The Dirty Independence Question

[Comfy Bean]

31 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The oil price will yo-yo.

The tax revenues that the UK or Scottish govt collects will never again reach the dizzy heights of 2011.

There is a truly massive amount of oil elsewhere in the world now that is cheaper - hugely cheaper - to extract than the oil off the coast of Scotland. And the costs of extraction off the coast of Scotland are growing much faster too.

A few months ago you were all about Scotland's renewables potential when that was the latest snippers pamphlet, but that one didn't stand up. So it's back to the oil cos the dream needs some sort of hope to cling to.

Until the last paragraph I don't see anyone here saying anything different. I don't see the resource lying out there as some kind of burden though either.

Your last paragraph again shows you either can't follow what's been written or chose not to.

I'm not back to any oil dream. That would be impossible... 

Some of my first posts on this thread a couple of years back were around Patrick harvie and the greens. Carry on with your few months banter if you like though....

I have supported things like renewable energy and removing nuclear weapons all my life and will continue to do so :-)

As mentioned the other day I'm voting snp and greens next week.

 

[LJS]

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Until the last paragraph I don't see anyone here saying anything different. I don't see the resource lying out there as some kind of burden though either.

Your last paragraph again shows you either can't follow what's been written or chose not to.

I'm not back to any oil dream. That would be impossible... 

Some of my first posts on this thread a couple of years back were around Patrick harvie and the greens. Carry on with your few months banter if you like though....

I have supported things like renewable energy and removing nuclear weapons all my life and will continue to do so :-)

As mentioned the other day I'm voting snp and greens next week.

 

I see the 2 most recent polls have Labour back above the Tories. Hopefully it will turn out that way. For all Scottish Labour's faults (& there are many) they are still streets ahead of the Tories.

 

 

[Comfy Bean]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

I see the 2 most recent polls have Labour back above the Tories. Hopefully it will turn out that way. For all Scottish Labour's faults (& there are many) they are still streets ahead of the Tories.

 

 

Agreed. 

[eastynh]

17 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Until the last paragraph I don't see anyone here saying anything different. I don't see the resource lying out there as some kind of burden though either.

Your last paragraph again shows you either can't follow what's been written or chose not to.

I'm not back to any oil dream. That would be impossible... 

Some of my first posts on this thread a couple of years back were around Patrick harvie and the greens. Carry on with your few months banter if you like though....

I have supported things like renewable energy and removing nuclear weapons all my life and will continue to do so :-)

As mentioned the other day I'm voting snp and greens next week.

 

I support Renewable energy, but it needs to compliment other generation methods in the UK, as it is just not efficient enough over here with the current technologies. There is also a massive skills shortage due to the pay gap between people going into Renewables and traditional methods of generation.

If the Scottish were serious about going into Renewables big style them it would tempt me as it is an area I have an interest in and wish to further my career in. Unfortunately most people just want to chase the money and thats holding the progression of renewable advancement back. 

Edited May 1, 2016 by eastynh

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, LJS said:

Without the *only* which you inserted it does not mean anything like you are claiming. You claimed the *only* didn't change the meaning. I have just given you a nice easy example of exactly how it changed the meaning.

Your position also relies on your personal interpretation of the definition of "Britnat" & your assumption that Comfy interpreted the meaning in the same way.

In other words your accusation is groundless & given that Comfy has made his intended meaning Crystal clear, you should withdraw it & apologise.

If you're right and I'm wrong .... Scottish people are peados.

Do you think there's no 'only' there? I only said Scottish people.

And are you happy with that, or do you think it's racist?

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Until the last paragraph I don't see anyone here saying anything different. I don't see the resource lying out there as some kind of burden though either.

But you do see it as a benefit, despite "oor oil" costing - no revenues, the reverse: costing - the UK over a billion quid last year.

That's an extra billion quid onto the deficit in the next GERS ... except I doubt the Salmond methodology used will allow that cost to be included. It'll be interesting to see if it does (they'll be a statement of negative oil revenues in GERS if it does).

 

Quote

Your last paragraph again shows you either can't follow what's been written or chose not to.

I'm not back to any oil dream. That would be impossible... 

Some of my first posts on this thread a couple of years back were around Patrick harvie and the greens. Carry on with your few months banter if you like though....

I have supported things like renewable energy and removing nuclear weapons all my life and will continue to do so :-)

As mentioned the other day I'm voting snp and greens next week.

Yep, you support it. Sadly you don't apply intelligence to it.

Or have you forgotten how a few months back how you said renewables would be iScotland's salvation, to cover its stonking deficit?

Meanwhile, back to the oil revenues. Salmond lied to try and take Scotland to financial disaster.... is that the "better govt by Scots" you were wanting? Bigger lies than the tories leading to bigger cuts than the tories?

Cos funnily enough, there's worse things than the tories.

To get it you first have to understand that Scotland costs 20% extra to run, but Scots are not 20% better than other people - which means in an indy Scotland Scots are 20% poorer.

But you don't. You keep clinging to the idea there's some sort of miracle just waiting to appear in a puff of smoke on Indy Day.

Scottish nationalism Is just an empty flag held by fantasists.

Edited May 1, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

I see the 2 most recent polls have Labour back above the Tories. Hopefully it will turn out that way. For all Scottish Labour's faults (& there are many) they are still streets ahead of the Tories.

It appears that Scottish people don't think they are. It appears that Scottish people rather like toryism.

Which is why around 70% of Scots will vote for policies closer to the tories than they will anything of social justice.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

If you're right and I'm wrong .... Scottish people are peados.

Do you think there's no 'only' there? I only said Scottish people.

And are you happy with that, or do you think it's racist?

What comfy actually said was "We all said rich brit nats might flea"

The use of the word "might" would suggest that some of the "rich britnats" might flee & some not. Maybe you thought he meant either every "rich britnat" would flee or every britnat would stay.

So we are left again with the words brit & nat.

British is clearly short for British which, as I am sure you are aware is a different thing from English. Are you suggesting comfy isn't aware of this? 

If comfy is desplaying any discrimination (& to be 100% clear, I do not believe he is) it is against people who are opposed to independence.

Of course, anyone sensible who thought that is what Comfy meant would then quickly dismiss the notion based on their knowledge & experience of comfy's views.

Only someone desperate would pick on two words, then twist & misquote them to try & frame an innocent man.

 

Free the Ayrshire one!

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

It appears that Scottish people don't think they are. It appears that Scottish people rather like toryism.

Which is why around 70% of Scots will vote for policies closer to the tories than they will anything of social justice.

I disagree with your interpretation of SNP policies.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, LJS said:

What comfy actually said was "We all said rich brit nats might flea"

The use of the word "might" would suggest that some of the "rich britnats" might flee & some not. Maybe you thought he meant either every "rich britnat" would flee or every britnat would stay.

So we are left again with the words brit & nat.

British is clearly short for British which, as I am sure you are aware is a different thing from English. Are you suggesting comfy isn't aware of this? 

If comfy is desplaying any discrimination (& to be 100% clear, I do not believe he is) it is against people who are opposed to independence.

Of course, anyone sensible who thought that is what Comfy meant would then quickly dismiss the notion based on their knowledge & experience of comfy's views.

Only someone desperate would pick on two words, then twist & misquote them to try & frame an innocent man.

 .

Oh, & I've just noticed ... Comfy mentioned "brit nats" (two words lower case)

The became "BritNats" (one word two capitals) when you were discussing what Comfy had said  

Funny that. 

[Comfy Bean]

15 hours ago, eastynh said:

I support Renewable energy, but it needs to compliment other generation methods in the UK, as it is just not efficient enough over here with the current technologies. There is also a massive skills shortage due to the pay gap between people going into Renewables and traditional methods of generation.

If the Scottish were serious about going into Renewables big style them it would tempt me as it is an area I have an interest in and wish to further my career in. Unfortunately most people just want to chase the money and thats holding the progression of renewable advancement back. 

I think they are serious although others may disagree. Fingers crossed the Greens increase their seats and continue to hold some influence.

Some figures here.....

The SNP manifesto will this week announce that a re-elected SNP Government will bring forward a new Climate Change Bill which will raise Scotland’s 2020 climate target from the current 42% cut in carbon emissions by 2020, to a new target to reduce emissions by more than 50% by 2020.

The exact level at which the new target will be set will come further to consultation with the Scottish Government’s independent advisers, the UK Committee on Climate Change.

It comes amid the latest official statistics which show that by 2013 – seven years ahead of the 2020 target date – Scotland had cut its emissions by 38.4%.
 
Scotland’s current target and the SNP’s proposals for a new target compare to the UK target of a 35% cut in emissions by 2020, and the EU target of 40% cut in emissions by 2030. Emissions are measured against a base year of 1990.
 
Scottish Environment Minister Aileen McLeod said: “Scotland has been a genuine world leader in the area of climate change and green energy, and the latest evidence shows that we are on track to exceed our 42% target – indeed we had already reached 38.4% back in 2013 – the latest year for which statistics are available. 
 
“Figures released last month showed that the SNP has powered through our renewable energy targets, so now we are raising our ambition on tackling climate change once again”.

 

http://www.scottishenergynews.com/snp-to-raise-climate-change-targets-if-re-elected-as-scottish-government/

[Comfy Bean]

On 2/3/2016 at 9:52 PM, comfortablynumb1910 said:

The Tories have nothing to win or lose vote wise up here. 1 seat at the moment what difference would none or another 1 make. We know it`s down to the Maths and with England having waaaay more seats it`s not difficult to see how their political decision making around investment etc would be motivated by votes.

I don`t agree with a Tory Govt being influenced by power but I certainly understand it.....and the maths.

I completely disagree that a Tory based in London is better placed to make decisions on Scotland than a Labour or SNP Govt running our show from Edinburgh. You are entitled to think otherwise. 

 

 

Sunday fun quiz * 

Who was quoted in the papers today saying......

" I saw time and time again how they ( the tories ) sought to secure short term political advantage before the long term interests of Scotland and the Scottish people "

Was it a rabid unionist....... or perhaps someone who held a very senior role during a 5 year " partnership " with Dave ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

* No prizes.

 

[eFestivals]

22 hours ago, LJS said:

What comfy actually said was "We all said rich brit nats might flea"

The use of the word "might" would suggest that some of the "rich britnats" might flee & some not. Maybe you thought he meant either every "rich britnat" would flee or every britnat would stay.

So we are left again with the words brit & nat.

'Might' says fuck all towards 'only'.  Meanwhile the mention of only none thing says only one thing.

I see they don't teach literacy in Scottish schools.

And we're still left with the question of why exactly he's saying only brit nats would flea, when a constitutional stance has absolutely no relevance for an attitude towards taxes. Funny enough, neither of you will touch that question. How very odd.

 

22 hours ago, LJS said:

British is clearly short for British which, as I am sure you are aware is a different thing from English. Are you suggesting comfy isn't aware of this? 

I'm sure he is, just as I'm aware that the use of pejorative words including nationality is a hate crime under British laws that classes as racism.

Just as he's aware that when he refers to people in Scotland who he doesn't refer to as Scottish, he's saying they're less-than-Scottish. That's what you snippers do.

And in comfy's case, he's more than once tried claiming the SNP as representing all-of-Scotland, which very firmly and beyond all doubt makes his reference to 'brit nats' as something less-than-Scottish - particularly when constitutional stance has absolutely no relevance towards taxes. anyway.

So why did comfy only say that 'brit nats' would avoid any higher Scottish taxes? Because he was being racist.

Edited May 2, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

22 hours ago, LJS said:

I disagree with your interpretation of SNP policies.

so please do tell me what social justice there is in your and their want to make Scotland's poor poorer?

Tell me what social justice there is in the SNP implementing tory austerity, and what social justice there is in making the poor poorer.

Scotland could raise taxes for everyone and use that money to help the poorest, where the poorest would gain.

But no, you say there'd be a greater wrong if the poor had more resources and more money than they'd get from a tory tax cut.

I'd love to hear Keir Hardie's take on your new version of Scottish social justice.

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, LJS said:

Oh, & I've just noticed ... Comfy mentioned "brit nats" (two words lower case)

The became "BritNats" (one word two capitals) when you were discussing what Comfy had said  

Funny that. 

if I've changed what he meant, first you'll have to tell me what he meant.

It's the question you never answer: what does brit nats have to do with taxes?

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

The SNP manifesto will this week announce that a re-elected SNP Government will bring forward a new Climate Change Bill which will raise Scotland’s 2020 climate target from the current 42% cut in carbon emissions by 2020, to a new target to reduce emissions by more than 50% by 2020.

Or put in real-world terms...

The SNP manifesto will this week claim decades of UK energy policy, nearly all of which was directly specified and funded by the UK govt, and the rest brought about by laws made in Westminster, as their own success.

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Sunday fun quiz * 

Who was quoted in the papers today saying......

" I saw time and time again how they ( the tories ) sought to secure short term political advantage before the long term interests of Scotland and the Scottish people "

Was it a rabid unionist....... or perhaps someone who held a very senior role during a 5 year " partnership " with Dave ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

* No prizes.

 

who said "we can have all be richer with £9Bn a year less money"? Who believed it, and still does?

Who said social justice is when you make the poorest poorer still, and are keener than the tories to achieve it

Who said "small tory cuts baaad, SNP cuts much much greater good"?

Who said "we're anti-austerity" while facilitating austerity?

Who said "3rd way politics from Labour baaaad, 3rd way politics from tories good"?

 

[LJS]

Morning Neil,

You have made a couple of points this morning.

I shall not be replying to them until you withdraw your allegation of racism against comfy & apologise.

I am fed up with your irrational & unreasonable style of debate.

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, LJS said:

Morning Neil,

You have made a couple of points this morning.

I shall not be replying to them until you withdraw your allegation of racism against comfy & apologise.

I am fed up with your irrational & unreasonable style of debate.

What's irrational is neither you or comfy being able to explain what relevance 'brit nats' has to tax avoidance.

It's clear what he was getting at, and perhaps - perhaps even probably - he only meant it as a joke. But it was meant in a racist way, and he knows it even if you don't.

I'm sorry to spoil your view by suggesting you take your head out of your arse. A view of the real world is something you'll have to get used to if you ever get your dream of impoverishing Scotland.

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

who said "we can have all be richer with £9Bn a year less money"? Who believed it, and still does?

Who said social justice is when you make the poorest poorer still, and are keener than the tories to achieve it

Who said "small tory cuts baaad, SNP cuts much much greater good"?

Who said "we're anti-austerity" while facilitating austerity?

Who said "3rd way politics from Labour baaaad, 3rd way politics from tories good"?

 

Sorry that's incorrect. 

The correct answer is Nick Clegg.

To the best of my knowledge Nick is not a rabid nationalist and was deputy pm during the period he was talking about.

Lib dems now "free" to support and campaign for indy. 

That's now a full house apart from the conservative unionist party and probably ukip. 

In my view these are important developments for indy looking forward. Especially with kez accepting 1 in 3 of what's left of her support backing indy.

If the libs fall behind the greens on Thursday they will need to reinvent themselves up here in my opinion. 

Edited May 2, 2016 by comfortablynumb1910

[eFestivals]

22 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Sorry that's incorrect. 

The correct answer is Nick Clegg.

To the best of my knowledge Nick is not a rabid nationalist and was deputy pm during the period he was talking about.

Lib dems now "free" to support and campaign for indy. 

That's now a full house apart from the conservative unionist party and probably ukip. 

In my view these are important developments for indy looking forward. Especially with kez accepting 1 in 3 of what's left of her support backing indy.

If the libs fall behind the greens on Thursday they will need to reinvent themselves up here in my opinion. 

While people might be free to do what they want, what they want isn't indy. You seem to have forgotten, you had a vote and you lost.

And shortly you'll try claiming again that it's only unionists who go on about a 2nd indyref.

Meanwhile, bankruptcy.

Are people in Scotland stupid enough to vote themselves bigger cuts than the tories as something better than the tories? Only if they're braindead or if they're mega-tories. (23% are already proven as braindead, so you're well on your way).

Cos what will indy deliver for you, comfy, apart from poverty? This is the question you cannot answer and refuse to answer - because you know that all you'll get is an empty flag.

Even Sturgeon isn't stupid enough to want Scotland to self-fund ... or did you miss the laughable wording of the SNP's FFA clause to the Scotland Act?

How will you have a better Scotland with £10Bn pa year less for public services?

Sturgeon knows you can't, but you know you can.

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Hey, Neil. Here is the Indy thread. Save you wasting £10bn in the wrong thread.

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, LJS said:

Hey, Neil. Here is the Indy thread. Save you wasting £10bn in the wrong thread.

it's you who wants to waste £10Bn, while claiming it was a lie that the iSG might not have the money to pay pensions or anything else they might have to pay.

How does £53.4Bn of revenues (and still shrinking) pay for £68.4Bn (and rising) of spending in your indy dream, LJS?

The best answer is: by indebting your kids as twice the rate of that nasty Westminster.

The real answer is: via an £8bn cut in spending, to the poor, to pensions, to education costs, to SHNS costs, and to benefits

The LJS answer? By Scotland having growth that's bigger than China, a feat that no developed economy has ever managed.

And you wonder why I keep mentioning reality.

Edited May 12, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

So in the wrong thread Neil said.

"now you're calling the Scottish Govt liars, too. cos It's them who have "made up" those numbers.

As Nicoliar clearly said a few weeks ago, she'd have to deal with it as Westminster did - with huge cuts. Just like a tory."

As I have dealt with both these distortions at length & have learnt there is nothing to be gained from repeatedly pointing out his errors, I shall ignore them.

At least I am ignoring them in the right place.

P.s. still awaiting retraction & apology, Neil.

[eFestivals]

23 minutes ago, LJS said:

So in the wrong thread Neil said.

"now you're calling the Scottish Govt liars, too. cos It's them who have "made up" those numbers.

As Nicoliar clearly said a few weeks ago, she'd have to deal with it as Westminster did - with huge cuts. Just like a tory."

As I have dealt with both these distortions at length & have learnt there is nothing to be gained from repeatedly pointing out his errors, I shall ignore them.

At least I am ignoring them in the right place.

P.s. still awaiting retraction & apology, Neil.

So the Scottish Govt aren't the ones responsible for those "made up" numbers?

(They';re created via an SG formulated and approved methodology, and exclude all of things that are charged to the UK that Scotland feels it doesn't benefit from, too ....so there can be no moans about "spending on train sets" and the normal obfuscating crap that standardly drips from the mouths of thick snippers).

Those "made up" numbers are the starting financial position of any indy SG .... and while they'll be free to change anything and everythhing of Scotland's economics, they can't magic £10bn from the air.

So the choice is to indebt your kids by far more than the indebting by Westminster that you slag off as a Westminster failure, or by MUCH bigger cuts than the tories are giving you that you slag off, or by massive tax rises for everyone (not just 'the rich', Scotland doesn't have enough rich to cover it). Or a combination, of course.

The option that's not available to you is for spending to continue at current levels with none of those things happening.

Go on, tell me again how you believe that's wrong and on indy day it'll rain money in Scotland.

[LJS]

in other news...

Flying Scotsman trips to Borders and Fife cancelled

Read more: http://www.berwickshirenews.co.uk/news/local-news/flying-scotsman-trips-to-borders-and-fife-cancelled-1-4127800#ixzz48cZQF3KP 
  You may wonder why I'm posting this here - well I made a wee trip below the line & found someone blaming this on the SNP

 

Quote

From the road close by would doubt if the engine would fit through the single span bridges

Another ECK folly original plan double tracking all the way

Cut back by the ever Brilliant SNP

And from the other side...

Quote

"Built in Doncaster" - that's the clue. This piece of second hand junk is not Scottish, and those plastic Scots who shelled out to this exploitative venture have only themselves to blame.