The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

Then you're not prepared to settle for democracy.

Like it or not, the opinions of others in this country give us that outcome. Trying to manipulate - poison - the political process to undermine democracy to try to get the result you want is exactly what it is.

I fucking hate that there's so many morons who vote tory or UKIP, but drawing imaginary lines doesn't give a democratic result.

Of course I accept democracy.

What undermines democracy is the Labour party's lack of principles & insistance on being Torylite.

[LJS]

then you should learn to examine policies, and not go with empty soundbites (there's a whole indyref theme just there ).

This made me laugh. You have latched on to a few "soundbites" yourself when it suits your argument.

[LJS]

Nope. I'm just repeating back (paraphrasing) what you've said here in the past.

Your opinions have changed in the last 9(ish) months. They're allowed to, just as I'm allowed to recognise that they have.

The denial that they have is somewhat amusing tho. Give it another 6 months and you'll prolly be claiming you've always been a nationalist.

the voting of tories and kippers will be their doing only.

The make-up for the parliament and what that parliament is able to do as a result is the doing of everyone who votes, Scotland included.

As I keep having to repeat to you: in UK elections, there is nothing that is called Scotland, and each individual's vote is 100% equal. You cannot shirk your responsibility via that equality by some fake pretence around a non existent Scotland.

Says the man who still wants indy on the basis at not even having considered the Scottish govts own words that Scotland is more financially fucked than the UK.

When yes-ers won't even believe the govt they want to empower, what's the point of empowering that parliament?

No Westminster govt will do a backroom deal to grant Scotland another indyref - it would be the instant death of any party that did so, and 100% counter-intellectual.

Again, this is a case of a yes-er refusing to accept the words of his own glorious leader. Salmond's words will be used to justify all refusals by Westminster for a minimum of 15 years.

I'm brave enough to face political reality and rule it out completely.

As ever, yes-ers won't face political reality. Plenty of you think there'll be a Labour/SNP coalition when your glorious leader has already categorically ruled it out (as he should if he doesn't want the SNP to be the next LibDems).

We can take this back up in 15 years, when you'll have to admit you were wrong.

Thanks again for your opinion. I think you are probably correct. I just think it is daft to rule out my scenario. But it's the future & neither of us knows for certain.

[eFestivals]

What undermines democracy is the Labour party's lack of principles & insistance on being Torylite.

Nope. They're perfectly allowed to do whatever they wish to try to gain electoral support within the UK system. That's how democracy works.

If they could get the same or better support by being further to the left, then no doubt they'd do so.

From where i'm sat it looks like much of Scotland hasn't yet reconciled itself to the social changes of the eighties that has impacted into today's politics - and which is why yes-ers in Scotland cannot see that their claims of being more left-leaning is actually the tory dream of 'me me me and fuck everyone else'.

Cos it's certainly not the idea of social solidarity, is it? It wants the socialist dream to be paid for by capitalists, as demonstrated by god-given right that Scotland thinks it has the Barnet money and the other extras at the expense of the poor in other parts of the union.

If yes-ers were playing it straight, they'd be demanding electoral and parliamentary reform for all of the UK, rather than believing they have greater right to anything and everything, and at other people's expense.

[eFestivals]

This made me laugh. You have latched on to a few "soundbites" yourself when it suits your argument.

fleshed out soundbites, so0undbites where detail is welcomed - rather than the SNP version of only empty rhetoric and where examination of the rhetoric is condemned as bias.

Have you ever stopped to consider just why it was that Salmond wo9uld not give his plan B?

(and don't come back with the waffle that having a plan B undermines the want of plan A - that's one for the empty-heads only).

[eFestivals]

Thanks again for your opinion. I think you are probably correct. I just think it is daft to rule out my scenario. But it's the future & neither of us knows for certain.

Yet Salmond himself has ruled out your scenario.

This is like those GERS numbers, where you make up a version that's outside of what your own glorious leader is saying himself.

Fair enough if you want to reject the opposition claims, but at what point do you start to accept the stated views of your own independence campaign as having a basis in fact?

[LJS]

Yet Salmond himself has ruled out your scenario.

This is like those GERS numbers, where you make up a version that's outside of what your own glorious leader is saying himself.

Fair enough if you want to reject the opposition claims, but at what point do you start to accept the stated views of your own independence campaign as having a basis in fact?

"Alex Salmond leaves door open for coalition with Labour"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/alex-salmond-coalition-labour-snp-leader-mp-general-election

[eFestivals]

"Alex Salmond leaves door open for coalition with Labour"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/alex-salmond-coalition-labour-snp-leader-mp-general-election

PMSL.

Do you think it's only the politicians of other parties who play the people who might vote for them?

He's not going to say it absolutely won't happen, will he? That would have you and plenty others re-consider how useful your vote for the SNP might be towards what you claim to want (not a tory govt).

Salmond wants a tory govt. Haven't you got that yet?

FFS.

Edited November 5, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

PS: Salmond only gets to form a coalition with Labour if Labour wish to form a coalition with him.

Why not stop and think what might be in that for Labour?

Firstly, why should Labour form a govt with votes that have rejected them?

Secondly, how will forming a govt with a purely-Scottish party work out for Labour, both within their term of govt and beyond?

And thirdly, Salmond has nothing to offer Labour that they could accept on any basis. Salmond will be demanding terms that destroy the whole rationale for Labour's existence.

[LJS]

PMSL.

Do you think it's only the politicians of other parties who play the people who might vote for them?

He's not going to say it absolutely won't happen, will he? That would have you and plenty others re-consider how useful your vote for the SNP might be towards what you claim to want (not a tory govt).

Salmond wants a tory govt. Haven't you got that yet?

FFS.

You said he had ruled it out. I was merely enlightening you.

[eFestivals]

You said he had ruled it out. I was merely enlightening you.

So, what you're saying is that you're prepared to delve into deeper thinking over what other politicians say, but Alex only speaks the gospel truth on all occasions?

All politicians say things to try and get your vote. What they say does not always match their real intentions.

If you applied the same hatred deeper thinking to Alex's words as you do the Labour Party, you'd be a much smarter guy.

Salmond is not the world's first honest politician, as that seems to have passed you by.

[eFestivals]

As I said, try thinking thru what would be the advantage to Labour of doing a deal with Salmond.

If you think signing a declaration of their own irrelevance will do them any good, Broadmoor is thataway ---->.

[LJS]

So, what you're saying is that you're prepared to delve into deeper thinking over what other politicians say, but Alex only speaks the gospel truth on all occasions?

All politicians say things to try and get your vote. What they say does not always match their real intentions.

If you applied the same hatred deeper thinking to Alex's words as you do the Labour Party, you'd be a much smarter guy.

Salmond is not the world's first honest politician, as that seems to have passed you by.

Chill, Neil. Have I given these words of the mighty eck my seal of approval? Have I said a deal with Labour is either likely or desirable.

The answers are no.

I merely pointed out a minor error or inconsistency in your post. You, as usual, interpret this as another sign of my insane love for the magnificent Alec

[LJS]

As I said, try thinking thru what would be the advantage to Labour of doing a deal with Salmond.

If you think signing a declaration of their own irrelevance will do them any good, Broadmoor is thataway ---->.

Yup which why I said it was unlikely. Don't let that hold you back though!

[Comfy Bean]

I see oil dipped below $80 dollars a barrel yesterday. A very far cry from the snps precious $113. What exactly was the snps plan b in the event of this eventuality again?

Meanwhile it's reported that the hated-by-scots London is making a net contribution of £34bn a year to the UKs public finances. Lucky that place exists to prop up your free prescriptions and universitys isn't it.

Since you asked, Independence was a massive missed opportunity because the campaign was lead by an egomaniac fantasist who was in bed with murdoch and big business.

And as for quotes regarding Labour being to the right of the torys it's been implied several times

Murdoch and big business ? Is that like the Sun and Sky ? Maybe you mean the Banks or what about the Supermarkets ? Are these the guys who you think were in bed with Salmond throughout the campaign ?

It would be a bit silly to disregard the possibility of a better Country for 5 million just because you didn`t like one man. I`m sure everyone would agree with this ?

I see you have softened your stance a bit on people on here saying that Labour are to the right of the Tories. Fair enough though feel free to dig up a quote, any quote, where someone even " implies" this.

I`ll bite on your bit in bold about London propping up our free prescriptions and university. For a start, what do you mean by " free " prescriptions ? If you pay your taxes,and part of these go towards the NHS. What sort of country would charge again for the medicines dispensed by the NHS that you have already paid for ? If you are unfortunate enough to require medical attention in the future, do you think you should be charged for that ....... again ?

Anywayz, London propping up prescriptions and university in Scotland : Assuming 10% of your £34bn = £3.4bn

If everyone in Scotland ( lets be generous ) gets a free prescription monthly so £8.05 x 12 x 5mill = £ £0.5bn

Lets throw in our free eye tests. 1 for all means £20 x 5mill = £0.1bn

For the Uni`s that`s £9000 x 4 years x 28000 students = £1bn

We can round it all up to £2Bn as I would very much doubt that my numbers are accurate to the penny !

But since you brought up London then maybe someone could help us out with some further expenses coming out of Scottish tax payers.

We know you city boys are getting a new sewerage system. How much is Scotland contributing to that ?

Your new train set, fair enough you want to knock a few minutes off the time it takes you to get to work in the morning but how much is Scotland contributing towards HS1,2,3 ? or Crossrail and that 17 minute saving ?

You see a few numbers being thrown around on the costs to us for these projects that benefit London and help it to contribute the figure Russy quoted.

Neil, your the numbers man. Can you shed some light on how much Scotland will contribute to these super duper trains and the new London sewerage system ? Then Russy can rest easy that he is not after all propping up our health and education.

Finally, I certainly do not " hate " London. Incredible city. Been lucky enough to have enjoyed a few trips over the years. Most recently for when you beat us at football last year. Had a great time before and after the match drinking with the England fans. Pity about the result. Another defeat

[Comfy Bean]

Right........which one of you lives in East Sussex

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29921797

Edited November 5, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[LJS]

Right........which one of you lives in East Sussex

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29921797

Round our way, we're burning am effigy of Neil!

[atomised]

East Sussex. That's me

[atomised]

And as an aside if they did withdraw the Alex aalmond tableau its a blow to the traditions of bonfire round these parts. The tableau have always been light hearted takes on news stories and it doesn't sit well having decades of tradition censored whatever the reason

[russycarps]

And as an aside if they did withdraw the Alex aalmond tableau its a blow to the traditions of bonfire round these parts. The tableau have always been light hearted takes on news stories and it doesn't sit well having decades of tradition censored whatever the reason

But Scotland always deserves special treatment, didn't you know?

[russycarps]

Murdoch and big business ? Is that like the Sun and Sky ? Maybe you mean the Banks or what about the Supermarkets ? Are these the guys who you think were in bed with Salmond throughout the campaign ?

It would be a bit silly to disregard the possibility of a better Country for 5 million just because you didn`t like one man. I`m sure everyone would agree with this ?

I see you have softened your stance a bit on people on here saying that Labour are to the right of the Tories. Fair enough though feel free to dig up a quote, any quote, where someone even " implies" this.

I`ll bite on your bit in bold about London propping up our free prescriptions and university. For a start, what do you mean by " free " prescriptions ? If you pay your taxes,and part of these go towards the NHS. What sort of country would charge again for the medicines dispensed by the NHS that you have already paid for ? If you are unfortunate enough to require medical attention in the future, do you think you should be charged for that ....... again ?

Anywayz, London propping up prescriptions and university in Scotland : Assuming 10% of your £34bn = £3.4bn

If everyone in Scotland ( lets be generous ) gets a free prescription monthly so £8.05 x 12 x 5mill = £ £0.5bn

Lets throw in our free eye tests. 1 for all means £20 x 5mill = £0.1bn

For the Uni`s that`s £9000 x 4 years x 28000 students = £1bn

We can round it all up to £2Bn as I would very much doubt that my numbers are accurate to the penny !

But since you brought up London then maybe someone could help us out with some further expenses coming out of Scottish tax payers.

We know you city boys are getting a new sewerage system. How much is Scotland contributing to that ?

Your new train set, fair enough you want to knock a few minutes off the time it takes you to get to work in the morning but how much is Scotland contributing towards HS1,2,3 ? or Crossrail and that 17 minute saving ?

You see a few numbers being thrown around on the costs to us for these projects that benefit London and help it to contribute the figure Russy quoted.

Neil, your the numbers man. Can you shed some light on how much Scotland will contribute to these super duper trains and the new London sewerage system ? Then Russy can rest easy that he is not after all propping up our health and education.

Finally, I certainly do not " hate " London. Incredible city. Been lucky enough to have enjoyed a few trips over the years. Most recently for when you beat us at football last year. Had a great time before and after the match drinking with the England fans. Pity about the result. Another defeat

So you think Scotland could maintain its exact same level of social services etc without the income of London and with oil prices at $80 a barrel?

Ok

[atomised]

Sorry I forgot the special treatment thing, that's fine then.

The tableau in question wasn't even.allowed out on the roads by police last night and the chairman of one of the bonfire societies had police stationed outside his home after receiving death threats.

[eFestivals]

The answers are no.

I know. Anything Salmond is beyond any critique from you guys, which is why you're walking blind.

Some words I've just seen elsewhere...

Perpetuating and extending an inequitable system just entrenches it further, and makes it less likely that anything meaningful will be done on a nationwide basis.

Or, put another way: divide and rule.

You were happy to cross your fingers and jump off a cliff to be crushed on the rocks below back in September, and you're happy to do it all again next May.

[eFestivals]

It would be a bit silly to disregard the possibility of a better Country for 5 million just because you didn`t like one man. I`m sure everyone would agree with this ?

It's less silly than failing to recognise that what you have is often paid for by others - that would have stopped, and caused massive public sector cuts - and that you were voting in support of a lie.

It's less silly than believing left-leaning means tax payer support for the doing-alright middle classes at the expense of the poorest.

It's less silly than saying that Scotland is not anti-immigrant to create a false pretence of difference with England.

All of these things are encapsulated in one man, who some of us have identified and called out for what he is and where he'd take you.

And in response, the yes-ers in Scotland said that the more we pointed out his lies, the more the likes of you would blindly go along with them - with that anti-intelligence personally vocalised for you all by that same self-serving man.

[eFestivals]

You see a few numbers being thrown around on the costs to us for these projects that benefit London and help it to contribute the figure Russy quoted.

Neil, your the numbers man. Can you shed some light on how much Scotland will contribute to these super duper trains and the new London sewerage system ?

Your glorious leader says not a penny, and formalises that in GERS.

You see, even with the cost of these things excluded from the Scottish accounts, Scotland is still more financially fucked than the UK average.

Meanwhile, London is contributing more taxes than all of its expenditure INCLUDING those 'national' infrastructure projects - so much so, it still has surplus enough to send Scotland all of the extra it takes from the UK and to still have some left over (which Wales, NI, and the north are grateful for).

But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument, eh?

Having said all of that, there's issues around London to be dealt with. Don't go thinking that the facts given above is my endorsement for keeping things as they stand - it's simply the case that I don't reject the real facts because they're inconvenient to what I'd like to see happen.

Edited November 6, 2014 by eFestivals