Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

dktreesea

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Eh?

So because lets say the central purchasing dept for the MOD is in England, or the armoured vehicle repair workshop is in Wales, Scotland shouldn't be allocated a % cost of that?

Are you really trying to suggest that an indy Scotland's military wouldn't need to fix military vehicles, or buy anything, ever?

What about the percentage contribution towards overseas embassies, diplomatic services, etc? Those can't be in Scotland... Should we not pay for them then?

And to be clear, Scotland is massively, massively subsidised even without things like Trident and to a far greater % of GDP as a deficit than the rUK.

We spend more money than we earn.

And more than we could reasonably borrow.

Simple as that.

The UK spends far more money than it earns, and currently Scotland isn't in control of that spend, so not in control of their share of that spend. Why should military spending be preserved in England while place like Leuchars and Kinloss have been turned into Army, rather than RAF, bases with less personnel? All we have left now for the RAF in Scotland is Lossiemouth.


Maybe Westminster should spend its defence budget better than it does:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html


"French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft."


Westminster in action. We now have an RAF not located in the right places, not for defence of our northern and north west borders at least, and a defence department so underfunded it has to call in the French because it no longer has the equipment and personnel it needs to defend its own borders. Pathetic, just pathetic.

elantan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-35233890

.string.

elantan wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-35233890

Thank you

However I thought it was that; £500 was an emergency support with the potential of more to come, hardly definitive for the "English" support for flood victim as as your post had claimed.

Not that such things can be directly comparable for different locations, it depends on the context, as I said.

elantan

Scotland d is getting g 3 times as much .... I don't think that's fair on the English do you ? I think if I were in England and affected by the floods I wouldn't be very happy with WM

.string.

elantan wrote: »

Scotland d is getting g 3 times as much .... I don't think that's fair on the English do you ? I think if I were in England and affected by the floods I wouldn't be very happy with WM

Don't you understand anything that I wrote?

First - that was York not England

Second - from the article there is further assistance that can be given on application, the £500 was for immediate relief.
So you were comparing different things

Third - Who cares anyway? You may be all up tight about who gets what and whether it is in England or Scotland, but that is, SNP self-think, not mine

elantan

Sorry there was me thinking York was in England and here I find its in some other country

The money for the floods in Scotland is only for immediate relief as well ... there up to another £3k available for them

Mistermeaner

dktreesea wrote: »

The day Scotland votes for independence there will be a huge surge of investment into Scotland from expatriate and descendants of Scots from around the world. When the rest of the world thinks of England, they think of Tony Blair, warmonger, the Knights Templar, the excesses of the British Empire. When they think of Scotland, they think of Sean Connery, James Bond, whisky, fishing, Skye, Kenneth McKellar, the Proclaimers, Scottish Dancing, Beltane, the Gathering of the Clans.

What's Connery trading at nowadays? I might sell my crusader bonds and invest in Sean

Q: does Connery bond stay with England in event of separation?

elantan

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Or is it just another example of media politics? Just like free prescriptions, free university. Money can only be spent once. At a later date underspend in other areas will come the fore. Illusionists always get exposed in the end.

It's totally media politics ... but it is interesting how when Ruth wore a Barbour jacket previously nothing was said

elantan

https://www.sundaypost.com/inside-the-sunday-edition/flood-victims-in-scotland-will-get-1k-more-each-than-flood-hit-english/


Ohhh look it's not that hard to find really here's a second one and I ain't even looking hard ...

.string.

Originally Posted by dktreesea
The day Scotland votes for independence there will be a huge surge of investment into Scotland from expatriate and descendants of Scots from around the world. When the rest of the world thinks of England, they think of Tony Blair, warmonger, the Knights Templar, the excesses of the British Empire. When they think of Scotland, they think of Sean Connery, James Bond, whisky, fishing, Skye, Kenneth McKellar, the Proclaimers, Scottish Dancing, Beltane, the Gathering of the Clans.

Classic, a skillfully woven mixture of Wooly-minded Wishful Thinking and Hate of the English.