Who is bogging off after the YES vote?

Who is bogging off after the YES vote?

Author
Discussion

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
AC43 said:
Anyway, glad the latter are getting the backlash they deserve. Banging on and on and on about their rights has now caused a backlash through the rest of the UK. Headline in the Telegraph page 4 is "Home Rule for England".
This is what I have trouble comprehending, I would say the majority of ordinary English residents would rather cut Scotland loose and get on with their own thing. Why has the current government spent so much time and effort trying to keep the union? What's in it for them?

GoneAnon

1,703 posts

151 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
If in doubt about a motive, always follow the money....

johnxjsc1985

15,948 posts

163 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
This is what I have trouble comprehending, I would say the majority of ordinary English residents would rather cut Scotland loose and get on with their own thing. Why has the current government spent so much time and effort trying to keep the union? What's in it for them?
I think Dave did not want to be the PM who broke up the Union and I think Ed didn't want to lose 40 odd MP's and I think Nick Clegg had a free date in his diary. Politicians only do stuff for themselves and their careers. self serving parasites all of them

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
johnxjsc1985 said:
I think Dave did not want to be the PM who broke up the Union and I think Ed didn't want to lose 40 odd MP's and I think Nick Clegg had a free date in his diary. Politicians only do stuff for themselves and their careers. self serving parasites all of them
So, why are the media portraying Scotland as a burden but the Government want to keep them? I've been in the north of England for the last week and as a resident of Scotland I've been offended by some of the medias portrayal of Scotlands residents. If England genuinely feels that way, why aren't they asking the government why they're trying to keep this burden on their economy?

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Sunday 21st September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
NoNeed said:
The Barnet formula can't survive as other areas of the union now want the same.
Really, do they not know that London and the South East get more than Scotland?
How does that help Bradford? Swansea? Belfast?


The formula will go as the winner of the 2015 general election will be the party that has the balls to stand up for the whole group and not the few, and if that means taking a tough line with the Scots so be it.

Farage is already winning even more points with this, the big three can't allow that.

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Sunday 21st September 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
How does that help Bradford? Swansea? Belfast?


The formula will go as the winner of the 2015 general election will be the party that has the balls to stand up for the whole group and not the few, and if that means taking a tough line with the Scots so be it.

Farage is already winning even more points with this, the big three can't allow that.
My point was, if theses 2 areas hold enough people to vote the current government in.........what will change?

AC43

11,436 posts

207 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
So, why are the media portraying Scotland as a burden but the Government want to keep them? I've been in the north of England for the last week and as a resident of Scotland I've been offended by some of the medias portrayal of Scotlands residents. If England genuinely feels that way, why aren't they asking the government why they're trying to keep this burden on their economy?
Scotland gets more benefits per head than England, Wales or Northern Ireland to to the tune of £1600k per person per annum.

BUT the markets like the idea of a unified UK. As soon as it looked like Scotland might go, money was flooding out of UK equities and the credit agencies were planning to downgrade the UK from the current AAA rating. The uncertainly over what happens to any govt contracts over the next two years, how national bodies are carved up (railways? defence?), how many corporations would be moving out of Scotland etc, etc would have caused huge problems to the rest of the UK for the next two years. Markets hate uncertainty and risk and we'd have had tons of both.

Eventually the rest of the UK would recover I suppose (whilst Scotland got poorer and poorer) but the short term hit would have been substantial and most unwelcome.

So for me, anyway, and the way I see the world the No vote was a good thing.

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
My point was, if theses 2 areas hold enough people to vote the current government in.........what will change?
I doubt that an election could be decided by just those two groups.

StescoG66

2,108 posts

142 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
AC43 said:
cat220 said:
dalzo said:
cat220 said:
Someone has now been stabbed in Buchanan street, these people burning saltires and signing sectarian songs are there to cause trouble, nothing else. It you think they're there to party then you're deluded! Absolute scum...
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=102024...
I'll leave the heavier stuff for you to find if you so wish.
What an impression to give with the world watching.

Edited by cat220 on Friday 19th September 23:52
I'm not going to argue who was the baddest out of the two, however if you think it's only one side to blame you are extremely naive. I've never been so embarrassed to be scottish in my whole life,not just by the clowns in George square but the reactions on social media as well.
I'm not putting forward an argument of who is the "baddest of the two" I'm only highlighting what was happening in the city centre last night. I came back from working in Edinburgh last night into Queen street station making my way over to Central station. It was obvious the element above were out to cause trouble and provoke people. Terrible atmosphere, this was at a time when people were finishing work and people in town shopping. By the sounds of it things just deteriorated as the evening past. I totally agree with you re being embarrassed to be Scottish, that was a first for me in my lifetime. A 'scotsman' burning a satire ffs that has to be an all time low! What would they be like if it had been a Yes vote, we'd have another Northern Ireland on our hands. Sad state of affairs.
Some of the funniest people I've ever met come from Glasgow. But unfortunately some of the most ignorant, bigotted and violent people I've met also come from there.
Anyway, glad the latter are getting the backlash they deserve. Banging on and on and on about their rights has now caused a backlash through the rest of the UK. Headline in the Telegraph page 4 is "Home Rule for England".
If the Glaswegian who glassed me in 1993 in reading this stick that RIGHT up your arse pal.
Firstly - after much soul searching I voted YES. However my first choice would have been autonomy within the UK, but this was not an option. When it was offered I personally thought it a bribe that would be reneged upon which further drove me to YES as it was closer to my ideal than NO. However NO it is so I'll get on with it, and hope that I am totally wrong in my opinion of the 'vow'.

Now on to the 'thorny' issue. I too am of the opinion that we have a very vocal 'brainless' section of the population whereby everything in their tiny, moronic minds revolves round religion and/or football. These cretins would have been the fly in the independence ointment alas. I overheard one particular amoeba chanting 'home rule is Rome rule......'. How the f*** did they work that out??? Equally similar mentality from the other side. We should give these asswipes no credence whatsoever, and they pose the biggest threat to civility in Scotland - independent or not. There is also a large section of what I term 'downtrodden and proud of it' who are every bit as toxic. We've all heard someone spit 'oh it's all right for you!'. We should pander to neither no longer........... However those in GENUINE need should have the safety net of social services.

Now - how's this for a suggestion people. Everyone is entitled to an education I am sure we agree. So one school for all. End of. No more segregation on supposedly religious grounds as bigots are bred not born. One school for all, anybody that doesn't like it goes private. Like it or lump it. I would reckon that alone would make a mammoth inroad into the bigotry problem within a generation. Moreover - think of the savings to the public coffers by not having to run and maintain as many schools. Win/Win situation in my eyes. Then if we want a wee bit of icing on that cake, put both sides of the old firm into compulsory liquidation and banish both to the history books. Another problem removed. We could -after all - do with the car parking spaces :-)

Alas the first of the above suggestions I will never see in my lifetime as there is nobody with either the gumption nor the brains to do it. Mores the pity.............

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
AC43 said:
Scotland gets more benefits per head than England, Wales or Northern Ireland to to the tune of £1600k per person per annum.
Not sure where you got your numbers? Barnett Formula Wiki
England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
AC43 said:
Scotland gets more benefits per head than England, Wales or Northern Ireland to to the tune of £1600k per person per annum.
Not sure where you got your numbers? Barnett Formula Wiki
England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385
So it's just England then that's being ripped off.

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
So it's just England then that's being ripped off.
Did you read the whole Wiki?

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
NoNeed said:
So it's just England then that's being ripped off.
Did you read the whole Wiki?
Did you paste the whole wiki?


If you want me to read the whole thing just ask, don't post a little taster.

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
Angelus said:
NoNeed said:
So it's just England then that's being ripped off.
Did you read the whole Wiki?
Did you paste the whole wiki?


If you want me to read the whole thing just ask, don't post a little taster.
Anyway I heard the Barnet himself wants the formula scrapped on a news item over the weekend.

Angelus

2,209 posts

163 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
Did you paste the whole wiki?


If you want me to read the whole thing just ask, don't post a little taster.
rofl

So back to my original question, if Scotland is such a burden then why area Westminster trying so hard to keep it? The Barnett formula isn't new, and not actually a big deal to England as it has 83% of the population. If they scrapped it, it would only a see a rise of £241 for England. you need to ask why it was introduced in the first place and why it isn't scrapped yet?

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
Angelus said:
rofl

So back to my original question, if Scotland is such a burden then why area Westminster trying so hard to keep it? The Barnett formula isn't new, and not actually a big deal to England as it has 83% of the population. If they scrapped it, it would only a see a rise of £241 for England. you need to ask why it was introduced in the first place and why it isn't scrapped yet?
Who said scotland was a burden?

All our leaders have said it is two good countries that compliment each other nicely creating a very successful union.


Unfortunately for those north of the border that had secured a good deal from this union a great number started shouting from the rooftops that they wanted more oh and more fairness. Now here we are today with the rest of the union asking why was that deal so good? and why don't we get the same? this isn't just finance either as it stretches to parliamentary representation and the west lothian question.


Now fairness is a topic for the other 60 million plus residents.

simoid

19,772 posts

157 months

Monday 22nd September 2014
quotequote all
One doesn't have to ask why it was introduced, one simply googles:

"The formula is named after Joel Barnett, who devised it in the late 1970s, while Chief Secretary to the Treasury as a short-term solution to minor Cabinet disputes in the runup to planned political devolution in 1979."

Short term solution that's been going for not years, but decades.