Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

elantan

https://www.rt.com/uk/256213-general-election-snp-fix/


Oh my I see Mr Spanner has been busy since last year ... curiouser and curiouser

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

Spin, spin, and more spin. Your interpretation of the Vow is not necessarily correct.

I'm directly quoting the letter Nicola Sturgeon sent David Cameron today. No spin there. As for 'my interpretation of the Vow'. It's possibly a little more reliable than yours. I at least had a vote.

Even if it is correct the English are still subsidising you to the tune of £87Bn over 10 years.

Borrowing money, you mean of course. Which they have to do to subsidise millions of English people and large regions of England as well. I think you may have missed that out somewhere in your eagerness to play the reluctant benefactor card.

The SNP don't want your money. But while we're where we are, looking after Scotland's best interests currently rests with them. Is actually a scary thought that Scottish Labour could've been in charge of these negotiations to be honest. They'd be waving through all sorts of crap.*shudders*

The SNP's time would be better spent working out how you'll survive after independence with minus £9Bn at the start of every year.

Am sure they have an entire dept dedicated to doing just that. But until then.. we're stuck in the Union.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

And the SNP's policy. No comment. As they haven't a clue. Other than believing that money is pumped out of the ground.

Salmond was right to jump ship. Avoided having to face the unanswered questions he left behind. :rotfl:

On the contrary. He wrote a best selling book about the whole thing. Then stood and was elected as an MP, and still serves as an MSP. We kind of like him up here. Something that's always been grossly underestimated in the media elsewhere.

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

https://www.rt.com/uk/256213-general-election-snp-fix/


Oh my I see Mr Spanner has been busy since last year ... curiouser and curiouser

The below was the real clincher for me. They all know who he is. As does Rowling. That Rowling can 'speak out' about internet abuse and misogyny but then think someone who references FGM and dried up old c words in reference to female politicians is funny. Is beyond me.

They're all getting a bit tetchy now that they've been exposed as complete hypocrites. Is amusing to watch their downfall. All they had to do was call the abuse out for what it is. Has been going on for ages. But no, 'hilarious satire'. Other's have been headline news for even linking to a slightly dodgy article written by someone else, and a few years ago at that. ( Paco McSheepie ). Get tae..

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm directly quoting the letter Nicola Sturgeon sent David Cameron today. No spin there. As for 'my interpretation of the Vow'. It's possibly a little more reliable than yours. I at least had a vote.

Borrowing money, you mean of course. Which they have to do to subsidise millions of English people and large regions of England as well. I think you may have missed that out somewhere in your eagerness to play the reluctant benefactor card.

The SNP don't want your money. But while we're where we are, looking after Scotland's best interests currently rests with them. Is actually a scary thought that Scottish Labour could've been in charge of these negotiations to be honest. They'd be waving through all sorts of crap.*shudders*

Am sure they have an entire dept dedicated to doing just that. But until then.. we're stuck in the Union.

At least you've accepted the terrible hole that Scotland would be in upon independence.

What level of subsidy from Londoners would you think is worth Scotland remaining in the Union or do you want independence literally at any price?

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

At least you've accepted the terrible hole that Scotland would be in upon independence.

Not really. Is just easier not to get caught up in endless arguments about it all the time. It only ends up with you labeling people as a bit 'thick' or similar usually. I can't be bothered having to list my entire life's worth of educational and career achievements once again.

What level of subsidy from Londoners would you think is worth Scotland remaining in the Union or do you want independence literally at any price?

Am afraid if you think Scottish independence is all about the money, and nothing but the money. Then you're a way off the mark. Is a factor yes of course. But certainly not the only one. Although I do try my best to paint a bigger picture from a different perspective completely. After all, that's what makes for good discussion.

You're not interested unfortunately. Which makes discussion with you, rather limited, and a bit boring if am honest sometimes. ( 'London subsidy' etc ). On this particular subject at least. I do read other parts of the forum though, where your posts are so much more informed and food for thought.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Not really. Is just easier not to get caught up in endless arguments about it all the time. It only ends up with you labeling people as a bit 'thick' or similar usually. I can't be bothered having to list my entire life's worth of educational and career achievements once again.



Am afraid if you think Scottish independence is all about the money, and nothing but the money. Then you're a way off the mark. Is a factor yes of course. But certainly not the only one. Although I do try my best to paint a bigger picture from a different perspective completely. After all, that's what makes for good discussion.

You're not interested unfortunately. Which makes discussion with you, rather limited, and a bit boring if am honest sometimes. ( 'London subsidy' etc ). On this particular subject at least. I do read other parts of the forum though, where your posts are so much more informed and food for thought.

To put it another way, what amount of money from the UK coffers would you have the Scottish Government turn down in order to be independent?

£1? £100? £1,000,000? £10,000,000,000?

There must be a level of money that would allow Scotland to provide services that she couldn't afford otherwise that would persuade anyone sane to remain in the UK. Or do you honestly believe that Scottish independence is worth any price at all?

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

To put it another way, what amount of money from the UK coffers would you have the Scottish Government turn down in order to be independent?

£1? £100? £1,000,000? £10,000,000,000?

There must be a level of money that would allow Scotland to provide services that she couldn't afford otherwise that would persuade anyone sane to remain in the UK. Or do you honestly believe that Scottish independence is worth any price at all?

That's a difficult question to answer. Self-governance is a highly emotive thing, as you can see from the EU referendum debate going on right now. As well as deeply political. Ecomomics, in these sort of situations always have people saying one thing, and other's countering with another. Reports and more reports. The media broadcast slants and skews to suit their own agendas.

Has always been my own view that Scottish independence support is more politically driven than emotive or economic in nature. Economics coming third in the equation. During the referendum, the politics and the likely prospect ( polls at the time ) of a Labour government at Westminster swung it to No in my opinion. Labour thought so too and is evident from all the campaigning they did at the time. Had it been really obvious from 2013 that a Conservative majority government was going to be elected in 2015, I honestly think it would've meant a Yes vote. Labour voters would've swung it. This would've happened absolutely regardless of the economics which would have been predicted to follow.

Economist's argue too much. They fail to predict much correctly either, never mind what an independent Scotland would look like, 2, 5 or 10 years from now. They're bean counters on the past and the here and now. Regarding predicting the future, they have a little more work to do.

Independence at any price no. But people imo will vote politically and emotionally regardless of any economist's price. As has been shown throughout history with other countries gaining their own independence. Is not always about the money. In fact, it very rarely is.

foxtrotoscar_2

Shakethedisease wrote: »

On the contrary. He wrote a best selling book about the whole thing. Then stood and was elected as an MP, and still serves as an MSP. We kind of like him up here. Something that's always been grossly underestimated in the media elsewhere.

Product details

• Format Hardback | 272 pages
• Dimensions 144 x 216 x 32mm | 459.99g
• Publication date 07 Apr 2015
• Publisher HarperCollins Publishers
• Imprint William Collins
• Publication City/Country London, United Kingdom
• Language English
• ISBN10 0008139768
• ISBN13 9780008139766
• Sales rank 81,075

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Borrowing money, you mean of course. Which they have to do to subsidise millions of English people and large regions of England as well.

Good point. We have to borrow money to subsidise Scotland, which the English are going to have to pay back.

So it's costing us considerably more than £9Bn per year to prop up your failing economy.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP don't want your money.

Really? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Am sure they have an entire dept dedicated to doing just that.

If they do they obviously haven't found a solution to date. Otherwise the SNP spin machine would have been shouting it from the rooftops.