The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

There you go. It's racist not to want burden students with massive tuition fees.

it's racist when a govt decides to penalise just one country on just the basis of that country being that country and that govt trying to raise up some hatred for that country.

What of that are you having difficulties about what the govt of your country is doing?

[viberunner]

it's racist when a govt decides to penalise just one country on just the basis of that country being that country and that govt trying to raise up some hatred for that country.

It didn't.

Scotland - wisely - did not want to implement the English-style tuition fees. They didn't want to let it apply to any other EU nation either, i.e. a national policy for the nation, but the EU ruled they must let other EU states have the same break, but that break did not apply to England due to the fact it is internal within an EU country

I, who am English, have benefited from the lack of tuition fees in my study in Glasgow. You have to be a resident for 3 years, which I was. But there is nothing racial about this, as you well know, this is about national policies within the EU legal framework.

PS, one benefit of Independence with Scotland in the EU is the English will have a legal right to study in Scotland without tuition fees.

[LJS]

it's racist when a govt decides to penalise just one country on just the basis of that country being that country and that govt trying to raise up some hatred for that country.

What of that are you having difficulties about what the govt of your country is doing?

Racism is a scourge & something I detest ...it is not a word to be bandied about in order to try and make some cheap political point. As viberunner has clearly shown, whatever this policy is, it is not racist.

You can argue it is unfair but it is not racist.

There is absolutely no need to drag the debate down to this level.

[LJS]

P.s. I have no idea where you get this "hatred" from.

[eFestivals]

But there is nothing racial about this, as you well know, this is about national policies within the EU legal framework.

I see you know nothing about the UK legal definition of racism.

PS, one benefit of Independence with Scotland in the EU is the English will have a legal right to study in Scotland without tuition fees.

absolutely right.

Tho your glorious leader has said differently, and your glorious leader has not put aside any money in his independence plans to pay for what he'll have to do by law - thus making his independence financial plans a crock of lying shit designed to con people like you.

[eFestivals]

You can argue it is unfair but it is not racist.

I refer you to your country's own racism laws.

Now, want to repeat your claim against the facts in law?

[eFestivals]

P.s. I have no idea where you get this "hatred" from.

Every jot of what Alex does is about creating divisions between Scotland and the rest of the UK.

(You know, like Alex increasing the poverty levels in Scotland, the richest part of the UK via the Barnet Formula, so he can blame the English for it)

If you've not noticed you've noticed nothing.

But we already know that. You've fallen for the lie that is the first line of the constitution, a constitution that Alex promised hand-on-heart - lied about - that he'd not ever write.

And while promising that he'd never write it, he just suddenly had a completed document to hand that he produced in an instant, whereby he steals your country from the people with deception.

Mind you, if it's as easy to steal as it's being - without a single whisper of protest - then it deserves to get stolen.

Wake up, FFS. It's one thing voting yes, it's another thing entirely to allow Alex the free pass yes-ers have given him.

Edited July 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[russycarps]

Sturgeon making a twat of herself again I see

[viberunner]

I see you know nothing about the UK legal definition of racism.

If it was illegal under the 2010 Equality Act, which replaced all previous discrimination legislation, then the courts would have found in your favour.

They. Have. Not.

[eFestivals]

If it was illegal under the 2010 Equality Act, which replaced all previous discrimination legislation, then the courts would have found in your favour.

They. Have. Not.

Discrimination on the basis of nationality as well as ethnicity is what is classed as racist in UK law.

Care to tell me how it's not discrimination on the basis of nationality?

------

But you just concentrate on telling me how wrong I am, while Alex walks away with your country with the lies you swallow.

He says "the people are sovereign". Care to tell me how you're any more sovereign within the constitution he's offered you than you already are within the constitution-less UK?

He also said he wouldn't write your constituuition for you, but suddenly, without a word in advance, he presents you with a completed document, so that he's given total power (and not you). And with that document he takes all sovereignty from you.

But Alex is perfect, and never a liar. If he was you smart yes-ers would spot the lies, wouldn't you?

Meanwhile, he increases poverty in Scotland despite having 20% more to spend on every individual than anywhere else within the UK has (where poverty has fallen)

Edited July 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[viberunner]

I ask you why then the tuition fees policy is not subject to sanction within a UK court.

That's right... because it's not racist, just like how a student from China is not typically allowed to settle here after work, but a student from France is.

Your slur of racism reminds me of the Zionists who, having failed at any attempt to win an argument, scream "anti-Semite" at anyone who can be bothered to listen.

[eFestivals]

I ask you why then the tuition fees policy is not subject to sanction within a UK court.

That's right... because it's not racist, just like how a student from China is not typically allowed to settle here after work, but a student from France is.

Your slur of racism reminds me of the Zionists who, having failed at any attempt to win an argument, scream "anti-Semite" at anyone who can be bothered to listen.

And you and everyone else in Scotland would be cool with it and think nothing wrong if English uni's started charging just Scottish students double, yeah?

You wouldn't think that was a deliberate anti-Scottish policy, would you?

The whole of the indy campaign is about how horrible nasty England is to those with a big victim complex, but if people from Scotland were legally penalised in England in the same manner all Scots would think it was perfectly fair.

Edited July 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Meanwhile.... Alex has already stolen your independence from you.

It's only the political class who get their (said in the obligatory Aussie accent) "freeeeeedooooommmmmm" in Scotland, the people can fuck off.

Alex has said so, and you never question Alex.

[kaosmark2]

[viberunner]

And you and everyone else in Scotland would be cool with it and think nothing wrong if English uni's started charging just Scottish students double, yeah?

You wouldn't think that was a deliberate anti-Scottish policy, would you?

The policy is about anti-Englishness, it's based on fact if English students could dodge the tuition fees by going to Scotland then Scottish universities would be flooded and over-run by English students. We're talking about a nation of 4 million against a nation of 50-something million.

That's not a fair burden, hence the policy.

[eFestivals]

The policy is about anti-Englishness, it's based on fact if English students could dodge the tuition fees by going to Scotland then Scottish universities would be flooded and over-run by English students. We're talking about a nation of 4 million against a nation of 50-something million.

That's not a fair burden, hence the policy.

The Barnet Formula that gives Scotland too much money so that it can afford to do its discrimatory policies isn't a fair burden onto the poor of England either, tho that doesn't seem to bother you.

[viberunner]

BP, the CBI,

The Barnet Formula that gives Scotland too much money so that it can afford to do its discrimatory policies isn't a fair burden onto the poor of England either, tho that doesn't seem to bother you.

In return you got Scotland's natural resources. And instead of investing them, like Norway did, you pissed them away giving billionaires in the City of London endless tax breaks.

The Barnett Formula, which I know how to spell correctly, is a penny-to-the-dollar deal.

[eFestivals]

In return you got Scotland's natural resources.

actually, not!

Scotland is £15Bn down in all of the years since 1980 on the SG's own numbers. You know, really the 'subsidy junkies' that some people insultingly call you (and you'll note I never have).

But ignoring that part, why do you think that oil so far extracted classes as Scotland's? This country is still the UK, remember? Where we share and share alike .... until Scotland demands it all for itself like any good tory screaming "it's mine, it's all mine".

And that's a left-leaning region, so i'm told.

And instead of investing them, like Norway did, you pissed them away giving billionaires in the City of London endless tax breaks.

Not me.

And yes, one version of reality says it was pissed up the wall, one I mostly subscribe to.

Yet if life were really as simple as you want to present it as we'd all be millionaires already, Rodney. ... Rodney you plonker.

The Barnett Formula, which I know how to spell correctly, is a penny-to-the-dollar deal.

Is a deal which gives Scotland too much, so that its able to afford policies that UK money pays for but the UK can't afford (and to be clear: neither can Scotland).

Yes, I know that Scotland contributes around the UK average per-person in tax revenue, but what Scotland contributes in tax revenue is hugely short of what it spends right now.

Edited July 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[kaosmark2]

you pissed them away giving billionaires in the City of London endless tax breaks.

Wrong.

Either you're being racist by lumping all English together with Westminster policies, you're being delusional by pretending that Scotland hasn't had any part of involvement in electing governments, or you're suggesting Neil personally did that.

My bet is on the first two, which still makes you a c**t.

[eFestivals]

Wrong.

Either you're being racist by lumping all English together with Westminster policies, you're being delusional by pretending that Scotland hasn't had any part of involvement in electing governments, or you're suggesting Neil personally did that.

My bet is on the first two, which still makes you a c**t.

Scotland had a very big part in electing Thatcher, but Scotland likes to pretend that it didn't.

[kaosmark2]

Scotland had a very big part in electing Thatcher, but Scotland likes to pretend that it didn't.

I've noticed. A lot of what's been said here is suggesting that the Scottish have no say whatsoever in the outcome of general elections, and are forced to be a subservient nation with no rights or influence compared to the bullying English, when they have just as much right and impact as either of us do.

[eFestivals]

I've noticed. A lot of what's been said here is suggesting that the Scottish have no say whatsoever in the outcome of general elections, and are forced to be a subservient nation with no rights or influence compared to the bullying English, when they have just as much right and impact as either of us do.

exactly right. The whole debate is based within a word scam.

Regardless of what individual Scots might like to think, there is no right for any region of the UK to get a govt it has voted for. The electoral area is the whole of the UK and for nothing else.

By changing "a region of the UK" into "the country of Scotland" and then repeating that endlessly, people have become convinced that the region known as Scotland should have special rights.

Yorkshire has a greater regional identity than Scotland does, and it could make all of the same bedroom republic claims as Scotland does. And yet it doesn't - because it's not parochial, and can see the bigger picture. And most importantly hasn't had someone playing an effective game of hate-thy-neighbour for decades.

Just because Salmond might be good at winning that game doesn't mean that you should follow the winner, not when the game is to his rules of lies and deception.

Edited July 4, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Wrong.

Either you're being racist by lumping all English together with Westminster policies, you're being delusional by pretending that Scotland hasn't had any part of involvement in electing governments, or you're suggesting Neil personally did that.

My bet is on the first two, which still makes you a c**t.

Gosh, what a helpful & constructive post.

[LJS]

Scotland had a very big part in electing Thatcher, but Scotland likes to pretend that it didn't.

yeah massive part...

Labour 44 seats 41.6% of vote

Conservative 22 seats 31.4% of vote

By your definition, I have a massive part too !!!!

Edited July 4, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

exactly right. The whole debate is based within a word scam.

Regardless of what individual Scots might like to think, there is no right for any region of the UK to get a govt it has voted for. The electoral area is the whole of the UK and for nothing else.

By changing "a region of the UK" into "the country of Scotland" and then repeating that endlessly, people have become convinced that the region known as Scotland should have special rights.

Yorkshire has a greater regional identity than Scotland does, and it could make all of the same bedroom republic claims as Scotland does. And yet it doesn't - because it's not parochial, and can see the bigger picture. And most importantly hasn't had someone playing an effective game of hate-thy-neighbour for decades.

Just because Salmond might be good at winning that game doesn't mean that you should follow the winner, not when the game is to his rules of lies and deception.

Absolutely correct the debate is based upon a word scam. & the word is "region"

Scotland is not a region of the UK

Scotland is a nation!

end of!

the Treaty of Union is not a Treaty between "regions". it is a treaty between nations. And I believe it does not remove nationhood from Scotland. so when & how exactly did our nationhood disappear?

And as for your constant repeating of the bedroom republic shite, no one on here has ever complained they don't get the government they individually vote for, we complain that collectively as a Nation we do not get the government we vote for .

You consistently ignore this & repeatedly try to lure us into Neil's bedroom.

Yet another simplistic argument to avoid addressing the issues. Like shouting racism, trying to make out it is all a vote for St Alex, like treating it as a general election where we are voting for policies.

You have some valid points - around currency & financial uncertainty. for example. But you undermine your own arguments, in the same way as BT do, by you scattergun & frequently illogical attacks on every argument for independence.