The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

This thread is mirroring Scottish political discussion.

Those who hate Labour or who say its dead say that the SNP are more to the left than Labour.

I say: prove it with policy comparisons.

Here, just as in other places I read, has the SNP supporters run away from that comparison, or has grand statements made ("we're anti-austerity") without the background substance of reality ... you know, the magic money tree.

Labour is far from perfect. We can spend all day agreeing on that one.

However, it's not moved to the right on immigration at all (why do you think it has? ) - tho Scottish public opinion (just as with England) would like it to.

Benefits have to be paid for. The simple fact is that it pissing money up the wall on the unemployed is not a popular policy anywhere in the country. Until you show me the magic money tree the wonderful SNP offer nothing different.

I'm asking you to show me where the SNP are to the left of Labour - with the costings and where they impact, not just grand uncosted wants.

You know, like the wonderful "left" policy of free uni, which benefits most the middle classes and is paid for by the poorest - so not left wing at all.

You know, like the wonderful "left" policy of free prescriptions, which benefits ONLY the middle classes (cos the poor got them free already) and is paid for by the poorest - so not left wing at all.

You know, like the wonderful "left" policy of free home care for the elderly, which benefits ONLY the middle classes (cos the poor got them free already) and is paid for by the poorest - so not left wing at all.

An absolutely true assertion, as shown by the real actual facts.

Robbing from the poor to give to the middle classes.

I'm well aware, more-so than you.

Universality is great, but not when it's paid for by only the poor - which has been the fact of these policies.

And you should be aware that free uni has fewer poor access uni than via paid-for uni. Cos those are the facts.

I can't for the life of me work out why that's happening, but happening it is - and dismissing a truth is one for the stupid only.

The SG has the power to do this. It's chosen not to.

I'm not trying to claim that it has all of the same levers of power as Westminster - only indie would give you that, and indie is something Scotland does not want - but to claim impotence is bullshit.

When Scotland does have the powers, the SNP preferred option is to do nothing and instead use the issue to create division with England, for their future political benefit while the Scottish people get fucked over.

The SNP do not even try to represent the Scottish people, they represent only their indie dream and they don't care who suffers for it.

The Scottish government only had the power to vary the basic rate of income tax. If you can come up with a way in which that redistributed wealth, well done to you I say.

"The Scottish Variable Rate (SVR) is the power set out in the Scotland Act 1998 that enables the Scottish Parliament to vary the standard rate of income tax in Scotland by up to 3p in the pound."

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/Finance/scottishvariablerate

[LJS]

Pretty much spot on!

The main parties - including UKIP and the SNP (but not greens) - are all neoliberal parties.

The main parties - including UKIP and the SNP (but not greens) - all try to play the electorate prior to elections by pretending themselves as something different to what they really are.

They all use popularism for what they shout about, and hope that people won't look too closely at the things they don't shout about.

The difference with the SNP to those others is that they shout about things they have no intention of doing. The shouting is about highlighting 'difference' with the rest of the UK, and by implementing a policy they make the issue - and so the ability to shout about difference - go away.

Which is precisely why they bang on about social justice, but then have to be held to the flame to actually implement a policy of social justice.

(they've only had one policy of social justice, and action only happened because of SLAB pisstaking of Alex's inaction).

Without endorsing everything above. That is why I am likely to vote Green & also why I have never tried to persuade anyone to vote SNP.

[eFestivals]

The Scottish government only had the power to vary the basic rate of income tax.

If you can come up with a way in which that redistributed wealth, well done to you I say.

"The Scottish Variable Rate (SVR) is the power set out in the Scotland Act 1998 that enables the Scottish Parliament to vary the standard rate of income tax in Scotland by up to 3p in the pound."

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/Finance/scottishvariablerate

My apologies, I'd misunderstood the powers.

(I'd thought all rates had to vary in-step, making an increase in just the higher rates impossible)

It's still a breeze to use that to redistribute wealth, by taxing everyone to a greater extent, and then using what is collected for the benefit of the lower paid/poor.

Which is much better than the SNPs actual doings of taking from the poor to give to the middle classes - you can't get more nuLabour than that!!

So i'll take that "well done" - - and add in that the facts show that the SNP do not wish to redistribute wealth except from the poorest to those doing OK(ish).

Edited December 31, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Without endorsing everything above. That is why I am likely to vote Green & also why I have never tried to persuade anyone to vote SNP.

But you have tried to persuade peeps that the SNP is more to the left than Labour.

I keep saying: prove it with policies.

Then comes only silence.

Those Scottish people are mugging themselves, by rejecting a party that they say doesn't have their best interests at heart to instead vote for another party that definitely doesn't have their best interests at heart.

Meanwhile, the party they're rejecting is more like what they say they want than the party they'll vote for.

They've been played by the tories and are too daft to see they're handing the tories power.

[LJS]

But you have tried to persuade peeps that the SNP is more to the left than Labour.

I keep saying: prove it with policies.

Then comes only silence.

Those Scottish people are mugging themselves, by rejecting a party that they say doesn't have their best interests at heart to instead vote for another party that definitely doesn't have their best interests at heart.

Meanwhile, the party they're rejecting is more like what they say they want than the party they'll vote for.

They've been played by the tories and are too daft to see they're handing the tories power.

I have disproved (with links) your claims (unlinked) & given you (linked) Labour quotes on immigration & benefits.

I am also taking into account Labour's record in government, not just ed's pre-election promises. Labour are always more right wing in government than in opposition.

The whole problem I have with the Labour party is that it is their job to be left wing. That's why they exist. They serve no purpose as another centre right party. We have no shortage of those. & if that doesn-t win them elections it is their job to persuade voters otherwise.

[Comfy Bean]

They've been played by the tories and are too daft to see they're handing the tories power.

Some would say this has already happened. We found out for sure at 7am the day after although some of us suspected long before

[LJS]

My apologies, I'd misunderstood the powers.

(I'd thought all rates had to vary in-step, making an increase in just the higher rates impossible)

It's still a breeze to use that to redistribute wealth, by taxing everyone to a greater extent, and then using what is collected for the benefit of the lower paid/poor.

Which is much better than the SNPs actual doings of taking from the poor to give to the middle classes - you can't get more nuLabour than that!!

So i'll take that "well done" - - and add in that the facts show that the SNP do not wish to redistribute wealth except from the poorest to those doing OK(ish).

Gosh you are clever, remember you have no control over tax thresholds or benefits so how are you going to make sure low paid workers are no worse off or are you doing redistribution from the poor to the very poor? Edited December 31, 2014 by LJS

[Comfy Bean]

It's not a consideration I'd need to make unless I lived in his constituency.

Apologies if I`m flogging a dead horse here. On Jim Murphy I had asked if anyone considered him a good choice to lead Scottish Labour after the previous leader and her deputy packed it after the Indy campaign. When I highlighted some of his background and beliefs you accused me of mud slinging, which implied it wasn`t true, before actually stating that I had made some of it up. I then posted you the link to his promise to bin the football bigotry act and now you are saying you have no further comment to make as you don`t live here so it doesn`t affect you ? To be fair you have found time to pass comment on the SNP leader(s)

My Union went with Finlay but as I said on here at the time, my view is that Murphy is more of a " character " and will stand a better chance of winning back votes. I`m not sure that makes it right though and wondered what others thought. I`ve also said I don`t think the SNP will win as many seats as the polls are showing ( I could be wrong of course ).

If this happens, Murphy will gain the credit and I wonder if he will then be returning to Westminster where the English press will take more of an interest as the Record etc are more interested in portraying him as some sort of irn bru swigging hero.

[Comfy Bean]

check out that Alex did nothing for 2 years about something he was so absolutely against? Why do I have to check out what I know is true?

During this 2 year period, are you saying that if I was on HB and was facing a % deduction due to the introduction of the " bedroom tax " ( 14%min ) then I would have had to pay the difference to make up my rent ?

I`m assuming this is what you mean by doing nothing but not sure ?

[eFestivals]

I have disproved (with links) your claims (unlinked) & given you (linked) Labour quotes on immigration & benefits.

Quotes, but not policies. Tho you could go and fimnd the full policies with costings (which are a bit different to those quotes, btw!).

You've given nothing from SNP to prove them as better on those things.

Anything you do give from the SNP needs costings too - else they're meaningless.

So give it to me, or say that you can't.

(PS: and do be prepared to admit that Scotland is anti-immigration, as the facts prove it to be).

I am also taking into account Labour's record in government, not just ed's pre-election promises. Labour are always more right wing in government than in opposition.

and the SNP are more do-nothing than they state they are. Do you factor that in too, or do you ignore it?

The whole problem I have with the Labour party is that it is their job to be left wing.

Do you think?

Or might it be that left wing means fuck all unless you get elected?

I'm left wing, but i know i mean fuck all against the right-wing populations of all parts of the UK.

If I want anything vaguely left wing to happen, I have to align myself with the vaguely left-wing party that stands a chance of holding power.

What I don't do is vote LibDem and expect them to be left wing - which is what Scotland laughingly does with the SNP.

They serve no purpose as another centre right party.

They serve FAR more purpose as that when getting elected than they do as left wing and never elected.

If you fly the red flag in this country, you fly the flag of defeat. There's no getting away from the truth, no matter how much you might object to it.

Pretending that the population of any part of the UK is left wing is only being stupid, and guaranteeing yourself nothing at all that might be regarded as left wing.

if that doesn-t win them elections it is their job to persuade voters otherwise.

Yeah, cos policies trump tribalism? Like in Scotland, yeah? PMSL.

[Comfy Bean]

Gosh you are clever, remember you have no control over tax thresholds or benefits so how are you going to make sure low paid workers are no worse off or are you doing redistribution from the poor to the very poor?

Looks like NS is looking for control over the minimum wage to be devolved after not being " allowed " to increase the minimum income tax threshold.

[eFestivals]

Some would say this has already happened. We found out for sure at 7am the day after although some of us suspected long before

The fish to go with your chip is over there, matey, next to the squirrels.

How does 'democracy for England too' become Scotland being stitched up?

Why does Scotland deserve more than other parts of the UK?

How does addressing the claimed democratic deficit on a Scottish basis in other parts of the UK stitch up Scotland?

Next up, will you be telling me that 'the vow' hasn't been delivered?

If what Scotland has is a good thing, it's a good thing for England too. Or doesn't fair and equal mean anything in the country that claims to be for equality?

If Scotland votes to marginalise itself in Westminster - as it did with devolution - why is it upset at deciding for itself it should be marginalised? Either Holyrood has powers or Westminster has powers, they both can't hold the same powers.

The indyref was Thatcher's Scottish homecoming, and you've yet to realise. Identity politics for the me me me generation, the Scottish Thatcher generation.

If Scotland wants tax raising powers, then let them have them and wither and die on lesser income.

Or is that too independent for those who voted for independence?

Edited December 31, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Gosh you are clever, remember you have no control over tax thresholds or benefits so how are you going to make sure low paid workers are no worse off or are you doing redistribution from the poor to the very poor?

If your words there are the limits of Scottish thinking, Scotland is fucked.

There's a million different ways to do it thru the powers Scotland already has. Just like Salmond, you're looking for excuses for doing nothing, becau8se doing nothing suits the divisive agenda you're pursuing.

[Comfy Bean]

The fish to go with your chip is over there, matey, next to the squirrels.

These squirrel jokes are rubbish. I include my own ! I miss all the emu banter.

How does 'democracy for England too' become Scotland being stitched up?

I think your at it sir. Why should Dave have mentioned it in his 7am Scottish Independence vote speech. Don`t believe me, ask Darling for his view on it.

Why does Scotland deserve more than other parts of the UK?

Who said it does or thinks it does ( apart from your good self )

How does addressing the claimed democratic deficit on a Scottish basis in other parts of the UK stitch up Scotland?

See above for my opinion on what was on Daves mind throughout Scottish Indy. Remember he kept out of it until he got a wee fright it a few days before

Next up, will you be telling me that 'the vow' hasn't been delivered?

I think we have agreed that the vow was written in such a way to be meaningless. Asyou know " some " people would have given it some consideration. The polls showed us at the time that there were people still making up their minds. In my view, they were Labour voters hence the arrival of Brown to deliver it. It worked.

If what Scotland has is a good thing, it's a good thing for England too. Or doesn't fair and equal mean anything in the country that claims to be for equality?

I believe that Scottish Indy would have been a good think ( long term ) for rUK as it would have meant a changed Westminster as well as Holyrood.

If Scotland votes to marginalise itself in Westminster - as it did with devolution - why is it upset at deciding for itself it should be marginalised? Either Holyrood has powers or Westminster has powers, they both can't hold the same powers.

Scotland voted to remain with Dave. Dave has the power. He has given us some.

The indyref was Thatcher's Scottish homecoming, and you've yet to realise. Identity politics for the me me me generation, the Scottish Thatcher generation.

Disagree. I`m sure you agree that not everyone who thought that Scotland should be an independent country was votingwith me me me in mind. I really hope that you agree with this last bit.

If Scotland wants tax raising powers, then let them have them and wither and die on lesser income.

Oh dear

Or is that too independent for those who voted for independence?

Edited December 31, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[eFestivals]

When I highlighted some of his background and beliefs you accused me of mud slinging, which implied it wasn`t true, before actually stating that I had made some of it up.

Not at all. I said if you're going to fling mud, use both hands. You know, to give all politicians the same scrutiny.

Jim might be horribly right wing - I don't really know either way, as the only comments i've seen have been from folks like you, who are working from bias and what they "believe" often detached from the facts.

But Salmond is also horribly right wing. He wanted to give the bankers free-reign like the most rabid of tories (Redwood, too extreme for even the tories!).

Instead you give Salmond a free pass.

An even handed view is reached by being even handed.

I then posted you the link to his promise to bin the football bigotry act

You gave no link.

I said: I'm aware that he's said he'll remove the booze ban at footie grounds, and that I'm not aware of him saying he'll allow bigotry.

I asked you to show me I'd not heard everything he'd said. You haven't done, so I can only presume that him wanting to allow bigotry is another of those things you "believe" that has no basis in fact.

But do feel free to show me him saying he'll allow bigotry, so i'm up to speed.

and now you are saying you have no further comment to make as you don`t live here so it doesn`t affect you ?

You asked me if I'd vote for him. I told you it's not something I have to consider as he's not standing where I live.

Within any party there's a lot of conflicting views. Those have no relevance for almost everything, because what happens is that party's policies and not the view of just one person. I'm happy to vote in support of Labour's policies, on the basis that I know they're the best 'left' this country will (perhaps) accept/get at this moment in time.

(to be clear, I'm talking UK policies. The discussion i'm having here is around aspects of the 2015 general election only. For that Murphy is just an MP, nothing more).

To be fair you have found time to pass comment on the SNP leader(s)

Nope, party policy! Right wing mostly and populist occasionally.

[eFestivals]

During this 2 year period, are you saying that if I was on HB and was facing a % deduction due to the introduction of the " bedroom tax " ( 14%min ) then I would have had to pay the difference to make up my rent ?

I`m assuming this is what you mean by doing nothing but not sure ?

I'm talking about when Alex said he'd abolished the bedroom tax.

If anything is different to my thinking on this, it's the result of porkie tellings by Alex and a big number of SNP supporters, that has caused me to believe a lie.

[eFestivals]

Looks like NS is looking for control over the minimum wage to be devolved after not being " allowed " to increase the minimum income tax threshold.

I think you should stop and think carefully about the effects of those two things onto the lowest paid workers.

From your words it's clear that Sturgeon wanted the tax threshold over the minimum wage.

The minimum wage is a lower amount than the tax threshold (for the average working conditions). And the tax threshold is rarely reached by the huge numbers of part-time workers.

That gets to mean that her choice was to do nothing for the very poorest, but instead raise the tax threshold for those who are already more-wealthy than the poorest.

Can you spot a trend there with other SNP policies?

[Comfy Bean]

Sadly I didn`t make up any of the stuff on Jim Murphy I accept though that it is difficult to keep up with what he has been up to ! Looks like scrapping the recent football bigotry law was one of his first pledges. Also turns out he has a season ticket at one of the two clubs who the new law was aimed at.

Anywayz.....my post was not an attempt at " mud slinging ". He clearly stands up for what he believes in across many areas. I was asking if everyone thought that he was the right man to lead the Scottish Labour Party.

What do you think Neil, now you know a bit more about him, would he get your vote ?

I would also be interested to see any post of mine you care to quote where I defended Salmonds meetings with Murdoch. We`ve had 1000`s of posts on Salmond who has now moved on. What about Murphy and some of the people he supports ?

I only knew about his involvement with the Henry Jackson Society as Douglas Murray was on Newsnight giving some " interesting " views on the CIA and torture.

Apologies. This was the post I was referring to ^^^^ and I`ve missed off the link I read at the time. My mistake, here it is.........

My point in the original post was that he shouldn`t be pandering to bigots ( on both sides ) to win votes. I`ve lived in the West of Scotland all my days and it remains a major problem

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11211688/Jim-Murphy-pledges-to-scrap-football-bigotry-law.html

[Comfy Bean]

I think you should stop and think carefully about the effects of those two things onto the lowest paid workers.

From your words it's clear that Sturgeon wanted the tax threshold over the minimum wage.

The minimum wage is a lower amount than the tax threshold (for the average working conditions). And the tax threshold is rarely reached by the huge numbers of part-time workers.

That gets to mean that her choice was to do nothing for the very poorest, but instead raise the tax threshold for those who are already more-wealthy than the poorest.

Can you spot a trend there with other SNP policies?

Agreed about the tax threshold and minimum wage. My point is that NS is going in the right direction with this and it would be interesting to see where she would go with the minimum wage. " Her " staff are now on the living wage. Any changes ( increase ) for Scottish Workers ( down the line ) would surely put pressure on Westminster so in theory a higher rate for all. I believe this would be a good thing

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/440190/scottish-government-staff-to-benefit-from-increase-in-living-wage/

[Comfy Bean]

Almost party time so just wanted to wish everyone all the very best for the New Year when it comes. I have really enjoyed all the Indy debate on here so a big thank you to you all and I wish you all good health and happiness for the New Year.

Oh and happy festivaling in 2015

[kaosmark2]

I have disproved (with links) your claims (unlinked) & given you (linked) Labour quotes on immigration & benefits.

I am also taking into account Labour's record in government, not just ed's pre-election promises. Labour are always more right wing in government than in opposition.

The whole problem I have with the Labour party is that it is their job to be left wing. That's why they exist. They serve no purpose as another centre right party. We have no shortage of those. & if that doesn-t win them elections it is their job to persuade voters otherwise.

I largely agree, but Labour are more pro-immigration and EU in government that they are in opposition.

I'd also argue it's their job to be centre-left. They haven't been substantially left wing for decades. The problem is they're right-of-centre.

[LJS]

I largely agree, but Labour are more pro-immigration and EU in government that they are in opposition.

I'd also argue it's their job to be centre-left. They haven't been substantially left wing for decades. The problem is they're right-of-centre.

Centre left would be fine with me.

[LJS]

I think you should stop and think carefully about the effects of those two things onto the lowest paid workers.

From your words it's clear that Sturgeon wanted the tax threshold over the minimum wage.

The minimum wage is a lower amount than the tax threshold (for the average working conditions). And the tax threshold is rarely reached by the huge numbers of part-time workers.

That gets to mean that her choice was to do nothing for the very poorest, but instead raise the tax threshold for those who are already more-wealthy than the poorest.

Can you spot a trend there with other SNP policies?

Work roughly 30 hours at the minimum & you start paying tax.

[eFestivals]

[eFestivals]

Apologies. This was the post I was referring to ^^^^ and I`ve missed off the link I read at the time. My mistake, here it is.........

My point in the original post was that he shouldn`t be pandering to bigots ( on both sides ) to win votes. I`ve lived in the West of Scotland all my days and it remains a major problem

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11211688/Jim-Murphy-pledges-to-scrap-football-bigotry-law.html

Pleasingly, I don't live in a place blighted by sectarianism, so I can't say i know enough to have a meaningful opinion on the subject for what might work and what might not. I'm also unclear about what this particular law is, as it's not a law that effects me.

But, from that article, it seems pretty clear that there's a lot of criticism of it as a bad law, and that even the SNP themselves are unsure about how good a law it actually is. The article indicates the SNP might well end up abolishing it themselves.

Is this the best thing you have to hang Jim on? As it's the attack you made, I guess it is.

It's pretty weak, against what the article says. It's nothing about "pandering to bigots" by the look of things.

Edited December 31, 2014 by eFestivals