Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Thrugelmir

Leanne1812 wrote: »

However, I'm not getting drawn into a debate with you about Barnett. I'll just say this, for all those who feel aggrieved that Scotland gets free prescriptions & higher education I'd say why aren't you lobbying your government for this instead of feeling bitter at what others get?

Buying votes is the easy part. Long term management of the entire economy requires far more ability.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Better_Days wrote: »

I would be interested to know though how the SNP finances now stack up for independence now the price of oil has tanked -

You'll find an objective explanation here.....

the short answer is that it doesn't.

Oil was never the 'cherry on the cake', it's the 'flour in the cake mix'.

Leanne1812

Better_Days wrote: »

I don't feel a blind fury for anyone who supports the SNP. I would be interested to know though how the SNP finances now stack up for independence now the price of oil has tanked - same way I would like to know how the Tories propose to find 12 billion of cuts. The level of fiscal responsibility of both may well turn out to be very important on May 7th.

This thread doesn't strike me as hate filled rants, but a discussion of the possibilities should the SNP win the number of seats predicted, and given the likelihood of a hung Parliament. (Especially as the referendum vote was 'no' and yet the SNP are pushing for independence - so if the SNP gets the majority of Scottish votes will it claim that it has a mandate for independence despite the outcome of the recent ereferendum?)

It does indeed make for interesting times......

Thanks for your honesty. There are posts which are informative & interesting but on the whole I feel this thread usually ends up with the Snp and its supporters being ridiculed for being so stupid to actually like & want to vote for them.

It's pretty pointless discussing how the finances stack up as it was a No vote. Also at this moment in time, had we voted yes, we'd still be in the union till next spring. The IFS had good & bad to say about all the parties & their policy regarding growth & the deficit. We are very much in the dark about any parties cuts after the election aren't we?

I'd say the media have sucked you in, show me one article where Nicola Sturgeon is pushing for independence. This is a general election, it's everyone except the SNP who keep on about indy. It's a tactic to turn people off but it appears to be failing. The SNP are riding high, a lot of Scots seem to trust them and like them more than the alternatives.

I think my frustration is coming out a little in this thread as everything I hear through the mainstream media right now is anti SNP. Can you understand how it feels to Scots that last year we were begged to remain yet now it feels like we are to be ostracised if we dare to vote for them? It does not feel like a happy Union at all.

Leanne1812

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Buying votes is the easy part. Long term management of the entire economy requires far more ability.

I agree, however sorting out the tax evaders instead of turning a blind eye might go some way to increasing revenues.

CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I think my frustration is coming out a little in this thread as everything I hear through the mainstream media right now is anti SNP. Can you understand how it feels to Scots that last year we were begged to remain yet now it feels like we are to be ostracised if we dare to vote for them? It does not feel like a happy Union at all.

sad how you confuse scotland with the SNP

and you still haven't explained why you think the people of Yorkshire should receive less than the people of Scotland

Leanne1812

CLAPTON wrote: »

sad how you confuse scotland with the SNP

and you still haven't explained why you think the people of Yorkshire should receive less than the people of Scotland

I'm done with you Clapton.

No matter what I say you will find some way to twist it.

Good day to you.

CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I'm done with you Clapton.

No matter what I say you will find some way to twist it.

Good day to you.

Just answer the simple question: why should the people of Yorkshire receive less grant than the people of Scotland?

How is that twisting anything?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

sorting out the tax evaders instead of turning a blind eye might go some way to increasing revenues.

Indeed.

But Scotland has a £14.2bn deficit every year at the moment, which is £7.6bn more than a population share of the UK deficit.

And the SNP's own white paper says they only think they can raise £250m from shutting down tax avoidance.

So what else do you suggest to raise revenue?

Here are some examples, which would you choose?

- If we raised the tax rate for high earners by 10p on the pound that would raise about another £250m a year.

- If we scrapped Trident that would be about another £130m a year.

- If we put in place a relatively crippling tax increase for absolutely everybody, including the poorest taxpayers, of 10p in the pound, that would only raise another £2bn a year.

- Putting up VAT to 25% would only raise £2.3bn.

No matter how you cut it, massively higher taxes on everyone, not just the rich, spending cuts for things like Trident, etc, you just can't close the gap...

There is no way to get there without significant cuts to front line services, benefits, public sector employment, etc.

So what would you cut?

Or what taxes would you raise?

The taxpayers in rUK subsidise us to the tune of £7.6bn a year.

That's basically the entire local government budget in Scotland, or about 70% of the Scottish NHS spend.

You just can't cover that gap without making some really painful cuts AND making every last person in Scotland pay a lot, lot more in taxes.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Rubbish. Tories and Labour doing confidence and supply deals in order to keep the 40 SNP MP's out it would end the union one way or another.

You're obsessed with the SNP so of course you view any outcome after the election as being about the SNP.

Let's say that Labour get 300 seats and as the largest party the Lib Dems do a deal with them and get to ~320. It would be perfectly reasonable for the Tories to say, "You won it and the fact you are slightly short of a majority is immaterial in terms of forming a Government. We'll abstain on your budget and Queen's speech as long as they're not absurd and then vote with or against you on a case by case basis"

No reference to the SNP. The SNP aren't even in the picture. Who cares about them. They're a party fighting in a few seats that will get the 5th or 6th largest number of votes.

The Home Counties vote consistently for the Tories and often get Labour Governments and seem to manage to deal with that okay. Perhaps some of the Scottish people should learn the same humility rather than ranting about how a minority party standing for election by less than 10% of the population should be able to dictate how the other 90% live.

zagubov

Generali wrote: »

You're obsessed with the SNP so of course you view any outcome after the election as being about the SNP.

Let's say that Labour get 300 seats and as the largest party the Lib Dems do a deal with them and get to ~320. It would be perfectly reasonable for the Tories to say, "You won it and the fact you are slightly short of a majority is immaterial in terms of forming a Government. We'll abstain on your budget and Queen's speech as long as they're not absurd and then vote with or against you on a case by case basis"

No reference to the SNP. The SNP aren't even in the picture. Who cares about them. They're a party fighting in a few seats that will get the 5th or 6th largest number of votes.

The Home Counties vote consistently for the Tories and often get Labour Governments and seem to manage to deal with that okay. Perhaps some of the Scottish people should learn the same humility rather than ranting about how a minority party standing for election by less than 10% of the population should be able to dictate how the other 90% live.

In a FPTP system, isn't it the case that the election result is decided by a small number of swing voters anyway?

I'm still skeptical that the SNP will grab so many seats. I'd be surprised if the unionist parties came out of the referendum debate looking to the voters as if they respected them. They ( especially the Labour Party) reminded me of the story of the East German writers' union distributing leaflets warning that the people had lost the trust of the government and could only earn it back by renewed effort and loyalty.

They're about to be told which way round the loss of trust has happened.;)