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

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Whatever the Growth Commission come up with will be scrutinised as much as GERS, it had better be watertight else it too will be discredited like the White Paper.

For it to be watertight I expect to see as previous white papers have set out, tax rises and/or spending cuts. Such as the one on commonweal that I read. I felt it had flaws which you appeared to agree with stating that it was a first draft - fair enough, but on the whole it appeared to be relatively reasonable iirc in that it acknowledged a debt and a large deficit.

Yes Tricky that's what I said

Nevertheless, it's their plan going forward that will become everyone's focus once they release their findings.

The SNP learnt many lessons from 2014 onwards, the most important of which is that any future economic plans for an independent Scotland will have to be 100% realistic, credible and robust. They also learned not to give your opponents over a year's free ride at tearing the whole thing to bits. From various odd reports on it seems most senior SNP members have already seen most of it presented and are very pleased with it so far.

However it won't be GERS v's independent Scotland next time round. It'll be independent Scotland v's UK out of the Single Market/EU ( and what that means for a future Scotland in the UK ). Sturgeon made it quite clear she'll be seeking answers in the other direction also. It won't all be one way this time.

And of course. Nothing will be robust nor credible enough most media outlets and other political parties anyway. It doesn't matter what the Growth Commission says. Let's be honest.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No one knows. They may yet be proved right. With tensions again in the Middle East and rise of the Islamic State. There's a fragile state of peace. If you had been around in the Cold War era. You would have seen the Cruise Missiles being rolled out of Greenham Common on their trailers and escorted to their firing locations in the Berkshire Countryside in the dead of night. The only certainty with regards to the future is uncertainty. Hindsight was created by humans to simply to support their own assertions. Real history gets written decades later. When all the facts surface.

This is true. However it's also true that Osborne took the blueprint for his Brexit remain campaigning directly from the Scottish independence BetterTogether handbook. Economic and political doomsdays and total instant armageddon beckoned. These arguments don't work so well as they used to.

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

And today Ruth who agrees with the rape clause is saying the Scottish government should mitigate it for the people of Scotland ... ye just cannae make this stuff up

I think the Scottish Tories have finally overstepped the mark. Gosh people are angry today about this. Be interesting to see where the Scottish media go.

The Scottish Parliament isn't there simply to clean up behind UK Tory policies. And if we have to keep voting in parties whose only function is to clear up messes and mitigate policies from a larger parliament...or else take the blame for them ( framed as an SNP "grievance" ).. then there's something going very wrong with the system.

elantan

I saw there was a protest in George Square today about the Rape clause ... doesn't sound like this one is going to go away quietly

Ruth deff overstepped the mark today, between that and supporting a person standing for councillor that openly talks about what damage he would do to Nicola. .. even some of the union papers picking that story up

Interesting times ahead

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

Ruth deff overstepped the mark today, between that and supporting a person standing for councillor that openly talks about what damage he would do to Nicola. .. even some of the union papers picking that story up

Interesting times ahead

Kidnapping, tying her up and doing something with a cattle prod wasn't it ? The papers are doing themselves no favours being so one sided. Not with social media these days, there's a whiff of 'enough is enough' in the air. McColm, Farquarson and Massie have all been referring to it in a veiled way over the last week too with their please, please stop it 'ultra unionist's' articles. It scares them.

IveSeenTheLight

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

3rd wave feminists are the same, everything is patriarchy.

As per your other posts, I found it quite illogical.

What about my signature and how it applies to you is feminist?

IveSeenTheLight

mollycat wrote: »

Are you sure you don't mean an electorate that is able to consider the effect of change and decide accordingly?

Brexit= willing to accept possible consequences of change.

Scottish Independence= unwilling to accept possible consequence of change.

Accepting democracy as our system means we have to accept the electorate are capable of understanding the consequences of their vote.

Anything else is just pseudo- intellectual elitism.

Not at all.
I absolutely despise negative campaigning and promotion of fear of change to try and win the argument.

I would much prefer our politicians to come out with the pro's and cons and for the politicians to debate the pro's and con's in order for the electorate to make a reasoned decision.

far too often, I think the politicians think we are not capable of coming to a reasoned decision, else they are incapable of backing up the arguments they are proposing.

We generally get soundbite headlines with no justification behind it and often the politicians are found out when it fails to occur.

We then see them stepping down / sideways to allow the next mould of politician to continue

IveSeenTheLight

mollycat wrote: »

I think you must be having a real laugh here!

Of all the people in the UK who have previous for NOT "accepting the will of the people" it's the pro-indy posters on this board.

BTW, my strong preference is that you return to ignoring my posts.

Thanks.

I am pro-independence.
Nothing against the other parts of the UK and I'd like a strong relationship moving forward.

I accepted the result in 2014 and was prepared to go along with it, however the result of Brexit has changed that previous acceptance, because the foundation in which the better together campaigned fought on was flawed

If the Brexit remainer were the majority, there would not be a clamour or mandate for a second independence referendum.

IveSeenTheLight

mollycat wrote: »

Why the change?

Is it because a very small minority of the people want it?

The SNP are a minority government at present in Scotland, yet the politicians voted in majority for a 2nd referendum.

the majority voted for it in parliament and now its time to see whether there is a majority or minority for it by the residents of Scotland.

IveSeenTheLight

mollycat wrote: »

Why would people have to vote again?

Surely you accept that the foundations and principles of the vote has significantly changed.

We were told, the only way to remain in Europe is to remain within the UK.
Here we are now leaving Europe, when in the Brexit vote, the majority of Scotland voted to remain in the EU.

Thats why there is a call for another referendum, as the forst one was based on flawed principles

mollycat wrote: »

Is it a case of just manufacturing referendum after referendum after referendum until YES wins one?

Not at all, If the UK had voted to remain in the EU, there would be no basis for another referendum at this time