Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

wotsthat wrote: »

The ideology of nationalism. London and the SE aren't nations so people there who voted labour just take it on the chin. If you voted SNP and didn't get at least deputy PM then it's an insult.

Yes, everything is an insult to the whinge machine.

.string.

kabayiri wrote: »

Elephant in the room time : how would an independent Scotland expect to pay it's own way in a time of collapsed oil revenues?

Crucially, do they plan to make ends meet in the short/mid term by demanding continued subsidy from the UK government. If yes, what sort of level of subsidy are we talking?

I think the rest of the UK deserve to know the answer to this sooner, not later, so that we can determine the impact on the overall finances.

I could cope with the bad news of the loss of Scotland if it meant that the financial health of the rest of the UK improved significantly.

Perhaps not the only elephant; there are the other issues of the Scottish Financial Sector collapsing, and businesses shifting South. These will all help ( the rUK that is). Then there is the probable shifting of rUK spending habits away from Scotland.

Buy rUK!

It doesn't have much of a ring to it but, well, never mind.

elantan

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Its good that someone has their finger on the pulse of Bournemouth's Scottish Nationalism sentiment and can report it back here.

Most of the people I know - who live in Scotland, seem to think that that ship has sailed even if they wish it hadn't.

Eh? Bournemouth?

Funny you say the people you talk to as today in work I spoke to one No voter and we'll over two dozen yes voters, all said it will happen and independence will happen ( the no voter unhappily so)

Different people different experiences

The yes voters were getting awfy irritated with a few things, some of them wanting Cameron to make his cuts hurt ... Not one of them had one ounce of respect for Labour, and that does worry me as we need a strong opposition to SNP, it seems labour is not going to be it, maybe ( and fingers crossed) Patrick Harvie gets loads more members of his party into HR next year

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

you keep stating that it was 'widely agreed' that the Sept referendum was a 'once in a lifetime' thing. It wasn't widely agreed. Salmond said it, and it gets quoted back a lot. That's about it.

Salmond was far from the only one.

Here's Sturgeon saying exactly the same thing.

Nicola Sturgeon said she hoped people would seize the "once in a lifetime opportunity for Scotland" in next year's independence vote

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24147303

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Salmond was far from the only one.

Here's Sturgeon saying exactly the same thing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24147303

But HAMISH, it only counts if a Unionist says something. They're the ones that need to be held to account, not the Nationalists.

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Salmond was far from the only one.

Here's Sturgeon saying exactly the same thing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24147303

I suspect that when Queen Nicola said that she was looking into camera one and addressing the octogenarians!

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well it would help if when they say things like 'devolve all crown estates and revenues'... if they actually meant it rather than cherry picking, and sneaking little clauses into the Scotland Bill, for rather obvious cash flow continuing... in the wrong direction to proposed devolution plans.
...

The estates are still owned by the Royal family; it's just the deal passing over revenues which is continued by each monarch since King George 3.

Back in 2011 that was circa £200m revenue. It's not much of a dent on a subsidy worth £7bn+ per annum is it?

I guess it's worth more in whinge factor.

Mistermeaner

What is it about scotland that gives it (or some of its residents) this special right to moan?

[Deleted User]

ggb1979 wrote: »

What is it about scotland that gives it (or some of its residents) this special right to moan?

England.


....

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Home Rule or Independence.

One leads to the other.

The choice is way more nuanced than a dyed-in-the-wool SNP voter like yourself can seemingly fathom. There are a myriad of issues and possible repercussions in a indyref that simply dont eixst in a safe risk free vote for the SNP in all other elections.
As someone once said, this isnt just about giving the effing Tories a kicking!:)

Independence isn't risk free. What makes you think that people like me think that it's 'risk free' ? We're not stupid. Of course it's risky economically. But politically things are diverging very quickly, and it's obvious that Scotland and England are going in different directions. How does one keep an economic union together, when the politics don't allow for it anymore ?

And I'm no dyed in the wool SNP supporter. In fact, anyone meeting me would never know. I only ever talk politics here and a few other places here and there. I've use Twitter but have never tweeted, I have no SNP regalia on my Facebook profile or twibbons. I've never posted on WingsoverScotland ( echo chambers aren't my thing, though it would be MUCH easier to post there than here for me ) and I don't even have an SNP sticker on my car ! I'm pretty much just an ordinary person who enjoys debate and Scottish politics.

Indeed.
In 2020 we could also be talking about a UK budget surplus, austerity in the past tense and perhaps a SNP struggling to realise the hopes and aspirations of its supporters in a sitation where Scotland is more and not less reliant on the "subsidy".
The Boris effect might even mean a few Tory MP`s in Scotland come the GE in 2020 too!:)

Oh gosh, the Boris effect. You think he's 'popular' up here ? He's the epitome of what even Labour voters can't stand about the Conservatives and all the cliches about 'Tory Toffs'. Osborne didn't do so well with his deficit plans last time round... I see little to hope for this time round and he tries to do the same, only quicker and more harshly.

At the end of the day. For whatever reason for the past few decades, Scots have never really got with the program in voting for Conservative policies. Even when Thatcher was in, Scotland still kept on voting Labour. Now that Labour is starting to look a bit 'Tory' with their policies, it seems the same scenario is playing out. I don't know why. It's just the way it is. Scots voters just don't seem to like Tory/more right wing policies, whether it's the Conservatives or Labour delivering them.

Lets hear the SNP make the case for a confident Scotland willing to run deficits then, their MP`s seem to think that it would be political suicide to suggest such a thing at the moment.

No, we realise there will be a deficit. No-one's ever denied it. And it's been shoved down every Scottish voter's throat for about the last 3 years 24/7. However, the UK has one too.

But somehow, when Osborne is in charge we magically, cheerily and unquestioningly ( as you have stated ) go from a big deficit, to a possible budget surplus in 2020.... But any Scottish government in an independent Scotland would somehow, and again magically, cheerily and unquestioningly ( by you ) be totally unable ever to cut theirs should they have exactly the same powers as Osborne ?

Can you really not see why someone would have a bit of a hard time believing what you've just posted ? It's almost as 'faith based' as much as SNP voters are accused of being. Most especially when Osborne crashed and burned the last time he tried for a budget surplus ? He's had five years already and has hardly made a dent. Am not sure any future independent Scottish Government could do much worse when it comes to eliminating debt and deficits.