Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Salmond has been accused of anti-English racism in the past:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/9632629/Police-asked-to-investigate-Alex-Salmonds-anti-English-jibes.html

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2013/09/alex-salmonds-selective-history-lesson/

Yes, I'm sure he has been accused in the past. But it doesn't matter because N1AK says you're not allowed to use newspaper quotes to back up anything you say on this thread. Sorry.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes, I'm sure he has been accused in the past. But it doesn't matter because N1AK says you're not allowed to use newspaper quotes to back up anything you say on this thread. Sorry.

No, N1AK said that it wasn't reasonable to pass off opinion pieces as fact.

Shakethedisease

N1AK wrote: »

Opinion pieces in a newspaper are not the same thing as quotes. By this point I honestly can't guess whether:
> You can't tell the difference between the two
> You can but will say anything when trying to 'win' a debate
> You didn't understand most of my post but felt the need to respond anyway.

You're not engaging in debate. If you were, you would have taken the time to comprehend what newspaper opinion means. You clearly wouldn't have accepted that me pulling out something by the Mail where their columnist says Alex Salmond is anti-English as proof of anything, the fact that you just stated categorically that you would shows your lying or making responses without due consideration.

I've given you plenty of time to provide me with quotes as requested. You can't or won't, so I won't. Enjoy your echo chamber, I hope you continue to highlight the typical SNP supporters attitude on here; hopefully it will be informative for some people.



I'd love to see you debate. So far I've just seen fawning over your idols and clumsy attacks.

And you are getting very off topic. We were talking about Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. Not myself or Leanne and your ( rather extensive ) personal opinion on how we should debate or engage with others on this board.

I've been debating this and many Scottish based issues over the last few years here. I can assure you I've been accused of much worse than 'clumsy attacks'. I'm happy with my posts and so are the moderators. What else is there to say really. If you're not, well, you've said it now. And hopefully can all move on to actually discussing the topic now ?

Now, those Salmond 'quotes' any progress ? And I did say if you wanted a direct quote there had been one on this weeks Question Time by Anna Soubury.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

No, N1AK said that it wasn't reasonable to pass off opinion pieces as fact.

I wasn't. I was giving an overall view of the Tory agenda, stirring up anti-SNP/Scottish feeling in order to win votes. I included, opinion pieces, cartoons, direct quotes from Tory ministers on prime time tv, and Tory campaign posters.. all in the last 7 days. Anything else you want me to sling in ?

I think I've provided an fairly good media overview there. One of course, that no-one here really wishes to see or accept. Which, incidentally, is why I included Iain McWhirter's opinion piece in the Herald. He reflects the views of many up here.. and isn't generally known for sensationalism. He does write for the Herald, not the Sun or the Mail.

kabayiri

STD, do you support using local tax raising powers to fund additional NHS spending in Scotland?

It's clear that it is something you place higher value on.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

STD, do you support using local tax raising powers to fund additional NHS spending in Scotland?

It's clear that it is something you place higher value on.

Why do you say that, out of interest ? And what do you mean by 'additional' NHS spending in Scotland ? Just to be clear on what I'm replying to.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Why do you say that, out of interest ? And what do you mean by 'additional' NHS spending in Scotland ? Just to be clear on what I'm replying to.

I have no hidden agenda

We seem to assume here that we all have the same priorities, when clearly we don't.

Do you think Scotland needs to spend more money on health at the current time? If an obvious means to achieve that is to pay more as a region do you not think this is a perfectly valid means to an end?

I'd definitely support more local decisions on spending for the NW region. Personally, I'd pay more tax to support NW educational investment in post graduate research activity.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Iain McWhirter's opinion piece in the Herald. He reflects the views of many up here.. and isn't generally known for sensationalism. He does write for the Herald, not the Sun or the Mail.

A rabid pro-SNP author writing in the only paper to come out in favour of Yes, from a media group that owns the new Nationalist paper.

Vested Interest if ever there was one.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Why do you say that, out of interest ? And what do you mean by 'additional' NHS spending in Scotland ? Just to be clear on what I'm replying to.

Do you support a 15p on the pound rise in income tax so Scotland can balance the books?

(it's less than half that in the rest of the UK)

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

I have no hidden agenda

We seem to assume here that we all have the same priorities, when clearly we don't.

Do you think Scotland needs to spend more money on health at the current time? If an obvious means to achieve that is to pay more as a region do you not think this is a perfectly valid means to an end?

I'd definitely support more local decisions on spending for the NW region. Personally, I'd pay more tax to support NW educational investment in post graduate research activity.

No you're alright, I wasn't assuming a hidden agenda.

I think everyone would like to see more spending on the NHS wherever they are in the UK. I guess though, people have differing ideas of where priorities should lie in terms of 'important' treatments etc etc. It's very easy to overspend.

The Scottish NHS has many failings, but at the moment is doing no worse than anywhere else in the UK. And Wales certainly seems to be coming off worst in terms of waiting times and overall satisfaction levels.

Tax, well I wouldn't mind paying a bit more. However, there is an issue in that I already pay tax.. and it goes in full to the Treasury. Imo, more tax, even if it went specifically towards the Scottish NHS, would produce a distinct feeling that raising taxes Scotland wide ( with limited powers and only through income tax ).. would in effect be paying twice for the same service ?

I think they'd have to come up with a means of demonstrating how additional 'Scottish only' taxes would produce real measurable results, in 'important' areas, very quickly ! Of course, those areas to deem important would be endlessly discussed and debated. For example, there are lots that would like to see additional taxes towards Cancer care, or special baby care units ( treatments/research)... but this would be against areas that are already underfunded or where private healthcare might not be at acceptable levels. Like mental healthcare ( understaffed/student training ) and elderly social care community systems ( understaffed/woeful pay/bed blocking etc ).

A bit of a minefield all round.