The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

9 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I must have misunderstood the number of votes for Tory and Labour in Scotland in the last Holyrood elections.

you didn't. whether you believe them or not, the SNP stand on the basis of fairness & combating poverty. There is a case to be made about how genuine this is but there is no doubt about what people thought were voting for. 

you want to talk about how people down your way vote?

Edited March 14, 2017 by LJS

[LJS]

5 minutes ago, brandycoke said:

Just watching the Scottish news, and there was an interview with the landlady of a "Yes" bar in Glasgow.

Quite sad that these places even exist, though i'd imagine the atmosphere inside would be quite something .

"Yes" bar for Glastonbury anyone ?

Got me thinking..couple of guys on here would be ideal to headline the Friday evening comedy slot .

 

Get me the gig, I'll be there. 

You heard the one about the blood & soil nationalists?

 

[pink_triangle]

26 minutes ago, LJS said:

Watching Newsnight. I'm not one who spends too much time obsessing about BBC bias ( although I do think they have questions to answer)

So they open with a piece on Indyref 2. let's start with some talking heads from politicians...

in the Red White & Blue Corner: Lord George Foulkes (labour - hates the snp), Theresa Villiers (Tory - guess she's not too keen on the SNP) Alistair Carmichael (LibDem, really really really hates the SNP - so much he lied to try and frame the first minister)

Well. in the Blue & White Corner we'll be expecting a few pro indy folk on to balance this. Here's the first one.. It's our old favourite Alex Salmond - well he's a bit divisive - I mean we've all made our mind up about Eck but he is definitely pro indy & there will be someone else along soon... oh.. no there won't ... it's Eck   & that's it 

In fairness Alec did get 2 soundbites but then so  did George Foulkes. so 3-1 to the union (or 4-2 if you count the double interventions)

Well it's not looking too balanced so far But wait a minute ... we're off to Glasgow - the famous Yes City and we're off to a pub to meet the public - that'll redress the balance.

We speak to five people in what I think is probably the wonderful Horseshoe Bar in Dury Street - highly recommended for anyone visiting Glasgow & seeking refuge from the Cybernat death squads that relentlessly roam the streets seeking elderly no voters to cull.

Astonishingly we manage to fine 3 clearly opposed to Indy, one opposed to having a referendum & one lukewarm pro-indy who doesn't think we should have a referendum now.

Truly astonishing from the BBC we talk to a total of 9 people. One of them is clearly in favour of Independence and he is Alec Salmond. 

We did go on to a studio discussion between 1 (one ) SNP mp & 1 (one) Tory mp. but by then the damage wa swell and truly done.

I'm sure this is available on iPlayer if anyone wants to check.. 

Anyone care to defend this?

 

 

I do wonder if your seeing bias where it doesn't exist. Newsnight is a British show discussing the biggest stories in politics. They have invited representatives from the 4 biggest parties in Westminster. 

As for a poll in a pub the scientist in me tells me you can't draw conclusions from a small sample size. You can throw 5 heads in a row, but tails is just as likely to come next. 

[LJS]

14 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I do wonder if your seeing bias where it doesn't exist. Newsnight is a British show discussing the biggest stories in politics. They have invited representatives from the 4 biggest parties in Westminster. 

As for a poll in a pub the scientist in me tells me you can't draw conclusions from a small sample size. You can throw 5 heads in a row, but tails is just as likely to come next. 

So if it had been a discussion about brexit they could have had quotes from the 4 biggest parties in Westminster with no one in favour of brexit. Farage isn't even in Westminster and his party are, at a rough guess about the 8th or 9th biggest party in Westminster but he was never off the bloody telly. 

You do realise the SNP are not the entirety of the campaign for Scottish independence?

The BBC has a serious credibility issue in Scotland as polls have shown. Tonight's newsnight showed exactly why.

[brandycoke]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

Get me the gig, I'll be there. 

You heard the one about the blood & soil nationalists?

 

No probs LJS ,consider it done,  do the "Once in a generation" one too, that'll have them rolling in the aisles.

[LJS]

1 minute ago, brandycoke said:

No probs LJS ,consider it done,  do the "Once in a generation" one too, that'll have them rolling in the aisles.

Yeah I'll do it alongside the "what's the way to get out the EU?" ... "vote yes." 

One of my favourites.

Oh & the equal partners in the union stuff should get a laugh too.

 

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

you didn't. whether you believe them or not, the SNP stand on the basis of fairness & combating poverty. There is a case to be made about how genuine this is but there is no doubt about what people thought were voting for. 

you want to talk about how people down your way vote?

I don't believe them, but I didn't comment about the SNP, I pointed out the Tories got more votes than Labour. I think it's a valid point. 

Sure. Here's the constituency I've lived most of the last decade in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Here's the constituency I've lived in for most of the rest of that period:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Here's the other two:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_North_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitcham_and_Morden_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Here's the constituency I grew up in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcastle_upon_Tyne_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Here's the only constituency I've ever lived in that has a sitting Tory MP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumfriesshire,_Clydesdale_and_Tweeddale_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Also the only one of them that has had a Tory MP since 1997. One of only two where they reached 20% of the vote in 2015.

Remain vote % varied between 57%-80%.

Edited March 15, 2017 by kaosmark2

[pink_triangle]

4 hours ago, LJS said:

 

You do realise the SNP are not the entirety of the campaign for Scottish independence?

The BBC has a serious credibility issue in Scotland as polls have shown. Tonight's newsnight showed exactly why.

When it comes to political parties at Westminster I think they pretty much are the entirety of the campaign. 

[lost]

oops:

Nicola Sturgeon abandons bid to remain in EU as poll shows record level of Euroscepticism in Scotland

[kipper64]

40 minutes ago, lost said:

oops:

Nicola Sturgeon abandons bid to remain in EU as poll shows record level of Euroscepticism in Scotland

Have you read the polling data for this? Telegraph don't actually make it clear but pull a Eurosceptic number of over 60% in Scotland with no explanation.

Where is comes from is the ScotCen poll has 25% of Scots want to leave the EU (that's down from the EU ref, by the way).  42% want a reduction in powers.

For what it's worth that's not a change either - there was a survey in 2015/16 by NatCen as well and I think it used similar measures and declared around 2/3rds were Eurosceptic in Scotland by lumping together leavers and those who wanted less EU powers or reform.  Despite that, we know where support for the EU lies in Scotland as almost 2/3rds voted to remain - not leave - It's pretty poor journalism (as expected from the telegraph tbf ) trying to pitch this as some seismic change in Scotland in line with rUK views, it's little to no change.

To add to all that, EEA or EFTA membership was always the likely option for an iScotland at least in the short term - it'd also allow an iScotland to have it's own relationship.with rUK if the UK doesn't have access to single market.

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, kipper64 said:

 

For what it's worth that's not a change either - there was a survey in 2015/16 by NatCen as well and I think it used similar measures and declared around 2/3rds were Eurosceptic in Scotland by lumping together leavers and those who wanted less EU powers or reform.  Despite that, we know where support for the EU lies in Scotland as almost 2/3rds voted to remain - not leave - It's pretty poor journalism (as expected from the telegraph tbf ) trying to pitch this as some seismic change in Scotland in line with rUK views, it's little to no change.

My experience of politicians or political journalists of all sides is they care little for polling methodology, but will still happily promote any poll that a supports their view. 

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

 

Can't believe how bad things have got in the space of an afternoon.

Anyone would think that you were just picking numbers out the sky and applying them to an unknown point in the future.

I can't believe that after 3+_ years of having it explained to you many many many times, you still don't grasp that there's the whole deficit and there's the amount of fiscal transfer from the UK.

You'd have to be really fucking thick - just about brain dead - to have not understood it by now.

 

10 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Of course that would be a little silly.

I think a hard road will lie ahead for an Indy Scotland but I don't imagine we will be returning to the caves lol

But you still won't say where at least £9bn of cuts will fall.

Perhaps you'll shut down the Scottish NHS? That'd almost cover the money Scotland doesn't have.

[lost]

11 minutes ago, kipper64 said:

Have you read the polling data for this? Telegraph don't actually make it clear but pull a Eurosceptic number of over 60% in Scotland with no explanation.

Where is comes from is the ScotCen poll has 25% of Scots want to leave the EU (that's down from the EU ref, by the way).  42% want a reduction in powers.

For what it's worth that's not a change either - there was a survey in 2015/16 by NatCen as well and I think it used similar measures and declared around 2/3rds were Eurosceptic in Scotland by lumping together leavers and those who wanted less EU powers or reform.  Despite that, we know where support for the EU lies in Scotland as almost 2/3rds voted to remain - not leave - It's pretty poor journalism (as expected from the telegraph tbf ) trying to pitch this as some seismic change in Scotland in line with rUK views, it's little to no change.

To add to all that, EEA or EFTA membership was always the likely option for an iScotland at least in the short term - it'd also allow an iScotland to have it's own relationship.with rUK if the UK doesn't have access to single market.

It reads to me more around the senior Snp person stating this is the case. So it's not the telegraph believing the poll it's the SNP

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

I like that blog. Its the one that shows Scotland's onshore deficit (which I think we can all agree is what matters) decreasing by £1bn+ per year for the past 6 years. the only way is up.

Have the tories been cutting UK spending and making the whole-UK deficit fall, or not?

Has the whole-UK deficit been falling faster than the Scottish deficit, or not?

Is the deficit gap maintained by the Barnett money or not?

Will the deficit gap reduce without the Barnet money being stopped?

The answers to these questions expose your belief that the deficit gap will disappear in the next few years as laughable.

 

9 hours ago, LJS said:

Like Neil, Chokka sets great store by the "deficit gap" a figure which will be entirely meaningless once Scotland is independent. 

The deficit and deficit gap is caused by spending more than is raised in revenues.

It only becomes meaningless once you tell us what spending is being cut to make the over-spend go away.

You never do, and post meaningless bollocks like this to deflect from the truth, to try and con your fellow Scotsmen with a lie.

I guess deception that would lead your country to disaster is part of the 'better' that Scotland is? 

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, LJS said:

Barnett always seemed to me to be a bit of a bribe for Scotland while Thatcher pissed North sea oil revenue up the wall to pay for the destruction of heavy industry & the unions while it could have made Scotland the Kuwait of the North.

Meanwhile in the mad panic that gripped Better Together in the last days of the last indyref, senior UK politicians fell over each other to outdo each other in their promises that Barnett would be protected. 

Unsurprisingly the SNP have held them to this bribe.

Like Comfy, i sincerely hope that we will release you from this terrible burden & allow your government to redistribute this money to the Welsh and the poor.

 

Like comfy, you demanded every penny - for yourself, and not for 'the yoons'.

Because without every penny of that £9Bn Barnett money, the SNP would have to make 15% cuts in spending.

The same cuts you want them to have to make via indy - which will make that money disappear.

Are you going to tell us what's going to be cut? Perhaps close down all of Scotland's schools & unis? That would almost save that £9bn of excess spending.

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, LJS said:

I can find nothing at all that suggests Scotland in any form has attempted to have any influence at all on how much money Walesa should get. I would suggest the responsibility for the amount of  money wales gets lies fair & square with Westminster. 

Westminster can only spend the money available to it.

If Westminster gives Wales more without the place that claims itself as 'the richest part of the UK' giving up some money, you're saying that money to England should be cut.

So England gets a cut, Wales gets more, and Scotland - 'the richest part of the UK' - gives up nothing.

That's very generous and non-selfish of you, LJS. Scotland truly has different ideas.

Edited March 15, 2017 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

Watching Newsnight. I'm not one who spends too much time obsessing about BBC bias ( although I do think they have questions to answer)

So they open with a piece on Indyref 2. let's start with some talking heads from politicians...

in the Red White & Blue Corner: Lord George Foulkes (labour - hates the snp), Theresa Villiers (Tory - guess she's not too keen on the SNP) Alistair Carmichael (LibDem, really really really hates the SNP - so much he lied to try and frame the first minister)

Well. in the Blue & White Corner we'll be expecting a few pro indy folk on to balance this. Here's the first one.. It's our old favourite Alex Salmond - well he's a bit divisive - I mean we've all made our mind up about Eck but he is definitely pro indy & there will be someone else along soon... oh.. no there won't ... it's Eck   & that's it 

In fairness Alec did get 2 soundbites but then so  did George Foulkes. so 3-1 to the union (or 4-2 if you count the double interventions)

Well it's not looking too balanced so far But wait a minute ... we're off to Glasgow - the famous Yes City and we're off to a pub to meet the public - that'll redress the balance.

We speak to five people in what I think is probably the wonderful Horseshoe Bar in Dury Street - highly recommended for anyone visiting Glasgow & seeking refuge from the Cybernat death squads that relentlessly roam the streets seeking elderly no voters to cull.

Astonishingly we manage to fine 3 clearly opposed to Indy, one opposed to having a referendum & one lukewarm pro-indy who doesn't think we should have a referendum now.

Truly astonishing from the BBC we talk to a total of 9 people. One of them is clearly in favour of Independence and he is Alec Salmond. 

We did go on to a studio discussion between 1 (one ) SNP mp & 1 (one) Tory mp. but by then the damage wa swell and truly done.

I'm sure this is available on iPlayer if anyone wants to check.. 

Anyone care to defend this?

 

 

You posted a link to Vonny's article earlier.

I suggest you have a read of the comments underneath, which show a huge number of Scots leaning away from wanting ref for all sorts of different reasons, much like was found in that pub.

It might not be all opinions, but the opinions Newsnight found seem to be the genuine opinions of an awful lots of Scots.

Never mind, eh?

 

 

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

is that fairer? I think that is a bit of an assumption. Even Neil accepts that it costs more to deliver services in Scotland because of geography. I'm sure I heard something in Indyref1 about pooling and sharing. In terms of how wealth is distributed in the UK, I'm not sure Scotland is the first place you should be looking for money to redistribute to the welsh, We certainly regularly vote for people who are more into redistribution than folk down your way.  

It costs more to deliver services to Scotland (and to Wales).

The purpose of the Barnett 'fiscal transfers' is to ensure a fair access to govt services in all parts of the UK.  

When one of the parts getting those fiscal transfers claims itself as 'the richest part of the UK' - as Sturgeon has claimed on many occasions (it even used to be on the SNP website) - without dispute from it's citizens, the fiscal transfers to that part are clearly exceeding the purpose of those fiscal transfers, and the fiscal transfers to that location should be reduced and that money spent in the places that are under the average - such as Wales, or the NE (both of which have greater poverty than Scotland.).

Care to say if any of that is wrong?

Now, what part do you think that you, comfy and Sturgeon played in ensuring none of that could happen, by demanding (as you did) not a penny was reduced of the money Scotland has been getting?

 

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

you didn't. whether you believe them or not, the SNP stand on the basis of fairness & combating poverty. There is a case to be made about how genuine this is but there is no doubt about what people thought were voting for. 

you want to talk about how people down your way vote?

Only in Scotland.

If poverty is elsewhere they don't give a fuck, and nor do you.

Because when it was put to you that the money you were demanding for Scotland should go to poorer Wales, you kept on demanding that it kept going to Scotland.

You are what you do, and what you did was the very opposite of fairness and combatting poverty. It was about satisfying Scottish greed.

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, brandycoke said:

do the "Once in a generation" one too, that'll have them rolling in the aisles.

When snippers are taunted with 'the once in a generation thing', the normal response is to lie about it - and no other snippers never call out the lie.

The most usual lie is that Salmond said it in an off-the-cuff way as a personal opinion just the once, and the SNP cannot be held to it.
(and sometimes it's also claimed that Sturgeon has never said it).

The truth is:-

1. Salmond said it many times (just check youtube)

2. Sturgeon said it many times (just check youtube).

3. it's stated explicitly within the Scottish Govt's 2014 White Paper for Independence.

The 'personal opinion' lie has even been trotted out in this thread, a long time ago. Comfy and LJS are a little wiser about repeating that myth now.

Sadly, they still do the myths. See  not far above for my personal current favourite: "the 'deficit gap' a figure which will be entirely meaningless once Scotland is independent" 

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, kipper64 said:

To add to all that, EEA or EFTA membership was always the likely option for an iScotland at least in the short term - it'd also allow an iScotland to have it's own relationship.with rUK if the UK doesn't have access to single market.

The new myth.

The UK's economy is the size of 18 EU members.

Do you really think the EU is going to allow rUK free trade with the EU via the back-door of an un-bordered iScotland that's in the EEA/EFTA?

And you do know that EU rules say that border states have to operate a people & goods secure border, don't you?

The only way there'll be no border between rUK and iScotland will be if rUK has a free trade deal of some sort with the EU anyway, in which case there's absolutely no reason for Scotland to be indy for its own EU trade access.

It really is the case that Scotland will be choosing free access to one or other of the rUK or EU - and where rUK is 4.5 times the size - or it will be choosing no meaningful trade difference at all (and so make indy for trade access pointless).

[LJS]

12 hours ago, LJS said:

Neil, may I suggest when Comfy who would run the Dalai Llama close for "The Most  Reasonable man in the World" award most years, gets a bit stroppy, it might be time to take notice.

It would be really nice to hear a range of views aired on here. For that to happen requires that we all respect each others' views & opinions. 

Morning Neil.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to so many of my posts. I don't have a great deal of time just now, so apologies for not replying to yours yet, although in fairness, you haven't really said anything new in any of them.

I wonder if you could find time to reply to the post above, which you chose to ignore.

I await your comments with interest.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, LJS said:

Morning Neil.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to so many of my posts. I don't have a great deal of time just now, so apologies for not replying to yours yet, although in fairness, you haven't really said anything new in any of them.

I wonder if you could find time to reply to the post above, which you chose to ignore.

I await your comments with interest.

You make a post saying you want other opinions in here, and then complain that I'm not smothering other opinions by replying to something there's no need to make a reply to.

Yep, your normal sense.

[eFestivals]

PS: if all you're really looking for is a meaningless diversion from discussing the facts of indy, you're not going to get it.

Ask me a question about indy, and you'll get the facts back. Make an idiot post about indy, and you'll get the facts back.

Do your normal distraction thing because the facts are too awkward for you to address? I'll just laugh at how vacuous the whole indy thing is. 

 

 

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

PS: if all you're really looking for is a meaningless diversion from discussing the facts of indy, you're not going to get it.

Ask me a question about indy, and you'll get the facts back. Make an idiot post about indy, and you'll get the facts back.

Do your normal distraction thing because the facts are too awkward for you to address? I'll just laugh at how vacuous the whole indy thing is. 

 

 

My post wasn't about indy, it was about having an adult debate where we can disagree without calling each other liars and morons.