Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You'll have to be a lot clearer. At the moment the Scottish government get a fixed budget decided by the UK Parliament. It's impossible to overspend.

In what scenario is this overspend going to happen in the near future ? As long as the UK parliament decides the Scottish, Welsh and NI budgets. None of them can possibly overspend.

And if the SNP is ever in charge of Scotland's budget, in order to overspend anything. It would only be through independence of FFA. In which case, they couldn't overspend UK money or add to the debt.. because Scotland would be raising and spending it's own revenues and contributing for shared services/debt.

I think we've crossed wires somewhere. Because I'm at a bit of a loss as to how the SNP will go 'wild in the aisles' in a UK context ? Yes, I think I need humoured.

.. and you'll have to stop dancing around the point.

Scottish financial deficit 40% higher than rest of UK, data reveals.

More money means more responsibility - who do you think is going to bail you out when there's an orchestrated deficit because the poor wee SNP claim not to have enough of the ready?

Glad to see Sturgeon's got another job. Mine's a pint please.

skintmacflint

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I'd agree if it was right across the spectrum but it's not is it?

You'll also note it was only the English edition of The Sun who published the picture & article. Wonder why it wasn't UK wide? A wee bit of stoking possibly......

It is across the spectrum Leanne, we used to see cartoons of Thatcher a la Madonnas gear with the cone bra , eating children, and worse. We didn't have photo shop capabilities back then. Everyone gets it not just politicians.

As for only published down South, is that not the final decision of the editor , whose remit is to sell this type of paper. It's not as if it was some big secret.

I keep hearing on here, Scottish people are now so sensitive the slightest thing sends them in droves to vote for SNP. For all we will ever know Salmond was behind it. Lol.

Let's not forget SNP have been rubbishing very other party except their own, the length and breadth of Scotland for decades. Just so happens at this point in time, it has been more successful.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

There are of course many good reasons why people wish to collect together and be governed in a certain way.
-They may wish to form such a collective because they will be richer and so have Thatcherite self interest.
-They may feel that have shared language and key values like good governance and rule of law, trial by a jury of one's peers etc.
-They may feel that they have key beliefs that link them like religious beliefs that justify killing non believers
-They may believe they have a similar genetics characteristics
-etc etc

but none of them can reasonably say a particular piece of real estate defines anything but a geographical area irrespective from the values of the peoples occupying that space.

Indeed, people may well take the view that they which to subscribe to the values, language, governance, legal system of a European superstate but that would only be reasonable if they shared the same values or felt that they would simply be richer but not because they happened to be a few miles off the French coast.

The people of Scotland should chose their form of government based on values and not by way of occupying a specific land mass.

You do know you're saying that England isn't a country or a nation either don't you ? It's defined by exactly the same characteristics. Is that what you're getting at ? Neither England nor Scotland are sovereign nations in the strict definition of one, nor countries in their own right ? Just regions of the UK ?

I know the 'strict' descriptions. Is that how you feel about England ?

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

.. and you'll have to stop dancing around the point.

Scottish financial deficit 40% higher than rest of UK, data reveals.

More money means more responsibility - who do you think is going to bail you out when there's an orchestrated deficit because the poor wee SNP claim not to have enough of the ready?

Who's going to bail 'you' out.. Again, in what context ? Independence ? No-one. FFA..No-one.. In a UK context, fixed budget.

The figures above are for Scotlands performance inside the union. Not outside of it. One could almost say that the above figures are a terrible reason to stay ! But we did, and that's in the past now.

Other than that, and the fact you keep going on about me dancing round the issue.. I still have no idea what in actual fact you're getting angry at ? You'll have to walk me though it..

Are we independent, has FFA/Devo Max taken place, or are do the SNP have 40 odd MP's in a parliament of 650 MP's when the SNP don't have enough of the readies ? I'm lost.

Iain Macwhirter ‏@iainmacwhirter 27s27 seconds ago Poll in @heraldscotland tomorrow: 69% of Scottish voters think Scotland will become independent. 59% of English think so too.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Who's going to bail 'you' out.. Again, in what context ? Independence ? No-one. FFA..No-one.. In a UK context, fixed budget.
.

If more spending was approved for UK, at the request of SNP , then Scotland wrangles another referndum after an EU out result. Wins with even a single vote, then walks away from a share of the debt.

Independence, a bail out in the national interest, as we did with Ireland. Movement of more Scots over the border who don't care for the new socialist regime of Scotland, or the even harsher cuts imposed, by getting their sums wrong.

FFA much the same as above.

There will probably be more , but if I'm Scottish , live in Scotland and don't trust SNP posturing , why would anyone outside of Scotland.

If Scotland and SNP want to regain trust both inside and outside of Scotland, they need to work with the powers they have and are being given. What would be wrong with that for a change ?

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You do know you're saying that England isn't a country or a nation either don't you ? It's defined by exactly the same characteristics. Is that what you're getting at ? Neither England nor Scotland are sovereign nations in the strict definition of one, nor countries in their own right ? Just regions of the UK ?

I know the 'strict' descriptions. Is that how you feel about England ?

I do have regard for common sense and evidence based information so do not I feel a slave to any nonsense like 'strict' definition.

Yes, England is clearly not a sovereign nation: the UK is one. In the future that may change, as it is the people that count and not some nonsense about a piece of magically land.

I feel no allegiance to the geographical region (although love its beauty and variety) in which I live but I do feel an allegiance to the peoples that broadly value the same values as myself.
So a belief in liberty, democracy, free speech, trial by a jury of my peers, free press (even one that is sometime unkind about great Scottish leaders), good governance, largely corruption free, a shared language, etc etc.

Because I hold those values I fully support the decisions that a section of the people may make if they feel they want to break away from the UK : if they think they have more in common with the values and customs of the people of the EU then so beit.

The will of the people shown in a democratic manner, yes : nonsense about a bit of land, no.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote:

Who's going to bail 'you' out.. Again, in what context ? Independence ? No-one. FFA..No-one.. In a UK context, fixed budget.

No one of course - that's why we have to take stringent deficit reduction measures.

Is your remark some sort of excuse/justification for the SNP to overrun its budget and then walk away from the debt?

You need not only to reset your logic Shakey but also methinks, the SNP needs to reset its moraL compass.

Shakethedisease wrote:

The figures above are for Scotlands performance inside the union. Not outside of it.

They are an indication of cynical financial incompetence by the SNP. Sorry to have to remind you, but things would get worse in Natland.

Shakethedisease wrote:

One could almost say that the above figures are a terrible reason to stay ! But we did, and that's in the past now.

Don't be disingenuous, you know perfectly well that the SNP is focussed on manipulating everything towards its separation goal.

Shakethedisease wrote:

Other than that, and the fact you keep going on about me dancing round the issue.. I still have no idea what in actual fact you're getting angry at ? You'll have to walk me though it.

Sorry, I don't believe that; I think you are evasive, not stupid.

.string.

Those of you who have gone through the interview process, on either or both sides as I have, will probably have met the deflection technique for answering difficult questions.

The technique is quite simple; if one is asked a question which is difficult or one which you do not feel comfortable with, you ask for some sort of clarification. Most interviewers when asked to clarify a question will be unable to avoid elaborating on the question as in so doing open up the range of possible response which could be construed as some sort of answer but which don't actually address the question asked. In that situation the interviewee can happily answer in any one of a number of ways to try to guide the interview into more "comfortable" areas.

It can be a good technique to get out of a hole but not when up against experienced interviewers. Such responses are glaringly obvious and if repeatedly used are quickly recognised for what they are and simply destroy the credibility of the interviewee.

So if anyone reading this is a potential interviewee, use the technique in an emergency but not more than once or it will be seen for what it is .... deliberate avoidance of the question.

.string.

Oh by the way, I forgot to mention earlier, in the link I posted before, where Sturgeon repeated the SNP lie about the Vow being broken, she laid bare her attitude to fiscal restraint in the paragraph when she said;
"Scotland would be tied to the UK’s current austerity fiscal framework, and under the plans set out could see capital borrowing powers replace, and not augment, the existing capital grant.".

In other words she is moaning and groaning about not being allowed full rein to borrow and spend unlimited amounts regardless of the pain the rest of us are collectively enduring.

Trust the SNP? - not in a month of referendum days.

.string.

CLAPTON wrote: »

I do have regard for common sense and evidence based information so do not I feel a salve to any nonsense like 'strict' definition.

Yes, England is clearly not a sovereign nation: the UK is one. In the future that may change, as it is the people that count and not some nonsense about a piece of magically land.

I feel no allegiance to the geographical region (although love its beauty and variety) in which I live but I do feel an allegiance to the peoples that broadly value the same values as myself.
So a belief in liberty, democracy, free speech, trial by a jury of my peers, free press (even one that is sometime unkind about great Scottish leaders), good governance, largely corruption free, a shared language, etc etc.

Because I hold those values I fully support the decisions that a section of the people may make if they feel they want to break away from the UK : if they think they have more in common with the values and customs of the people of the EU then so beit.

The will of the people shown in a democratic manner, yes : nonsense about a bit of land, no.

Interesting point the Clapton; I agree up to a point although I must say, nomadic though it may be, that the sense of territory or "home" is strong in humans and may well be a very real factor in their feeling of belonging.

The kinship-to-the-people argument would go some way to legitimising Russia's annexation of the Crimea and Eastern Ukrain, although in that case it is moot as to whether there was a genuine democratic decision made there and, in the end it was, and is, an illegal invasion.

But it could also be applied to the current Scottish situation. It would be logical and democratic to include all Scots living in the UK (who would be affected by the decision made in a referendum) to be included in any future separation referendum. Mind you, I would not be surprised if the SNP did not find all sorts of reasons to ignore them ranging from "We can't be bothered to work out who they are, it's much too difficult", through "they're not true scots because they don't live in Scotland and foreign nationals who live here are much more worthy of a vote" to "Ok we agree but only if the vote is given to those older than 12 [sub voce] because they are more likely to vote YES if we throw in free state-funded video games[/sub voce]" and "old fogies can't vote because they have no future".