Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

I'm shocked STD, shocked.

Clearly a 25% cut in funding for the Scottish NHS while having it run from Edinburgh will mean a huge improvement in patient care in your opinion.

The fundamental problem with the SNP's policies is that there is a disconnect between:

1. Spending more money
2. Cutting a huge amount of funding by quitting the Union.

I'm not so sure of that.

Osborne cut Wales Scotland & NI budgets by 11% & then shifted blame for any consequences to the devolved governments

By 5th April 2021, George Osborne will have cut an accumulated £20,161,900,000 from Scotland's Budget over 10 years.

See what I mean about economists, reports facts and figures ? There are always opposing views. The above are all from a Labour supporting site. http://labourrebuttal.com/
I make no claim on the validity. Just pointing out that the counter arguments are there. Not that they'll ever appear in any unionist supporting newspaper of course.

The reality is that the extent of the cuts required by enacting #2 means that lots of Scots will die of cancer and be poorly educated so that you can get shot of the English. It's a heck of a price to pay.

Not sure about the poorly educated thing either.

Scottish Tory leader today attacks Free Tuition Fees. UCAS applications are 20% down among English due to £9000 fees

The above is what happens when someone takes the time and attempts to put into context comparison's with rUK counterparts. Something which the media and general commentary rarely do re the NHS and education in Scotland. But given the state of the current English NHS, Scottish Labour have very wisely dropped most of their NHS crisis manufacturing. Concentrating instead on education.

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

Precisely so :T

It's hard for people from outside Scotland to find out how much being in Scotland was like a one-party-state. Everybody who lived there knew it; but the media weren't going to talk about it.

Scottish Labour had too much influence and also too much inertia. The gravitational wave from their collapse launched the SNP into orbit, it didn't get there under its own power.

so no real change then

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

Precisely so :T

It's hard for people from outside Scotland to find out how much being in Scotland was like a one-party-state. Everybody who lived there knew it; but the media weren't going to talk about it.

Scottish Labour had too much influence and also too much inertia. The gravitational wave from their collapse launched the SNP into orbit, it didn't get there under its own power.

Presumably the same thing will happen at some point to the SNP.

One party states don't usually go well.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not so sure of that.




See what I mean about economists, reports facts and figures ? There are always opposing views. The above are all from a Labour supporting site. http://labourrebuttal.com/
I make no claim on the validity. Just pointing out that the counter arguments are there. Not that they'll ever appear in any unionist supporting newspaper of course.

Not sure about the poorly educated thing either.



The above is what happens when someone takes the time and attempts to put into context comparison's with rUK counterparts. Something which the media and general commentary rarely do re the NHS and education in Scotland. But given the state of the current English NHS, Scottish Labour have very wisely dropped most of their NHS crisis manufacturing. Concentrating instead on education.

you seem to be saying that you would prefer that the people of the UK, English, NI, Welsh and Scottish should pay more taxes so there can be more spending

Scotland has the power to have more tax and more spending : what is the problem for scotland then?

.string.

"Accumulated Cuts"... Something is funny here.

Each year is thus the total of all cuts up to that year.

Anyway presumably they are the cuts in order to reduce the deficit to zero, and possibly a bit beyond depending on how much and if GDP increases to allow Debt pay-off. So in principle according to Osborne's plan A, cutscare not needed after 2018 or 2019?

So why does the bar chart not level off by 2019 at the latest?

Cuts are being "imposed by George Osborne" according to the heading. Yet one could state "Savings needed to balance the budget"

So what is the message, and how credible is it?

chewmylegoff

Only just over 500 posts until this thread reaches the maximum and gets locked. I think that gives us all a goal to work towards, let's try and get there as quickly as possible.

Thrugelmir

Only 499 :beer:

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not so sure of that.




See what I mean about economists, reports facts and figures ? There are always opposing views. The above are all from a Labour supporting site. http://labourrebuttal.com/
I make no claim on the validity. Just pointing out that the counter arguments are there. Not that they'll ever appear in any unionist supporting newspaper of course.

Not sure about the poorly educated thing either.



The above is what happens when someone takes the time and attempts to put into context comparison's with rUK counterparts. Something which the media and general commentary rarely do re the NHS and education in Scotland. But given the state of the current English NHS, Scottish Labour have very wisely dropped most of their NHS crisis manufacturing. Concentrating instead on education.

Yes, there is always some idiot blogger prepared to support your point of view. Rather like there are plenty of points of view about science with idiot bloggers prepared to claim that climate change and evolution don't exist.

I realise that you honestly believe that Scotland carries the Union on its shoulders and so independence would lead to no drop off in spending but you must wonder sometimes why no official figures back up your proposition.

Spoiler alert: it's because you're being lied to.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

you seem to be saying that you would prefer that the people of the UK, English, NI, Welsh and Scottish should pay more taxes so there can be more spending

Scotland has the power to have more tax and more spending : what is the problem for scotland then?

Only tax raises across the board. Tax varying won't happen unless the new Scotland Act gets agreed.

It was the 'shifting the blame' to devolved Govt's that I found particularly relevant.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

"Accumulated Cuts"... Something is funny here.

Each year is thus the total of all cuts up to that year.

Anyway presumably they are the cuts in order to reduce the deficit to zero, and possibly a bit beyond depending on how much and if GDP increases to allow Debt pay-off. So in principle according to Osborne's plan A, cutscare not needed after 2018 or 2019?

So why does the bar chart not level off by 2019 at the latest?

Cuts are being "imposed by George Osborne" according to the heading. Yet one could state "Savings needed to balance the budget"

So what is the message, and how credible is it?

I have no idea who he is. He just pops up on my Twitter feed from time to time with other people retweeting him. He's definitely nothing to do with the SNP though, and like I said, I have make no claims on the validity of his stuff. Only that it's there, and for every Kevin Hague, there's an equal and opposite.