Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

In answer to your question a week or so back elantan.. it seems if tonight's tweets and tomorrow's Sunday Herald are right.. that the SNP has just hit 100,000 members.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Paddy Pantsdown ! I can certainly understand why he used that particular mode of criticism... There were more people at Alex Salmond's book signing yesterday than there were at the Lib Dem conference. Say it all as far as the Scots Lib Dems are concerned.

It's a campaign diary.. not a set of in-depth historical memoirs. 'Literary criticism'..:rotfl:

Ah yes, the standard move for the SNP playbook: mock and belittle the messenger and point out how much better the SNP is. The only bit you omitted was the ranted threats to the messenger's wellbeing.

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

Ah yes, the standard move for the SNP playbook: mock and belittle the messenger and point out how much better the SNP is. The only bit you omitted was the ranted threats to the messenger's wellbeing.

Obviously there's a fair few scots who do think the SNP are better if the polls are to be believed.

What is it that people seem so resentful about that for?

People voting for a party they think represent them best.

All the talk of lying and misrepresenting, well, quite a lot see through the unionist lies too. That may be why so many are flocking to SNP.

100,000 members can't be bad for a small insignificant party from a northern region of the UK. What other party can claim that?

Their popularity may not last forever but the reality right now is they are doing something Scots ( not all!) like.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

In answer to your question a week or so back elantan.. it seems if tonight's tweets and tomorrow's Sunday Herald are right.. that the SNP has just hit 100,000 members.

so that's about 2% of the scottish population

good for a degenerate old westminster party but absolutely terrifying low for a modern honest decent party that truely represents the aspiration of the whole of the scottish nation.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

All the talk of lying and misrepresenting, well, quite a lot see through the unionist lies too. That may be why so many are flocking to SNP.

The SNP lies would have led to a right old mess financially for Scotland had they just conned a few more people into voting for independence...

But anyway, I note Sturgeons grudging admission this week that the Yes campaign's oil figures were wrong (by a factor of 13 times !!!) and also that she hasn't disputed the latest IFS calculations.

The ones that show the Scottish deficit is now the equivalent of a 17p in the pound increase in income tax...

I'm guessing you and Shakey, as with most of the SNP supporters, would now like to see as 'Max' a 'Devo' position as possible, presumably as close to a federal state with full fiscal responsibility as you can get.

If we assume for a moment that the Scottish Government's own GERS figures are roughly correct about income and expenditure, and that the oil price remains roughly where it is now on average for the next few years, how would you propose we allocate the massive, swinging, Austerity-Max cuts to spending along with crippling rises in tax that such a shortfall would require?

Or are you now quite happy to not have full powers over Scotland's finances, and to let the huge subsidy from the rest of the UK continue?

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The SNP lies would have led to a right old mess financially for Scotland had they just conned a few more people into voting for independence...

But anyway, I note Sturgeons grudging admission this week that the Yes campaign's oil figures were wrong (by a factor of 13 times !!!) and also that she hasn't disputed the latest IFS calculations.

The ones that show the Scottish deficit is now the equivalent of a 17p in the pound increase in income tax...

I'm guessing you and Shakey, as with most of the SNP supporters, would now like to see as 'Max' a 'Devo' position as possible, presumably as close to a federal state with full fiscal responsibility as you can get.

If we assume for a moment that the Scottish Government's own GERS figures are roughly correct about income and expenditure, and that the oil price remains roughly where it is now on average for the next few years, how would you propose we allocate the massive, swinging, Austerity-Max cuts to spending along with crippling rises in tax that such a shortfall would require?

Or are you now quite happy to not have full powers over Scotland's finances, and to let the huge subsidy from the rest of the UK continue?

I did vote Yes so you tell me.........

I'd like to see devo max but it's unlikely. The UK gov like to keep a tight hold on the purse strings. Lest Scotland actually makes policy that enhances our economy and makes them seem incompetent.

Nicola wasn't the only one who got the oil figures wrong. Did you forget that? It's not our only form of revenue, far from it.

Am I correct that massive spending cuts and more austerity is what we are getting anyway?

But of course it would have been catastrophic had Scoland voted Yes.

As yet no one has proven to me that Scotland is subsidised. The figures may point to that but nowhere do we see an actual breakdown of exactly where the money goes. Prove that to me and I'll concede.

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

In answer to your question a week or so back elantan.. it seems if tonight's tweets and tomorrow's Sunday Herald are right.. that the SNP has just hit 100,000 members.

Yep i noticed, was at a town fair yesterday, in a VERY unionist town ( they used to paint the kerbs red white and blue, and always have union flags up to give you an idea of how unionist)

out of roughly 500 people 350 were wearing SNP badges ( and yes badges) I tried to stay away from them to get a feel of what other people were thinking, engaged a few people ( as I was there on business) and every single one only wanted to talk politics ( I honestly didnt want to as my purpose was business not pleasure) I kept trying to get the conversation back to the matter in hand but no chance.

And every single one without exception cant wait to vote SNP in May and every single one without exception would vote yes if another referendum was called, but not every single one voted yes the first time, a few ( a fair few ) voted no and have stated they have regretted it ever since.

Now these were the people that didnt have any badges or obvious political allegiances on show ( admittedly I didnt talk to everyone that didnt have a badge )

There were three labour people there the local MP and two councillors, their faces were tripping them, people were avoiding them, The MSP and SNP MP candidate were swamped with people asking questions, people were queuing up to get their photos taken with them, the SNP councillor that lost the vote to the MP candidate stood there and supported the whole lot of them making sure they were not overcrowded but leaving them alone in the main, I spoke to them ( I know them all really well from indy ref) what a team, they gelled exceptionally well and showed a friendly united front compared to the labour co hort who were all sad and desperate looking.

I do hope it is a huge contingent of SNP MP's we send down, I do hope that labour finally understand Scotland has had enough, and finally make the changes that are needed to get themselves sorted. I do not want to ever live in a one party country, I want to live in a country where we have SNP, Labour, Tory, Green, SSP, CW ( I reckon they will form a party) independent, and every other colour and political background, one that really represents the people they serve

elantan

CLAPTON wrote: »

so that's about 2% of the scottish population

.

or the equivalent of 1 million labour members ( cant ever remember labour membership topping 1 million do you?)

to trivialise 100,000 members of a political party which was 8 months ago approx 25,000 ( or less, i'm not really sure tbh) is quite funny, you do make me laugh with all your prejudices Clapton

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Nicola wasn't the only one who got the oil figures wrong. Did you forget that? It's not our only form of revenue, far from it.

The SNP were warned time and time again that their figures were hopelessly optimistic. By those in the oil industry, by the OBR, by commentators, etc.

They dismissed it out of hand, and were prepared to risk Scotland's future on a volatile commodity price.

As it turns out, the SNP were indeed hopelessly wrong, and significantly more wrong than anyone else.

Lets not forget Swinney's secret (and subsequently leaked) briefing document where he raised concerns to the SNP cabinet about the financial viability of an iScotland reliant on oil revenue.

Here's a copy....

http://b.3cdn.net/better/c1d14076ee08022eec_u9m6vd74f.pdf

Am I correct that massive spending cuts and more austerity is what we are getting anyway?

No, you are completely wrong.

Do you have any idea what level of cuts would be required with the current Scottish finances under financial home rule or indy?

It's an order of magnitude bigger than anything currently proposed if the billions in annual subsidies stop flowing from rUK.

But of course it would have been catastrophic had Scoland voted Yes.

It would indeed.

As yet no one has proven to me that Scotland is subsidised. The figures may point to that but nowhere do we see an actual breakdown of exactly where the money goes. Prove that to me and I'll concede.

The SNP controlled Scottish Government compiles and releases the figures.

If anyone has a vested interest in massaging the truth, it's them, and yet even their own figures show what a dire and unsustainable predicament we'd be in today under full fiscal control or indy.

Perhaps you should ask Nicola why her government is releasing those stats when you clearly don't believe them?

Leanne1812

So, we'd need to borrow heaven forbid!

It's not like the UK aren't already borrowing.

As yet no proof that we are indeed subsidised.

Why can't you point me to a breakdown showing where the money goes?

A bit suspect that.........