)?
And a young person who is locked out of the labour market (which has NEVER provided full employment unless made to by government economic policy) upon leaving education?
I bet she wouldn’t advocate bankers being stripped of their votes after they crashed the global economy and were bailed out with hundreds of billions of pounds.
Welcome to your fascist future.
Welcome to the real world UKIP. Honeymoon over. Now you will be scrutinized like every other political Party. As a protest Party it is easy to get away with stupid comments. Now… come up with some serious policies, stop blaming everything on Europe (or the unemployed). Stop pretending to be something you are not… a serious political Party.
Those who tend to subscribe to the view that those who do not pay tax should not be allowed to vote should first explain how anyone who eats, drinks, moves and shops can possibly avoid paying tax. With the diminution of the contribution that income tax makes to the revenue, employment is hardly a significant issue.
Ian, will you also excluded those who paid tax before losing their job. You thick, fascist nutter!
The hypocrisy of UKIP is breathtaking, they have UKIP, MEP’s with their snouts in the EU trough
This undermines, in the most fundamental sense, what it means for the UK to be a ‘democratic’ state.
If anything this will lead to a further failure in the political function to be elected, as in the first place the chances of attaining the Doctrine of the Mandate would be largely marginalised by the expulsion of the unemployed from a voting system which already favours landslide majorities. This will inevitably lead to a silent majority rendering government as unrepresentative since the Burkean Theory of Representation states that the MP is a direct link between Westminster and the constituency – so if, say, 9% of a constituency have the right to vote, factoring those who are disengaged with politics as it is, how can an MP possibly uphold that function to represent, and, by extension, how can the Government do what their name denotes, and that’s govern!? What UKIP have also not taken into account is the existence of particular types of unemployment – If someone’s frictionally unemployed, yet has been working for the last 29 years, that’s an encroachment of their own civil liberties and effectively shifts the UK as one that’s a democratic state into one that’s subtly oppressive.
What else fails in that statement is that ‘unemployed’ is a term that considers students, both in higher and further education (people who may very well go on to acquire high paying jobs, that contribute to society in equal measure), and so not allowing the unemployed to vote will impose itself on people who may be in employment just after a general election. However, if a government chooses to allow certain members of the unemployed community, a community which is largely looking for work, to vote then that’s just segregation. This isn’t just unfair, it’s fascism in it’s purest sense.
seems funny that everyone raging back and forth here about various issues, seem to have missed one critical point, the jobless make up a very very very small part of our entire ‘social network’ as a country, some people really need to look a figures before following social properganda set forth by pretty much all of the major parties in this country, the biggest statement that makes me laugh is benefit scrounger, so much rage for a very very tiny percentage of the gross population as a whole, such a minute group of people (when considering the entire UK population into consideration, including immigrants from across the globe who are now legal UK residents in some shape or form) get attacked politically, which in turn has greater implications, affecting a vast majority in turn.
to give an example of this, i have worked since i left college, and was made redundant a short time ago, i spent no time out of work during this time and i worked hard to pay my taxes, live some sort of a life and to have fun, now i find myself out of work, and i cannot find it anywhere, ive been in and out of work mostly due to temporary placement contracts with agencies, find myself over qualifies for mcdonalds and many other job around here, yet as time as gone on, i find myself being treated like dirt from the job center/DWP even though i have willingness to work and work hard at that, more and more i find myself labelled the same as these small 0.5% of the population who have no drive or incentive to work, so this is me being indirectly affected by government propaganda and i can assure all of you that i am one in a very big bag of names who feel this way.
as conclusion, our society in this country and as a planet as a whole is failing, our monetary system is wrong and indeed unessicary in this age of technology an abundance, we can either carry on to some weird capitalistic dystopia, where everything is owned in the galaxy (and this planet) by ‘someone’ theres is nothing wrong with working or not wanting to work, we have created social dogma to support ‘not working is evil’ even though we are in an age where one person can invent something to make life easier or simpler for 5000+ other people, the harsh fact of the matter is, we are overpopulated globally and inherantly corrupt worldwide, the only way to change this would throw our entire world into uproar and chaos, it also boils down to the individuals ideals of work, chores, duty, honour and respect.
gotta love the way the masses follow the money spinners like sheep……..
Hmmm
Given that nobody listens to us or gives a monkey’s in Parliament we may as well not have a vote for all the good it does.
Let’s face it, we are being sent back in time by the right wing parties so much, that it is inevitable they would want to take us back to landowners only representation.
Well said Janine.
KRIS, you arrogant blind fool! I am disabled! I have a mental illness that causes me at time to lose complete touch with reality! I also have a physical illness that leaves me struggling to do the simplest of tasks. I cannot cook my own dinner. I cannot prepare a meal. I have to live off ready made sandwiches or salads and even then I struggle to get into the packaging! I cannot get in and out of the bath and do not have a shower, so I have to sit on a stool and wash with water from the sink. I cannot wash my own hair! I cannot type for more than a few minutes, despite the fact that writing has always been one of my favourite pass times. I used to walk 5 miles a day, now I can barely manage to get to the shop round the corner and back without collapsing and crying in excruciating pain. If I sit for too long my body starts locking up and its hard to move again and also excruciatingly painful. I DO NOT LIVE COMFORTABLY ON BENEFITS! I AM in massive amounts of debt because of being on benefits, and no one will employ me because of my illnesses. STILL, having failed in trying to gain employment that will not put me or other people at risk, I AM TRYING TO START MY OWN BUSINESS. It’s in the planning stages at present. I will go without food and heating and hot water to save the money I need to pay for the stock I intend to sell, as I cannot get a loan with such a low income. The business WILL decrease my quality of life despite how low that is now, and I may not earn enough to cover all of my bills, but I will try my best! DO I SOUND LIKE A F***ING SCROUNGER TO YOU, YOU C**T???? I am ashamed of the country I live in today and I am ashamed to call myself a british citizen!! Small mindedness and greed over powers compassion and understanding! Stop the f***ing world…. I want to get off!!
In fact Janine has a very good point!! The Georgia Stones do indeed say it all, and as I said to my GP only a few days ago, the government have devised the perfect plan to cut the population. Make it so difficult for the poor to survive in the world that they get backed into a corner by debt, hunger, homelessness, illness, and get so desperate that they take the only way out they see in front of them. Suicide! Government keeps their hands clean that way, or so they think!!
@Ross (way above). I think I can clear up the linguistic confusion. In the USA, Libertarian = Anarcho- Capitalist. When I mention Libertarian Socialism to my friends there, they think I am being inconsistent.
JSA is classed as taxable income, it’s our democratic right to vote if we choose, people have died to defend that right. Perhaps the ukrap drones on here can explain, farages £130,ooo he owes the taxman, does this exclude him from voting? or can they explain farage having dinner at Rupert Murdochs London home last month? too cosy if you ask me, or were they only playing twister?
The thing that immediately jumps out for me here, is that she currently holds a position of authority.
What would follow if she had her way, maybe ethnic cleansing?
i think its time you all migrated and we ran our own afairs
the pomposity of these people never ceases to amaze me ,i wonder just how arogant these people would get if they where ever allowed a position of authority dread the thought
What an idiot! I wonder what her parents are and how much money,theirs not hers,they ahve invested in their spoilt brat.Many people are not that lucky.There are so many rich people living off inheritence,housewives who are unemployed,seriously ill people who cannot work,people who have been made reduntand,something that can happen to ANYONE….
What this nasty little airhead needs to realise is a PhD on 19th century land reform adds absolutely no value to the economy of UK PLC. It needs a mature and sophisticated society to recognise the long-term benefits of historical research and hand out grants, i.e. money collected from its citizens, to fortunate individuals who are charged only with the responsibility of adding to the sum total of human knowledge. Even if Ms Swann is funded herself by mummy and daddy, it’s likely a fair number from among her supervisor, the librarians who help her, her advisers and her colleagues have been funded at some stage in their academic careers, quite apart from the fact we have universities in the first place. Get your head out from under your wing, Ms Swann, and look around you. Do some more immediate research and find out how very privileged you are.
Let’s just set aside the argument that “the unemployed pay taxes because they pay VAT, cigarette tax etc.” They’re not paying these taxes because they don’t earn the money that they receive. They pay these taxes with money that the taxpayer has given them. In reality, they’re just paying back a little of what they were given for nothing. That is not the same as paying taxes with your hard earned cash…..I’m sorry, but it’s just not.
I think this would be very suspect thing to do, exclude part of the population from voting because they’re out of work, those that are hardest hit by government policy/cutts being denied a voice. Maybe instead of attacking people who are out of work UKIP and the torries should try courting the unempolyed, after all the way the torries are running the country this section of the population is sure to be growing.
Stevibaldi say’s it all UKIP = Tory and it really is as simple as that .
@Jason No it’s not the same. But many people who are unemployed have been employed and paid taxes themselves. I know I did before I became ill, and I will again when I get my business up and running because that’s the only way I will ever become employed again, by making a job for myself, despite the fact it may disable me further. Also, my dad has worked where he works for over 20 years! He broke his leg last year and they took that opportunity to get rid of him as part of their cutbacks despite him having never had any sick time off work in all those years. Yes they took him back after 8 month of being unemployed and trying his hardest to find work, but now they are making him redundant again this year, as they are either making cutbacks again, or closing down completely!! Does that mean that we should have our names blackened because we are not currently paying our taxes, despite what we have already paid into the system??
Ms. Swann is trying to fly away from the truth. Herbert Spencer is all about “survival of the fittest” the man who coined the eugenics slogan to bring about the avid destruction within the 20th C. This little bird needs to be muted so she can preen and post upon the water rather than poison the air with her 18th Century views.
Strange how Murdoch is plugging ukrap along with the bbc and other media outlets, could this be to put presure on the politicians to stop the Levesson investigation. Also have you noticed that it is only celebraties who have been charged with sex crimes, no politicians , at the moment. With more evidence against Murdoch and his corruption, he is trying to save his own arse by plugging ukrap perhaps a secret deal will be struck to keep him quiet. Strange how all this info appeared AFTER jimmy saville died, maybe he had secret info on who did what to protect himself.
This lot are straight out of a comic book !
Even thinking about taking away someones human right to vote is just the rantings of a nut case
“Samuel Wheeler
Posted April 18, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Permalink
As a sociology PhD student what exactly does Ms Swann contribute?”
Come to that Samuel, what exactly does a sociologist contribute.
And what of those who are out of tax due to raising of allowance? It’s nuts that she thinks govt is ONLY about finance!
that just sums up what is wrong with the country too much greed ,,, there is more to beaing a goverment than spending the tax payers hard earned mony
ROFL – U. Kretinous. Independantist. Prat. I take it university isn’t teaching her to think, then! I hope no tax payers money was wasted on her education.
I much prefer Kropotkin’s anarchism and darwinism!
http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/watching-the-detectives/peter_kropotkin_and_the_evolution
I bet all these stuck-up dole-o-phobes would love it if the government turned around and said “Let’s just have all unemployed people put down.” They seem to think benefit claimants are a) selfish, worthless lowlives who are out for what they can get and therefore deserve to be treated like vermin, and b) retards who are incapable of rational thought. Well I think that describes politicians (esp. Tories and UKIP) don’t you? OK, unemployed people don’t pay taxes, but they would if they were lucky enough to have a job and therefore could afford to do so. Surely EVERYONE deserves the right to have a say in how the country is run, since they live here too? What if someone who has worked for 20 years and wants the country to be a good place for their kids and grandkids to grow up in and suddenly becomes unemployed through no fault of their own? Does that suddenly make them unworthy? Should human rights be an employed-only thing? Should people who have never worked due to disability/illness just be put down?
left the tories, huh? Just goes to show that UKIP are actually just a phony arm of the Conservative party, sent into the wilderness to road test the more extreme ideas. fucking kill the lot before we’re in Hitler’s germany 1939
Ukip will be a wasted vote come the general election ….
They will all be unemployed in 2015
You know, I always thought that “income” was different to “wages”. There are several worthy essays making good arguments for the unlawfulness of PAYE. I also believe that if you are able to live without working, well then, you have an obligation to feed back into the system that allowed you to achieve that, and should actually pay a HIGHER proportion of your income in taxes than someone on a low wage.
The phrase “wealth creator” is a misnomer, as it is the bottom of the pyramid, the ones generating turnover, that are the wealth creators. If a Ltd company is allowed to make £15k profit before paying tax, why isn’t a person? Why does a multi-national company do business at all in the UK if it makes no profit?
Personal taxation is only fair if everyone pays the SAME PROPORTION of their wages, and if your income is unearned, then you can AFFORD another 5 percent, can’t you? Lobbying for private business interests has led to a culture where those WITH the capital are now chivvying those who actually earn it for them. This Seems to me to be bullying, pure & simple. The largest element of welfare is Housing Benefit. This is paid to landlords for their artificially inflated, unregulated rents. So, ultimately the primary beneficiaries of the current welfare state are already wealthy.
Paradoxically, the wealthier you are, the more options that are available to you to pay less tax. If you are able to idle your time away, paying 3% income tax while someone has to work his guts out to keep food on the table and is losing 80-90% of his earnings to taxes and rent, this in my view makes the one with the money the parasitic scrounger, wouldn’t you agree?
The next step is to make the wearing of a coloured star compulsory…
Then ban access to libraries, cinema’s and all public places
Then access to basic facilities
Then a forced move to a ghetto
Then, Auschwitz.
We are but a few steps short of another Holocaust.
Arbeit Macht Frei
Britain grants Hitler posthumous victory….
This ignorant little bitch needs to put down her “Sociology” textbooks (and what a useful degree she’s studying, btw. Too stupid to study a science, Alexandra? Don’t you know the old joke -”what do you say to a sociology graduate? Big Mac and fries please”) and pick up a history book. She is veering very very close to nazi ideology (Hitler was also a “Social Darwinist”.). I find it obscene that someone so young and obviously inexperienced in life can hold such loathsome views. Perhaps she should talk to some World War II veterans and ask them what they fought for. To obliterate ideologies like hers. She might as well go forth and urinate on a war memorial, to show her disrespect for those who died fighting exactly the same sort of view she’s espousing. Nasty little girl. UKIP are showing their true colours as far right lunatics who wish to transform this country into 1930s Germany. Over my dead body and the dead bodies of all who stand for decency. Crawl back under your slimy little rock, Ms Swann. You and your ignorance and disgust me.
Also, for the UKIP supporters claiming that this silly little airheaded child is “right” and that people who do not pay income tax (but do pay VAT and other forms of tax) should have no representation within Parliament, then how does that sit with Farage’s idea that all minimum wage earners, up to a limit of £13k pa, should be tax exempt? Does that mean that all full time working people who earn NMW would be stripped of their vote? Oh dear, UKIP, this is getting messy. That’s not compatible with democracy. Please, if you wish to succeed (and gain the votes of “normal” people rather than extremists and loons), get this sorted out.
really considered voting UKIP next election, YOU just lost my vote.
David Davis If someone is unemployed, in the classical sense, which is to say: he/she has no job and no income, then he/she cannot be asked to pay taxation. This is reasonable, and every Libertarian would go along with this.
But they do, mostly in the form of VAT, fuel tax and other taxes that aren’t income-based. Are you suggesting that unemployed people should no longer pay VAT and other taxes that aren’t related to earnings?
David Davis The real problem arises when a State decides that it ought to pay benefits of some sort – which are a cost – to the unemployed. If these are to come out of tax revenue and not war-booty (for example) then it is also reasonable to suppose that “the unemployed” will most likely vote for whichever party(parties) promise to maximize the benefits out of taxation of other people. That way lies socialism, and we know, for the past 100-odd- years, that it always and invariably fails not only to benefit the unemployed and the “workers”, but also reduces powerful and potentially-productive nations’ economies (such as Russia under the USSR) to the size of Wales.
The point of Parliament, originally, was for those from whom taxes might be raised, voluntarily or otherwise, to be able to debate the matter with the State regading the said taxes’ justice or even necessity: initially this was the King, and later the King just rubber-stamped (she still does) the decisions of Parliament.
If you let people vote who have no stake in producing the taxes demanded by the State betimes, then you will get higher taxes, and mostly to pay for things the non-earning voters want to vote for, such as income for themselves if this is “offered” by the State.
Right, so you are suggesting that the unemployed receiving benefits is a real problem as well as them being enfranchised? So you are saying that socialism comes about through unemployed people voting for parties of high taxation, e.g. the Russian Revolution was caused by unemployed people voting for a party of high taxation (you did mention the USSR in the following sentence)?
On the first point, you are pretty much saying the unemployed should be stripped of the vote and their incomes, and be allowed to starve in the gutter. On the second point you make no mention of other groups who may not financially contribute, but also will vote for the party that best represents their interests: retired people, disabled people, full-time mothers, etc. Do you think anyone who doesn’t work but wants the government to increase the state pension/disability benefits/ child benefits should be denied the right to vote?
“also reduces powerful and potentially-productive nations’ economies (such as Russia under the USSR) to the size of Wales”
Russia pre-1917 was never a major economy; it was poor and backward. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the USSR, it did become a superpower and it couldn’t have managed that without having financial muscle. As we know it was able to fund communist activity around the world for decades and build up a massive arsenal to rival the USA. Can Wales do that? Why is it the USSR is always given as an example of socialism too? It was hardly that, because the workforce didn’t have any say in the means of production.
“That way lies socialism, and we know, for the past 100-odd- years, that it always and invariably fails”
What of the Scandinavian social-democracies then? High taxation coupled with very high living standards. If we take capitalism over the last 100 years we have seen repeated economic collapses, with countries going bankrupt and the workers and unemployed suffering as a consequence.
But she has raised a relevant point, which is the corollary of “no taxation without representation”: it is “no taxation will imply no representation” in a society where the State tries to pick up the tab for those who have no income.
No, what Ms Swann is suggesting is “No representation without taxation”, when in fact unemployed people DO pay tax, even if it’s not income tax. So Ms Swann’s suggestion is wrong on that basis and the result of it if taken to its conclusion would be taxation without representation.
Jason
Posted April 28, 2013 at 7:53 pm | Permalink
Let’s just set aside the argument that “the unemployed pay taxes because they pay VAT, cigarette tax etc.” They’re not paying these taxes because they don’t earn the money that they receive. They pay these taxes with money that the taxpayer has given them. In reality, they’re just paying back a little of what they were given for nothing. That is not the same as paying taxes with your hard earned cash…..I’m sorry, but it’s just not.
When in work you pay National Insurance contributions. If you lose your job you receive these back in the form of benefits, therefore they are getting back what they paid in and it is indeed their money. Or are you assuming that ALL unemployed people have never worked or paid NI contributions?
Kris
Posted February 19, 2013 at 11:52 am | Permalink
Miss Swann is absolutely right. I’m a former UKIP branch chairman, and I have had similar thoughts over the years. Why should long term, unemployable layabouts have a right to vote? Unemployable scroungers will ALWAYS vote for more taxpayers’ money to be spent on them. Look at the unemployed mother of 11 (and her unemployed ‘partner’) who is about to have a mansion built for her, at the taxpayers’ expense. The welfare state bred this underclass of loathsome, parasitic Eloi who live off the backs other people’s labour.
Do you happen to know what this unemployed mother of 11′s voting habits are,or are you making assumptions? Do all unemployed people have 11 kidsand live in mansions at the taxpayers’ expense? Are all unemployed people “unemployable scroungers”? The answer to all three is “no”, so your argument falls flat.
How ironic though that you’ve chosen a race of people from a science fiction novel written by a socialist author! What may I ask do the unemployed-yet-enfranchised members of the Royal Family contribute to the economy? They get funded to the tune of millions by the taxpayer, so I guess you think they shouldn’t be allowed to vote now? Then we have the corporations that avoid paying taxes by having their head offices in offshore tax havens, but whose CEOs can still vote. Thinking of disenfranchising them too are you? They all seem pretty Eloi-like to me.
Scary that this lady has a PhD in Sociology. Did she learn nothing?! I can assure anyone who would wish to negate sociology as being worthwhile that it is the last discipline basis from which you would expect some one to come up with this type of ignorant comment. The majority of sociologists are very concerned about all types of inequality and discrimination.
Unless she is a closet Marxist who is looking for a revolution…
PS That comment from Kris is disgusting!
I think what the silly bitch, and the idiot she was agreeing with in her ignorance, were suggesting is that it is “dangerous” to let people who are poor and disenfranchised vote, as they will vote for left leaning parties. Therefore, by denying them the vote, only right leaning parties will be elected. It’s no different to the dictators everywhere in the world, who throw their political opponents in prison, stop them voting and generally try to disempower them in order to stay in power. I have shared this story with several of my friends and family who were considering voting UKIP, all have now said “no way”. The party obviously does not stand for democracy. They are a scary group of right wing loons, nothing more.
Are u all blind to the fact we all pay taxes unemployed or not everything we buy foods included
are taxed to the max, and our parents fought in a world war some 2 world wars to get what we once had. Unemployment was bought out to stop people starving in this country in the 1900s now we are undoing all the good that came out of 2 world wars the nhs being another of them.
A simpler rule would be just to ban anyone who this guy thinks might not vote UKIP
The man whose comment I respect here is Roger Helmer. It is clear that supporters of the other three parties are now absolutely terrified that UKIP is growing in stature. The time is ripe for major change and those members of the population who were once silenced by the Main Three have now found a voice.
As for the unemployment thing; may I suggest that you ALL remember that NOT ALL unemployed people have “never contributed”. There are plenty of unemployed in all age groups, and the older ones will have often made quite substantial contributions, including women who have given up their jobs to have families and not gone back to work afterwards.
I note this post is almost exactly one year old and can only assume it’s been dragged up to poison UKIP’s chances at the local elections. There are always a few wild cards in ALL political parties.
Quite honestly, given that my son has been unemployed and disenfranchised for three years (and for most of his life), that the unemployed really give a toss either way. They take what’s due.
I wonder if her second language is Afrikaans.
WELL. now this is how the young of Germany were brainwashed in to thinking …….VERY dangerous ground here and you just know people will fall for the Ukip bullshit on the rebound from dave and Gideon. Stupid Swann.
I think that letting the unemployed keep the vote is far less dangerous tha’n disenfranchising them – at least for any politician who would be stupid enough to bring in such measures. The delightful Miss Swann and her likeminds would likely find giving the unemployed back their vote a lot less interesting and dangerous than being shot or blown up by the assorted terrorist groups that this kind of idiocy would create and encourage.
Slagging off Gays and now wanting to deprive the unemployed of there vote, Your really warming the hearts of the Scottish voters arnt you, You can leave out my vote if your(UKIP) our only choice, So far your a disgrace to a democratic society, But don’t worry UKIP you will never be in number 10 because your views are too right wing and we have had enough of “right wing” lately to last us a lifetime.
Well maybe she forgot that unemployment benefit is taxable, both income and retail taxes. But that is besides the point – the unemployed is not a crime!
Fucking LOL ukip can suck a dick IM unemployed i dont wanna vote or wait I VOTE WE BURN ALL MPS and start over.. i cant gt a job i look day in day out ive worked my arse off in the past and i will again.. i wont even sign on cos u cunts blame me or leeching ( plus i dont wanna sign on daily just cos i dont have a bank account) GET THIS our local MP PROMISE NOT TO BUILD UNSIGHTLY WIND FARMS WTF!??? MOOAAR NUCLEAR ENERGY PLEASE
)))) OMNOMOMNOM
If work is such a good thing, why do people have to be paid to do it?
@Anna
I have also a learning difficulty which was only picked up at university! I do agree with how it is going to pan out for those on low income. The are trying to single out them to massacre them as I have read that WILL be a plan for it. Eugenics, don’t you just love it!
There’s no such thing as an “anarcho-libertarian.” You’re mixing up “anarcho-capitalist” (which is a bizarre category of people who think the world would be more free as a whole if only it was run on the basis of taking away all rights from people without assets and giving people with assets the ability to do whatever they want without any consequences) and “libertarian” (basically Ayn Rand obsessives with views ranging somewhere between a general desire to minimise state activity particularly in the field of welfare provision and full-on anarcho-capitalism).
The sad truth is that statements like this appeal to UKIP’s target audience.
I was kind of being swayed by UKIP for a while, but comments like this from Swann and some previous comments in the past on Question time from Paul Nuttal have turned me against them.
Having read ALL of the comments, the original article and the feeble attempts to explain the comments away, I’ve come to the following conclusions:
@Everyone – Every citizen is entitled to a vote, your franchise is guaranteed and I would hope that any attempt to wrest that right from you would be met with the violent revolution that such an attempt would deserve.
@Those deciding not to vote for UKIP… Your call, who you vote for is entirely up to you but consider this: The Tories, Labour and Lib-Dem have lied to you, stolen from you, insulted your intelligence, destroyed your economy and enriched themselves and their cronies in the process and they have also made the same stupid remarks you are getting so excited about here… Choose wisely as no matter which brand of liar you vote for, they will be serving their own needs and not yours.
@Fishcat – It’s ironic that your “clever” comment is in fact racist… Yes, some of the people that created and enforced the concept of Apartheid were Afrikaans speaking but those days have gone, let them go lest I remind you that England was once involved in legalised slavery, murder, narcotics trafficking, piracy and, let’s not forget, subjugation of the poor in general and women in particular.