The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

[Deleted User]

Herzlos wrote: »

3 simple points.

1. The background checks are still being done
2. The risk is negligable. I mean, statistically, it's 1 in about 20 million, or 0.00000005% reference. You're twice as likely to be killed by a shark.
3. Increased border checks don't make any significant difference. Most of these terrorists are home grown and radicalized within these border checks.

You wouldn't agree to increased government scrutiny to reduce your chance of being killed by your own toaster, so why accept it for a terrorist? As pointed out, reacting in a pointless, panicked, xenophobic and totalitarian way is exactly what they want you to do, and will do absolutely nothing to address the problem.

I'm used to reading total rubbish on the web about terrorism but !!!!!! get a grip. Can you direct me to the information that shows that over the past few months hundreds of civilians in Europe going about their everyday business have been killed or injured by sharks? Did I miss it? Was there some kind of European "Sharknado"?

WR

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

But you're trying to separate the economics absolutely and exclusively away from the underlying politics that exist. As well as trying to isolate off the SNP and their continued success as somehow not being a result of the underlying politics in Scotland at the present time. As if they came to power with no votes or something.

Brexit is just the latest example of how politics is diverging very markedly between rUK and Scotland. Even between Westminster MP's and their Scottish MSP counterparts in Holyrood ( Scottish Labour being against Trident renewal being a recent example ).

There are many differing opinions on what an independent Scotland might look like, short, medium and long term economically. Most of it quite bad short term it has to be said. But on the other hand, you have to accept also, that politically just going along with absolutely everything when it goes against what the majority of Scots voters wish ( such as Brexit ) isn't really sustainable for much longer either.

After all, it's a large part as to why England and Wales voted out of the EU after all. Other countries dictating aspects of politics which they feel aren't acceptable any more.

I thought we'd established that we're not compatible to discuss this topic?

You believe the SNP and/or Scottish nationalism represents the Scottish people, I don't based on vote numbers alone. And there's pages, blogs and petitions saying the same and putting it out there that there is significant support for the Union. There's a lot of Sturgeon hate in Scotland. The political case is far from closed. Lets just leave it at that.

The economic case you've never had an answer for, you've never given me one and I don't believe you ever will. Being a socialist state with no money to spend isn't good for the people of Scotland.

Every day in the UK people go along with things they disagree with. If my council decides to pi** £250,000 up the wall on chopping trees down that didn't need to be chopped down I have to put up with that because of the voting intentions of the people I live around. I can't declare independence for my house and do what I want to do. That's democracy. And Scotland is part of the UK democracy. That's how it works. Voting for the SNP gives Scotland less of a voice in Westminster because the larger proportions of representation won't work with them because of their views. Like if you voted for a UKIP candidate on a local council. If Scotland had made significant changes to Scottish Labour and Scottish Conservatives you'd probably be better represented in Westminster. Instead you've divided yourselves from the rest of the UK.

Lets just not bring it up anymore between us. We're never going to agree.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Wild_Rover wrote: »

Can you direct me to the information that shows that over the past few months hundreds of civilians in Europe going about their everyday business have been killed or injured by sharks?

Sharks alone? No...

But the average death rate for Europeans killed by accidents, including slips, trips, falls, electrical appliances, vehicles, etc, is 31 people per 100,000 population per year.

The population of the EU is 508 million.

310 people die of an accident per million population.

So 157,480 die per year from accidental deaths.

That's 13,123 per month... or 52,493 in "the last few months".

Which is many orders of magnitude greater than any deaths caused by terrorism over that time.

Of all the things you should be scared of causing your death in Europe and demanding your government protects you from - Terrorism should fall well behind crossing the road, driving your car, or using your kettle.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Oh no, don't give up over the National Anthem thing. Clapton has been round the block and back with that on these sorts for threads for as long as I've been here. Most of us know not to get drawn in on that one, or the 'anti-English' narratives he believes exist up here.

no, not even you believe that

Herzlos wrote:

"Anyone but the English" is a sporting thing, but that happens in every country with a rivalry, no?

is normal for most countries

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Sharks alone? No...

But the average death rate for Europeans killed by accidents, including slips, trips, falls, electrical appliances, vehicles, etc, is 31 people per 100,000 population per year.

The population of the EU is 508 million.

310 people die of an accident per million population.

So 157,480 die per year from accidental deaths.

That's 13,123 per month... or 52,493 in "the last few months".

Which is many orders of magnitude greater than any deaths caused by terrorism over that time.

Of all the things you should be scared of causing your death in Europe and demanding your government protects you from - Terrorism should fall well behind crossing the road, driving your car, or using your kettle.

That's why there's electrical safety regulations, road safety, MOT's and comparable tests, standards to prevent slips, trips and falls, etc...

The governments do try to protect the people.

But when smugglers bring in counterfeit items, children, sex workers, drugs, guns, etc.. through the external border, that's it! Free reign! It's already hit the market of the entire EU. Even in the US they have inter-state checks on freight.

So by introducing new regulations and standards to protect the population, by checking freight and by trying at least on the external border to stop criminals they are indeed trying to stop all this from hitting the population. All I've been saying is it would work better by re-introducing internal border checks and settlement checks to stop dangerous people from coming to the EU. It's no stopping the freedom of movement in the Schengen area for people who abide by the law.

But you say no?

What benefits are there to no checks at all that you don't get if you had checks? No wait times? No ID needed? Any others?

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I thought we'd established that we're not compatible to discuss this topic?

You might have. I'm fine chatting with you.

You believe the SNP and/or Scottish nationalism represents the Scottish people,

At least 45% of them sure I do.

I don't based on vote numbers alone. And there's pages, blogs and petitions saying the same and putting it out there that there is significant support for the Union. There's a lot of Sturgeon hate in Scotland. The political case is far from closed. Lets just leave it at that.

Brexit has added to that 45%. There is a lot of Sturgeon hate, but thankfully there's a lot of respect there too. Is all balanced and the same can be said for Kezia and Ruth too.

The economic case you've never had an answer for, you've never given me one and I don't believe you ever will. Being a socialist state with no money to spend isn't good for the people of Scotland.

Every day in the UK people go along with things they disagree with. If my council decides to pi** £250,000 up the wall on chopping trees down that didn't need to be chopped down I have to put up with that because of the voting intentions of the people I live around. I can't declare independence for my house and do what I want to do. That's democracy. And Scotland is part of the UK democracy. That's how it works. Voting for the SNP gives Scotland less of a voice in Westminster because the larger proportions of representation won't work with them because of their views. Like if you voted for a UKIP candidate on a local council. If Scotland had made significant changes to Scottish Labour and Scottish Conservatives you'd probably be better represented in Westminster. Instead you've divided yourselves from the rest of the UK.

Lets just not bring it up anymore between us. We're never going to agree.

No one has any answers Tricky. We established that some posts back. Because as you said yourself, no one knows what the terms of leaving will be. Both regarding the EU and should Scotland leave the UK.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

no, not even you believe that

I do believe we've discussed Flower of Scotland many, many times on Scottish based threads. I think I now know the Corries lifetime history better than my own by now given how many times it's been brought up.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I do believe we've discussed Flower of Scotland many, many times on Scottish based threads. I think I now know the Corries lifetime history better than my own by now given how many times it's been brought up.

I actually post about 'anyone but the english'

ash28

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

That's why there's electrical safety regulations, road safety, MOT's and comparable tests, standards to prevent slips, trips and falls, etc...

The governments do try to protect the people.

But when smugglers bring in counterfeit items, children, sex workers, drugs, guns, etc.. through the external border, that's it! Free reign! It's already hit the market of the entire EU. Even in the US they have inter-state checks on freight.

So by introducing new regulations and standards to protect the population, by checking freight and by trying at least on the external border to stop criminals they are indeed trying to stop all this from hitting the population. All I've been saying is it would work better by re-introducing internal border checks and settlement checks to stop dangerous people from coming to the EU. It's no stopping the freedom of movement in the Schengen area for people who abide by the law.

But you say no?

What benefits are there to no checks at all that you don't get if you had checks? No wait times? No ID needed? Any others?

Haven't some countries reintroduced temporary internal border controls? France, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Sweden and Norway all have controls on some or all of their internal borders to try and protect their citizens.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/reintroduction-border-control/index_en.htm

And then there's Hungary with it's external border fence with Serbia and a bit if tit for tat with Austria who have controls between itself and Hungary.

I agree with you about Eastern Europe, I have a relative who is Russian and thinks paying for things is the norm too.

TrickyTree83

ash28 wrote: »

Haven't some countries reintroduced temporary internal border controls? France, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Sweden and Norway all have controls on some or all of their internal borders to try and protect their citizens.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/reintroduction-border-control/index_en.htm

And then there's Hungary with it's external border fence with Serbia and a bit if tit for tat with Austria who have controls between itself and Hungary.

I agree with you about Eastern Europe, I have a relative who is Russian and thinks paying for things is the norm too.

Well yes some EU countries are putting these border checks back in place, which can only be a good thing, however it goes against the Schengen agreement and they're only temporary solutions. So if the EU is hell bent on these ideals these countries will no doubt eventually be told to remove the border checks. The very idea of no borders internally and no checks, whilst a noble idea isn't practicable in reality as it will be exploited, sadly. I wish that were not the case.

Edit: On the Russian relative, what was your reaction to them saying they can pay for these things like queue jumping in healthcare and purchasing a passport or driving licence without actually filling in any forms or passing any tests? I was absolutely shocked. I thought, naively, that most governments would as the UK does lock these kind of things down but it appears government officials and police use them to subsidise their income!! Crazy stuff.

I have another anecdote as a testament to this culture, we needed to book train tickets but the train for the public was sold out. So we got in touch with a local politician our family knew and purchased a ticket through them and got on the train - at a discounted price!! It really is everywhere and quite shocking.