Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

Weirdly, in some systems, it'll turn out that that is precisely what it it is. It would be better if there was considered discussion and thought on how this could be minimised or avoided. This can be postponed but not forever.

With the current coalition it seems that the Lib Dems have a voice which is genuinely that of a junior coalition partner.

I guess the fear for the non-Scottish voter, or at least for this non-Scottish voter, is that an informal promise to enable 'confidence and supply' in the end means that ever other bill that goes through Parliament gets stuffed full of pork for Scotland to keep the SNP happy.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

String.. the Vow has not been enacted yet. Nothing has been passed into law, nothing has happened, nothing has been given, nothing has been granted nor immediately enacted upon. At the moment it's a series of proposals. That's as far as it's gotten.

Please stop deluding yourself.

As for your Granny stuff. Grow up. I'm a new Granny.. it's not a derogatory term by any means and shouldn't be used as such. And I'm shocked you and mcskinflint think it is to be honest. Aren't you a Grampa yourself ? Disappointing from you. Being a Gran is a wonderful thing, not an insult.. for anyone.

Maybe you need to stop deluding yourself as well, and wait what happens with the new powers. As well as whether the new tax raising powers given see the creation of the new benefits being created. Instead of assuming ( and we all know how the word assume pans out) the most negative. Wouldn't suit SNP spin mind you.

As for the use of Granny. Now who is getting personal , and I'll repeat that oft used phrase, you don't know the first thing about me. Lol. I agree with you Grans are wonderful creatures as are Grandpas , so what's the problem? I think she' a perfect fit just now.

Grandparents are traditionally benevolent to their grand kids, less strict, ensure the time they spend with them is fun with maybe a few wee goodies thrown in. What's not to like. In the safe knowledge that they don't have to take or make the less popular most difficult decisions longer term.

Maybe it would be more appropriate then if I used Temp or pretend Granny instead. As I certainly don't see her fitting the nice term, in the longer term. Or maybe made liberal use of the blue icon instead after it. I'm happy to compromise if you are?

Unless not being so knowledgeable in the use of these things I'm totally misunderstanding it's meaning or context.

.string.

Generali wrote: »

We've already established that STD didn't understand what 'pork' meant.

From the SNP viewpoint pork is a takeaway.

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

What a bizarre notion. So a country like Scotland, with a tradition of studying at home has to simply pay for another country which has a conveniently cost-saving tradition of studying abroad where others have to pay for it.

Is any other country in the world joined to a country with the highest HE fees on the continent and therefore makes them vulnerable to such exploitation?


Weirdly, in some systems, it'll turn out that that is precisely what it it is. It would be better if there was considered discussion and thought on how this could be minimised or avoided. This can be postponed but not forever.

It's the EU rules : Scotland can avoid them because, as everyone knows, it isn't a nation.

I agree it's wrong that Scotland should have different rules to England as I agree with you that the Barnett formula is corrupt and wrong headed.

still, in the long run, Scotland's narrow minded loss is England's gain.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That's a good thing. I agree. Westminster quite like the tax revenues from oil/gas too. It's of real benefit to our country ( UK ) after all.

That doesn't explain his support for Manchester business rates; help for N.E region; and supporting the industrial base in the Midlands.

*None* of these are purely benevolent actions. That would be silly.

It's a form of investment, so that the region can become ever more productive to the UK economy at large.

The hope with Scotland Oil fields is that we all derive better returns from Oil in the future, and start to make a dent in that deficit which we *all* share.

I like the positivity behind it.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Maybe you need to stop deluding yourself as well, and wait what happens with the new powers. As well as whether the new tax raising powers given see the creation of the new benefits being created. Instead of assuming ( and we all know how the word assume pans out) the most negative. Wouldn't suit SNP spin mind you.

I stated a few posts above that imho, only the presence of more SNP MP's in Westminster will see any of the Smith commission proposals passed into law. I don't believe at the time 'the Vow' was made that either the Tories, Lib Dems or Labour ( Scottish Labour overheard in pubs toasting the 'end of the SNP' on 19th Sept )... envisioned that in 8 months time there was any prospect whatsoever of 30 or 40 SNP MP's in Westminster actually making sure it was delivered, in full and with added extra's promised from Gordon Brown/Jim Murphy !

I still don't think it will be enough. And the polls seem to be bearing this out very forcefully. The Scottish electorate seem to be intent on a path towards devo-max/FFA at the moment. I don't believe, as Generali keeps stating, that this is to be at the expense of any other part of the UK. A gradual transference of powers and economic responsibilities to Scotland should be welcomed. Especially when the Barnett formula is so hated anyway.

As for the use of Granny. Now who is getting personal , and I'll repeat that oft used phrase, you don't know the first thing about me. Lol. I agree with you Grans are wonderful creatures as are Grandpas , so what's the problem? I think she' a perfect fit just now.

The problem is that it's very childish.. the same as people who constantly post of Ca-moron, or Milli-bland, Liebore etc etc. Most of us left that kind of name calling behind in the playground where, imho, it belongs. It's not about 'getting personal'.. it's about what kind of debate you wish to have. If you want a childish one that involves infantile name-calling. Then go ahead. I can't be bothered with that sort of malarkey.

Conrad

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The Scottish electorate seem to be intent on a path towards devo-max/FFA at the moment.

Listening to Leanne Wood and Sturgeon, it really is time for the celts and picts to go their own way and leave us English to it as we really do think quite differently. Leanne Woods on 'Free Speech' was endlessly on about what we can take, what citizens should be given, what ought to be free and a host of natural entitlments, she really has no interest in wealth production.


You will be free to follow your 'progressive' dream, rid of the pesky Tory English, free to hand-out benefits to all, free to have a bleeding heart for every Nigerian pretending to flee Homosexual persecution, free to give all commers a house and a bunch of freebies, free to have fluffy chats with ISIS and Putin who will surely be won over with such hand wringers as Natalie Bennet verbally battering ex KGB men, she'll set em straight with the might of her progressive alliance behind her.


Also free to tax enterprise and of course none of it will flee England where nanny isn't nearly so hectoring. And no fattie will be offended by anyone saying they ought to put down the Fandant Foncies, nothing is the citizens fault, no one is to blame in socialist nirvana, eat all you want and nanny will make it all right with a gastric band.
At every turn employers will be sued for rightful compensation, the worker always front and centre of society, firms will love such a just environment.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I stated a few posts above that imho, only the presence of more SNP MP's in Westminster will see any of the Smith commission proposals passed into law. I don't believe at the time 'the Vow' was made that either the Tories, Lib Dems or Labour ( Scottish Labour overheard in pubs toasting the 'end of the SNP' on 19th Sept )... envisioned that in 8 months time there was any prospect whatsoever of 30 or 40 SNP MP's in Westminster actually making sure it was delivered, in full and with added extra's promised from Gordon Brown/Jim Murphy !

I still don't think it will be enough. And the polls seem to be bearing this out very forcefully. The Scottish electorate seem to be intent on a path towards devo-max/FFA at the moment. I don't believe, as Generali keeps stating, that this is to be at the expense of any other part of the UK. A gradual transference of powers and economic responsibilities to Scotland should be welcomed. Especially when the Barnett formula is so hated anyway.



The problem is that it's very childish.. the same as people who constantly post of Ca-moron, or Milli-bland, Liebore etc etc. Most of us left that kind of name calling behind in the playground where, imho, it belongs. It's not about 'getting personal'.. it's about what kind of debate you wish to have. If you want a childish one that involves infantile name-calling. Then go ahead. I can't be bothered with that sort of malarkey.

I can see no reason why the smith commission proposals should be implemented : I don't remember the people of the UK being asked their views on the matter.


of course, if the result was a residual non corrupt block grant then one might feel differently but that's unlikely to happen.


no-one 'hates' the Barnett formula : but all right minded people condemn it for being corrupt except those that unfairly benefit.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I stated a few posts above that imho, only the presence of more SNP MP's in Westminster will see any of the Smith commission proposals passed into law. I don't believe at the time 'the Vow' was made that either the Tories, Lib Dems or Labour ( Scottish Labour overheard in pubs toasting the 'end of the SNP' on 19th Sept )... envisioned that in 8 months time there was any prospect whatsoever of 30 or 40 SNP MP's in Westminster actually making sure it was delivered, in full and with added extra's promised from Gordon Brown/Jim Murphy !

I still don't think it will be enough. And the polls seem to be bearing this out very forcefully. The Scottish electorate seem to be intent on a path towards devo-max/FFA at the moment. I don't believe, as Generali keeps stating, that this is to be at the expense of any other part of the UK. A gradual transference of powers and economic responsibilities to Scotland should be welcomed. Especially when the Barnett formula is so hated anyway.
.

Strange this as obviously I don't support SNP, but did envisage the SNP surge being reflected in the GE 2015, and even worse the implications for the Holyrood 2016 elections. Their ardent wish for FFA at the moment IMO rings hollow.

SNP made their position in Westminster and their feelings toward it as an institution of government crystal clear from the 19th September.

Trying to change their stance into the anti austerity party or alliance for the entire UK is also IMO hollow. Wales, NI and the Greens should be wary of Greeks offering false gifts. SNP have made it very clear they don't believe in sharing anything from finances to power .

Shakethedisease

Conrad wrote: »

Listening to Leanne Wood and Sturgeon, it really is time for the celts and picts to go their own way and leave us English to it as we really do think quite differently. Leanne Woods on 'Free Speech' was endlessly on about what we can take, what citizens should be given, what ought to be free and a host of natural entitlments, she really has no interest in wealth production.

You will be free to follow your 'progressive' dream, rid of the pesky Tory English, free to hand-out benefits to all, free to have a bleeding heart for every Nigerian pretending to flee Homosexual persecution, free to give all commers a house and a bunch of freebies, free to have fluffy chats with ISIS and Putin who will surely be won over with such hand wringers as Natalie Bennet verbally battering ex KGB men, she'll set em straight with the might of her progressive alliance behind her.

Also free to tax enterprise and of course none of it will flee England where nanny isn't nearly so hectoring. And no fattie will be offended by anyone saying they ought to put down the Fandant Foncies, nothing is the citizens fault, no one is to blame in socialist nirvana, eat all you want and nanny will make it all right with a gastric band.
At every turn employers will be sued for rightful compensation, the worker always front and centre of society, firms will love such a just environment.

I'm not sure about thinking differently. However, it think it's pretty obvious we vote differently. Loving your uber-socialist/liberal 'painting a picture' there.. but I think it's more likely that Scotland would just be like any other 'normal' country in the world with it's own good points and bad points.

There's not many around in the world these days that get handed pocket money by political parties that no-one votes for anymore.. In power in the neighbouring country/region.. The political union is on a very sticky wicket ( or on a shoogly peg as we say up here ). Once that's gone..