Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

IveSeenTheLight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Please do not do that. Because that speeding would be on record

Of course I wouldn't do it. My point was that devolved services does not necessarily stop at the border.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Sturgeon is still bleating, she wants more, she will always want more, even if we allowed full devolution she would want more, she would even want more if we also gave them every penny this country made. The only mantra she knows is "I want more". I personally think that once everyone realises she will not get everything she wants by acting like a toddler having a tantrum then people will actually go back to their roots to a party that might actually know what it is doing by then.

this retort about Nicola Sturgeon bleating like a kid with a tantrum is very boring and shows a distinct lack of understanding of what she stands for and what her party has delivered in Scotland.

Hence the rise in support.

You just need to review the 7 Leaders debates and see how well she stood amongst all the party leaders.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Of course I wouldn't do it. My point was that devolved services does not necessarily stop at the border.



this retort about Nicola Sturgeon bleating like a kid with a tantrum is very boring and shows a distinct lack of understanding of what she stands for and what her party has delivered in Scotland.

Hence the rise in support.

You just need to review the 7 Leaders debates and see how well she stood amongst all the party leaders.

The SNP's success comes from what they have failed to deliver: the Scots having to pay for the Government services they consume without the London subsidy.

The Scottish Government manages to spend well above their means with no consequence. As long as the SNP maintains that they will have massive support in Scotland. Heck, if I could find a political party to vote for that would give me power over spending decisions without having to pay for it I'd vote for them like a shot.

You'd have to be crazy to vote out the SNP as things stand. They get to spank London's money up the wall. What's not to like?

chewmylegoff

Shakethedisease wrote: »

All depends on the methodology used.

http://moneyweek.com/one-less-thing-to-think-about-in-the-scottish-referendum-debate/

Not sure what the methodology used to determine how to apportion revenues has to do with the methodology used to apportion costs, or, indeed, what your point is.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

You just need to review the 7 Leaders debates and see how well she stood amongst all the party leaders.

indeed so

5 years ago the outstanding person was some-one called Nick Clegg

didn't work out well in the end

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Of course I wouldn't do it. My point was that devolved services does not necessarily stop at the border.



this retort about Nicola Sturgeon bleating like a kid with a tantrum is very boring and shows a distinct lack of understanding of what she stands for and what her party has delivered in Scotland.

Hence the rise in support.

You just need to review the 7 Leaders debates and see how well she stood amongst all the party leaders.

Of course she bleats, the Queen of Project Whinge.

On her performance : if you like platitudes and whinging she did well.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

They get to spank London's money up the wall. What's not to like?

I thought we proved it was not London's money that subsidises the rest of the country.

They need London, South East, Scotland and East as the 4 top contributors to surpass 50% of the GDP.

I also showed many areas outside London which contribute above the UK average.

Why do you continue to ignore clear facts in favour of this political fallacy gesturing?

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

indeed so

5 years ago the outstanding person was some-one called Nick Clegg

didn't work out well in the end

Nicola Sturgeon is not the weak leader that Clegg was

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I thought we proved it was not London's money that subsidises the rest of the country.

They need London, South East, Scotland and East as the 4 top contributors to surpass 50% of the GDP.

I also showed many areas outside London which contribute above the UK average.

Why do you continue to ignore clear facts in favour of this political fallacy gesturing?

Nope

With current oil prices, London provides far more than her share of spending. The SE puts a little into the pot and the SW pays her way.

Scotland is currently running a deficit twice that of the UK as a whole.

Lucky you all live in a country where Londoners aren't separatists/

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon is not the weak leader that Clegg was

the issue was about both 'winning' the leaders debates: however it is useful of you reminding us the nationalistic socialism does seem to throw up autocratic leaders

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I thought we proved it was not London's money that subsidises the rest of the country.

They need London, South East, Scotland and East as the 4 top contributors to surpass 50% of the GDP.

I also showed many areas outside London which contribute above the UK average.

Why do you continue to ignore clear facts in favour of this political fallacy gesturing?

You did nothing of the sort.

As I recall you did not give the Scottish Spending data together with the tax raised so that we could see the net balance between them and thus the figures on which you base your assertions.