We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies
Comments
-
ruggedtoast wrote: »Disaster economics? What on earth have you got to complain about now? The economy has recovered reasonably well over the last few years and Scotland has been protected from the majority of the cuts that England has faced. Thanks to the largesse of English taxpayers mostly.
Perhaps I should have said 'predictions' of disaster economics like I did in the post afterwards.
English taxpayers 'largesse' ah yes.. it's been at least a week since that one was rolled out. Moving on..It all seems so stupid it makes me want to give up.
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid ?0 -
Shakethedisease wrote: »Hung parliament still though on most of the betting arena's ?
Obviously (how could it not be, when the Tories and Labour are so close in the 'most seats' market)! No overall majority is 1.25 on betfair. But I was quoting (and made a point of stating it) the 'most seats' market.
EDIT: The current full show for the 'overall majority' market is:
1.25 No overall majority
6.6 Tories
19.5 Labour
100 Any other overall majorityChuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
chucknorris wrote: »Obviously (how could it not be, when the Tories and Labour are so close in the 'most seats' market)! No overall majority is 1.25 on betfair. But I was quoting (and made a point of stating it) the 'most seats' market.
EDIT: The current full show for the 'overall majority' market is:
1.25 No overall majority
6.6 Tories
19.5 Labour
100 Any other overall majority
1.25 is pretty good odds, I'm tempted to stick 5k on for a free holiday. No ones getting a majority this time.Proudly voted remain. A global union of countries is the only way to commit global capital to the rule of law.0 -
chucknorris wrote: »Obviously (how could it not be, when the Tories and Labour are so close in the 'most seats' market)! No overall majority is 1.25 on betfair. But I was quoting (and made a point of stating it) the 'most seats' market.
EDIT: The current full show for the 'overall majority' market is:
1.25 No overall majority
6.6 Tories
19.5 Labour
100 Any other overall majority
No, I was genuinely asking. There was a question mark at the end of my post. I've seen a few tweets from 'election forecasters' here and there, but I don't follow the bookies ones.It all seems so stupid it makes me want to give up.
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid ?0 -
Shakethedisease wrote: »...
So you can save yourself some time by not expecting any more of my input discussing GERS figures. Those that follow this thread know them already. This years were never going to be good. Same as next years most likely. Whether they are a result of being in the union, or despite it, depends entirely on personal opinion.
It's not opinion, but a point of fact. With an important revenue source below $100 per barrel Scotland is a net receiver of subsidy from the Union.
When the situation reverses and Scotland becomes a net contributor feel free to adopt a smug mode and come back here to post.
I won't be holding my breath0 -
Shakethedisease wrote: »No that's not what I asked you. If Tories get most seats, but not enough to run a majority and not enough Lib Dems/UKIP to support.
What happens then ? Seat numbers aren't the issue. It's forming an actual Government which then becomes a rather pressing need.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/datablog/2015/mar/10/election-2015-the-polls-are-moving-the-overtaking-is-upon-us
You don't seem to be able to grasp that 'most number of seats' doesn't equal taking power.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/06/queen-to-miss-ve-day-anniversary-events-general-election-hung-parliament?CMP=share_btn_tw
So I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say ? Tories get most seats and then what ?
Most seats legitimises a government.
The incumbent government however get the first attempt to form a government even if they didn't get the most seats. In 2010 we nearly had Gordon Brown as PM despite the Tories having most seats.
To prevent the SNP from getting near government they could run a minority government. It's not ideal but they just need to get through the Queens speech without an amendment. They might get support from the SNP (for who a Tory government is brilliant) and if the SNP get record seats the new MP's are hardly going to be in a rush to go through a rerun.
If the Tories get the most seats then as the incumbent it's likely they'll be forming the next government.
Luckily this is academic to the SNP because all roads lead to independence when an extra hour of daylight will be introduced to celebrate.0 -
Shakethedisease wrote: »No, I was genuinely asking. There was a question mark at the end of my post. I've seen a few tweets from 'election forecasters' here and there, but I don't follow the bookies ones.
I know, which is why I not only answered you, but also gave you the full 'overall majority' market betting, which has no overall majority as the 1/4 favourite.Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
1.25 is pretty good odds, I'm tempted to stick 5k on for a free holiday. No ones getting a majority this time.
I can't work out why UKIP are less than 100/1 to lay, would anyone really want to back them to get the most seats at only 94/1?Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
It's not opinion, but a point of fact. With an important revenue source below $100 per barrel Scotland is a net receiver of subsidy from the Union.
When the situation reverses and Scotland becomes a net contributor feel free to adopt a smug mode and come back here to post.
I won't be holding my breath
Yes, the UK using borrowed money to plug a totally mythical independent 'Scotland's deficit' is really worth loads of time debating.
Get real.And mabye reread.. I said that 'Scotland's deficit' whether it is because of being in the union, or despite of it.. is a entirely a matter of personal opinion. GERS is a measure of Scotland's performance within the union after all, not outside of it... and that also is a point of fact.
I liked the smug mode thing though. Kryton rocks !It all seems so stupid it makes me want to give up.
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid ?0 -
Most seats legitimises a government.
The incumbent government however get the first attempt to form a government even if they didn't get the most seats. In 2010 we nearly had Gordon Brown as PM despite the Tories having most seats.
To prevent the SNP from getting near government they could run a minority government. It's not ideal but they just need to get through the Queens speech without an amendment.They might get support from the SNP (for who a Tory government is brilliant) and if the SNP get record seats the new MP's are hardly going to be in a rush to go through a rerun
If the Tories get the most seats then as the incumbent it's likely they'll be forming the next government.Luckily this is academic to the SNP because all roads lead to independence when an extra hour of daylight will be introduced to celebrate.There are the peculiar posters of Alex Salmond (who is not, remember, the leader of the SNP) looking Berlusconi-like with a tiny Ed Miliband in his pocket and the words “Vote Conservative”. The suggestion is that a vote for Labour in England is a vote for the SNP. Labour want to bankrupt Britain, the SNP want to break it up, say the Tories. Meanwhile in Scotland, Labour are telling people that if they vote SNP, they will get a Conservative government. So, the twisted refrain from both is: don’t vote for the party you actually want to win.
What fresh hell is this? It’s a belated realisation on the part of the Westminster parties that the momentum pushing for Scottish independence is still there. This was apparent in the days after the referendum, and it is hard to see how anyone thought it had gone away. You cannot tell the Scots, who voted for years under Thatcher and her successors for a party that did not become government, how to vote.
The SNP now presents itself as an anti-austerity party and the English press are going mad about it...It all seems so stupid it makes me want to give up.
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid ?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards