Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

elantan

skintmacflint wrote: »

Sigh and sadly you've immediately reverted to defensive SNP mode, and totally missed the point of what I asked Leanne.

I wasn't referring to all the tit for tat stuff party quibbles in MSM, which I might add you keep posting links and referring to, while repeatedly stating no one of any sense reads them anymore. Lol.

If Scotland as a people are awakened and questioning and alert it wouldn't blindly accept and follow a party which for reasons of convenience has positioned itself with a couple of exceptions as basically not much different to any other.

SNP have spent a lot of time and energy demanding new powers.Apart from the spin of it will ensure social justice, and grow the economy, SNP are extremely light on any ideas of how they will actually use them to any effect. IMOif SNP had any detailed innovative ideas or policies in mind of how they use them to effect, they'd have been hanging them from the lamposts.

But you said you know them, so maybe you can tell us in detail how they will use them differently to achieve their claims? if you attempt to deflect with the excuse their manifesto isn't put together, Or asking me about any other political parties detail policies, etc then I'll assume you don't know. If you don't have the answers why aren't you asking them?

To my mind too many new SNP supporters are just blindly following the new fashionable party rhetoric in echo chambers on social media. Very little has changed here.

Which is why I asked if we are all so enlightened up here, why are people not flocking to hear what the smaller grass root parties Elantan speaks of have to say and suggest. Or questioning SNP past the rhetoric. That's what enlightened people do, unless as I suggested 'enlightened' is just an empty oft repeated SNP soundbite.

Just asking.

I get where your coming from and agree in many respects ... we do need to keep a critical eye on the SNP just like we should any governing body, that's why I really fancy a yellow green HR next year, labour are useless, tories even worse but I reckon Patrick Harvey would do very well against them, agreeing with certain points but when disagreeing actually able to give sound reasoning as to why and be able to persuade others to re think etc

Now the ideas of the other new parties forming well sadly right now they are just starting and I reckon they will take a few years to get settled in, we're still waiting for a CW party for example, I do believe they will arrive and I think they will be a viable alternative but not for a while ... I think also many pro independence people want and need to see independence first then go about the business of building the country into what the people want, that's the reason many are members of the SNP ... independence first then build the country ... a recognition that we need to be on the same side so even people like Tommy Sheridan tell people to lend the SNP their vote ... Now that man has nothing to thank the SNP for ... he gets treated like crap from them at every turn, but he recognises that this is bigger than him and we need independence first.


It's all very interest to watch unfold ... with copious amounts of popcorn obviously

Mistermeaner

elantan wrote: »

I'm a member of a speakers club, we have three topics we don't talk about religion, sex and politics ... last night a man in his 70's stood up and spoke for 7 minutes about politics, this has never EVER happened in the 66 years our club has existed, this man felt it was so important a subject in today's Scotland he risked being kicked out of the club which he has been a member of for over 30 years ... he couldn't stay quiet any more ... he got a huge round of applause and recognition that things need to change.

So politics here is thriving, growing and everywhere here now

Like Leanne I take my hat off to Shake ... I really couldn't be bothered with all the crap she puts up with, change is a coming people cause we ain't going away and we will get our independence cause we're stubborn !!!!!!s that way

that's a very weird and niche sample of the population on which to base such a generalisation

elantan

I merely gave an observation of an experience I had last night ... nothing more, it was however very interesting to note IMO and felt it interesting enough to share ... don't get yer knickers in a twist and read more it it than anything i've written

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

How the hell do you define 'fair share' if Scotland isn't getting enough?

The longer this BS continues my thoughts are increasingly that if the Scots are dumb enough to keep voting for the SNP then let them face the consequences: full FFA, no safety net. No extras from England. No guarantee on Scottish Government debt. Let the Scots reap the benefit of their electoral decisions.

Save your wrath for those who chose to remain dependant.

When I spoke of fair share it was directed at those who constantly like to deride Scots because of the extra per head spent here.

Leanne1812

Rinoa wrote: »

Well, substantially less than 32Bn, otherwise you would have mentioned it in your post.

Yet you throw these figures out there without having any real clue on what to base your sums on?

Just jump on the bandwagon.........

Rinoa

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Yet you throw these figures out there without having any real clue on what to base your sums on?

Just jump on the bandwagon.........

Well, in Lord Barnett's own words:

It has no legal or democratic basis and I never dreamed the Thatcher and Major governments would adopt my calculation as a convenient political measure, or that it would outlast Tony Blair and Gordon Brown to dominate the current cross-party Westminster’s response to the Scottish independence issue.
I have become more troubled by the so-called ‘Barnett Formula’ with every passing year. It is clear that what was then a short-term political fix has no place in deciding long-term government spending. It is grossly unfair that Scotland should receive more money than the regions of England or Wales when that decision is not based on actual need.
At the moment, Scotland is given around £1,600 a head in annual central government grants more than England. That is manifestly unjust and allows the Scottish parliament to provide all sorts of things, such as free prescription charges and university education, that the English can only dream of.

Leanne1812

Rinoa wrote: »

Well, in Lord Barnett's own words:

Quite bitter about it all isn't he? Why is it still in use today if it is manifestly unjust? I genuinely don't know the answer to that question. Seems successive governments like to keep us sweet for some unknown reason.

.string.

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Quite bitter about it all isn't he? Why is it still in use today if it is manifestly unjust? I genuinely don't know the answer to that question. Seems successive governments like to keep us sweet for some unknown reason.

Is that really all you have to say on that?

Do you, for example, think it is fair?

skintmacflint

elantan wrote: »

I get where your coming from and agree in many respects ... we do need to keep a critical eye on the SNP just like we should any governing body.

Thank you for recognising the point I was trying to make.

All urban myths and generalisations of nations start somewhere I guess. Enlightenment is simply another one IMO. If nothing else, at least I know Alex Salmond started this one.

skintmacflint

Leanne1812 wrote: »

What I see when I read your post is very typical anti SNP. I think most of us know that people who dislike them really, really despise them. And mostly because of this one aim that they have.

You remind me very much of a friend who campaigned for No last year. He was a long term conservative but has recently left the party as he is involved with a new party. You may not have heard of this party yet but their aim is to unite all of Scotland and find some middle ground. I'm very open to that as for me and probably most folks we want the best for Scotland and the whole of the UK. But his problem is he still reverts to SNP bad mode regularly. At which point I switch off.

You have to accept that while you don't like them quite a few people do and we are not all brainwashed fools. I wouldn't describe myself as a blind follower but right now they have my support. I see them as pretty competent and really I suppose the question is what are the other parties proposing to entice voters to them? Can you point out failings that are really so bad that supporters should turn away from them? Can you state what the alternatives are that are so much better than what the SNP's are? As Shakes said we don't really know as they waste so much time just criticising and denouncing SNP. They need to rethink their strategy. Independence is old news. I don't wish to revisit so besides that policy why are they so terrible for Scotland?

You say SNP are basically not that much different to the other parties and I agree. So, what you need to ponder is why are voters choosing them and not the other parties.

If you remember I was questioning your 'enlightenment, politically alert and energised description of everyone in Scotland. I've tried to rephrase it.

So why aren't enlightened Scottish voters of all different brands giving their preferred parties and politicians a hard time with questions on a detail level? Or did you mean just SNP voters are enlightened?

As a newly enlightened voter, what relevant questions on detail have you asked your MP or of SNP recently. Or anyone else you know of. Anything about how they will use new devolved powers agreed so far?

Before you ask what questions I've put forward on the subject, I don't claim to be enlightened. Besides my preferred party hasn't a cats chance in hell of being in power to use them. But yours will.

I've never had any time for Salmond nor Sturgeon. Much the same as I've never had time for several other politicians over the years from various parties.