Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Am not entirely sure what your point is to be honest. Are you saying you'd have welcomed the SNP ( about 6 MP's back then ) voting FOR tuition fees ? *puzzled*

I assumed you were referring to this, where it states that:

When it comes to English tuition fees, the SNP will argue that the more private money through tuition fees that goes into English universities, the less public money is spent on education south of the Border.

The less taxpayers’ money spent on English education, the less public money comes to Scotland through the Barnett Formula, the funding mechanism that determines the size of Scotland’s block grant.

[Deleted User]

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Not been on any of that before - I assume as we're doing an official race that the roads will at least be controlled if not closed? Also the maps don't show it but quite a bit of the work is offroad (although that tends to be running or kayaking)

Certainly looking forward to getting sloshed in Glencoe at the end of it.

We;re camping on the beach in Nairn the night before and then in a field near fort Augustus at the end of day 2. Taking plenty of bug spray!

Enjoy your weekend too

I don't know if this year any of the cycling is "off road" but last year it was all just on the ordinary roads with the usual two way traffic! They can be a bit problematic at the best of times .

Enjoy the "refreshments"!

WR

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

I assumed you were referring to this, where it states that:

Well I can assure you that I have never heard the SNP state anything of the sort. The SNP don't support tuition fees ( education should be free for all ).. wherever they are voting. If they support Labour reducing them in England, it's because they don't believe they should've even been introduced in the first place. And they'd support anyone reducing/abolishing them.

To be honest the Scotsman probably isn't the best source to be getting any 'facts' from re the SNP. There's a reason that particular newspaper, both the paper and the online version, is going down the tubes quick style..

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well I can assure you that I have never heard the SNP state anything of the sort. The SNP don't support tuition fees ( education should be free for all ).. wherever they are voting. If they support Labour reducing them in England, it's because they don't believe they should've even been introduced in the first place. And they'd support anyone reducing/abolishing them.

To be honest the Scotsman probably isn't the best source to be getting any 'facts' from re the SNP. There's a reason that particular newspaper, both the paper and the online version, is going down the tubes quick style..

clearly only mad people think that education is free

the issue is who pays for it and who benefits.

The SNP choose to charges all taxpayers including the poor and subsidise the rich.

I respect their democratic choice although I would rather charge the rich and subsidise the poor.
But them I have different values.

.string.

CLAPTON wrote: »

clearly only mad people think that education is free

the issue is who pays for it and who benefits.

The SNP choose to charges all taxpayers including the poor and subsidise the rich.

I respect their democratic choice although I would rather charge the rich and subsidise the poor.
But them I have different values.

I'm sorry, but I don't know any other way to put it more clearly.

I don't believe you.

Time and again the SNP and it's acolytes have tried to justify their policy of voting on English matters by claiming a link with Scottish funding.

Other rationale are just smoke screens , whether or not they happen to coincide with other SNP policies.

.string.

CLAPTON wrote: »

clearly only mad people think that education is free

the issue is who pays for it and who benefits.

The SNP choose to charges all taxpayers including the poor and subsidise the rich.

I respect their democratic choice although I would rather charge the rich and subsidise the poor.
But them I have different values.

There is another issue and that is fiscal responsibility; if the country is strapped for cash, it a matter of priorities as to where the money goes. Personally I dislike the idea of saddling any students with a debt and, if needs must, would have preferred a means test arrangement with a gradually sliding scale of fees (not arbitrary jumps in fees) primarily aimed at the parents since it would be their income (normally) which would have resulted in increased fees. With exceptions, Students are all poor.

Roll on EVEL.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Scotland is still part of the UK. You can't seperate 'UK' and 'Scotland' in those sort of terms at the moment. As if they're different entities. Because they're not, even if it suits you to keep switching between the two.

And is hardly being negative pointing out the bald truth that whatever Scotland ( as part of the UK ) raises or 'boosts' in terms of the economy.. the revenues aren't Scotland's ( since it is part of the UK ) to do what they like with. They go into the UK Treasury. The block grant get's allocated to deal with/pay for devolved matters, that's it. And it's there that differences can be make in terms of priorities re the NHS/Education/Policing etc. But very little in that list is 'income producing'. The vast majority in terms of economic matters, for Scotland, are reserved. As such, any income 'boosting' goes to the UK---> which allocates the block grant..... and so it goes on in a loop.

... And the bald truth is also that Scotland benefits from receiving more that it raises. And to make it clear I don't particularly begrudge that, Scotland being in the Union, but your negative remarks ignore such benefits, pretending , repeat pretending, that Scotland is loosing out financially.

So much for your negative clap-trap SNP whinge.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

After 2016, there won't be another election until the General election in 2020. If it looks like the Tories will get in with a resounding majority and the opinion polls for independence climb to around 60%... there will be a snap and very quick referendum ( none of this 3 year lead up next time ) on independence before 2021 and the next Holyrood elections. But both need to happen though. Only Corbyn as things stand can possibly prevent either. Bringing ex-Labour voters in Scotland back to Labour... and doing the same as the SNP did in Scotland with his 'grass roots' and young people ground swell continuing to build.

So there you go again, finding yet another reason to have a referendum. This time it's because the Conservatives get another term in office. Next time because it rains more in Scotland, or the SNP don't get their own way in yet another contrived issue at Westminster?

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

... And the bald truth is also that Scotland benefits from receiving more that it raises. And to make it clear I don't particularly begrudge that, Scotland being in the Union, but your negative remarks ignore such benefits, pretending , repeat pretending, that Scotland is loosing out financially.

So much for your negative clap-trap SNP whinge.

It's much easier to come up with excuses for not taking control.

Scotland has an abundance of resources to improve the economy up there; it's just a question of priorities.

Mistermeaner

Like a dog chasing cars..... they wouldn't know what to do if they caught one