Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
bullies180 said:
If salmond said after a yes vote everyones farts would smell of roses they would belive it and anyone who sayes otherwise is a dirty tory traitorpcvdriver said:
Only if population density gets to be as out of control, through lack of proper planning as S E England.
It is a stated aim of the SNP to have unlimited immigrationIt is also stated that to vote YES means we will end the bedroom tax and reverse all benefits cuts
It is also stated that scotland has zero growth due to tory policies
Meanwhile it is stated that a tory majority government in england will slash benefits and throw them out of their houses
So what is to stop everyone in england who is on benefits moving on mass into the workers paradise that is Scotland and going straight onto benefits?
McWigglebum4th said:
bullies180 said:
If salmond said after a yes vote everyones farts would smell of roses they would belive it and anyone who sayes otherwise is a dirty tory traitor
ks (Salmond) is running his mouth off again about what's in the UK's "best interests". I'm sick of being told what's in my interests by that tt.Maths was clearly never his strong point.
Alfa numeric said:
What he's suggesting means that, for all intents and purposes, Scotland would become a one party state. And that one party would be Labour.
That can't be seen as a good thing, no matter what your political leanings are.
I guess you must have missed my numerous posts about a resurgence of the fortunes of the Tories North of the border, post independence. That can't be seen as a good thing, no matter what your political leanings are.
It would have to go down in the annals of history as another ironic twist for the Tories in Scotland, you know currently having just the one MP from a Scottish constituency in Westminster - they couldn't really do much worse.
The same thing happened (The Tories complaining loud(ly/est) at the idea of Holyrood in the first place, only to have their fortunes revived at the ballot box.
A strong opposition is necessary, as it keeps those in power honest (well as honest as we can expect), so to claim I favour a one-party state is about as wide of the mark as you can get.
Isn’t the next election in Scotland 18 months after the referendum? Do you honestly think that the Consevatives could become a major player in that time? The yes campaign are pedalling a message of “vote yes and no more Tories” so they don’t seem to think that it’s a possibility.
Which leaves you with two parties to choose from- the SNP and Labour. And according to you the SNP will disappear.
Which leaves you with two parties to choose from- the SNP and Labour. And according to you the SNP will disappear.
pcvdriver said:
I guess you must have missed my numerous posts about a resurgence of the fortunes of the Tories North of the border, post independence.
It would have to go down in the annals of history as another ironic twist for the Tories in Scotland, you know currently having just the one MP from a Scottish constituency in Westminster - they couldn't really do much worse.
The same thing happened (The Tories complaining loud(ly/est) at the idea of Holyrood in the first place, only to have their fortunes revived at the ballot box.
A strong opposition is necessary, as it keeps those in power honest (well as honest as we can expect), so to claim I favour a one-party state is about as wide of the mark as you can get.
All your Tory bashing crap is just deflection away from the important stuff. It would have to go down in the annals of history as another ironic twist for the Tories in Scotland, you know currently having just the one MP from a Scottish constituency in Westminster - they couldn't really do much worse.
The same thing happened (The Tories complaining loud(ly/est) at the idea of Holyrood in the first place, only to have their fortunes revived at the ballot box.
A strong opposition is necessary, as it keeps those in power honest (well as honest as we can expect), so to claim I favour a one-party state is about as wide of the mark as you can get.
Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
No rants, just facts will do.
Neonblau said:
All your Tory bashing crap is just deflection away from the important stuff.
Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
No rants, just facts will do.
What Tory bashing? I was merely pointing out that since Holyrood - their fortunes have improved. What's negative about that?Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
No rants, just facts will do.
mpire said:
No ... why should the whole country ( if for the sake of argument,
we consider Scotland to be a country )
be subjected to an indeterminate economic future .. aka suffer. Simply to negate the
platform that the SNP is putting forward ?
A resounding " No " will marginalise the SNP just as effectively, and it's
left leaning MP's would still be able to go on and join the centre left
party of choice .... would they not ?
Hard of thinking .... you have a monopoly on rational thought I suppose ?
If so, I'd reconsider my pov on unrestricted immigration that you endorse on here ...
if I were you.
A resounding No would mean the SNP keep going.... not vice versa.we consider Scotland to be a country )
be subjected to an indeterminate economic future .. aka suffer. Simply to negate the
platform that the SNP is putting forward ?
A resounding " No " will marginalise the SNP just as effectively, and it's
left leaning MP's would still be able to go on and join the centre left
party of choice .... would they not ?
Hard of thinking .... you have a monopoly on rational thought I suppose ?
If so, I'd reconsider my pov on unrestricted immigration that you endorse on here ...
if I were you.
Alfa numeric said:
Isn’t the next election in Scotland 18 months after the referendum? Do you honestly think that the Consevatives could become a major player in that time? The yes campaign are pedalling a message of “vote yes and no more Tories” so they don’t seem to think that it’s a possibility.
Which leaves you with two parties to choose from- the SNP and Labour. And according to you the SNP will disappear.
Are you saying that the Tories are no longer a major force in Scottish politics? Do you think the Greens have more pulling power at the ballot box currently? Which leaves you with two parties to choose from- the SNP and Labour. And according to you the SNP will disappear.
barryrs said:
I guess its possible PVC.
After all with a voter turnout average of 53% the SNP only achieved a 19.9% approval compared to a conservative result of 16.7% according to wiki.
Still it would appear they both have a long way to go in challenging Labour.
Just as an aside - I'm not into PVC....it squelches too much After all with a voter turnout average of 53% the SNP only achieved a 19.9% approval compared to a conservative result of 16.7% according to wiki.
Still it would appear they both have a long way to go in challenging Labour.
pcvdriver said:
Neonblau said:
All your Tory bashing crap is just deflection away from the important stuff.
Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
No rants, just facts will do.
What Tory bashing? I was merely pointing out that since Holyrood - their fortunes have improved. What's negative about that?Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
No rants, just facts will do.
Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.
pcvdriver said:
Are you saying that the Tories are no longer a major force in Scottish politics? Do you think the Greens have more pulling power at the ballot box currently?
The Greens in Scotland vote with the SNP its part of what supports there slim majority. So yes they have influence.The SNP will not disappear and really why should it as they are an alternative to labour or they would have you believe that. After all why say what you will do in power if you only have one aim.
Reality check though, No CU, No EU membershi, No shared defence procurment (why would you bother as it would be a cost to the rUK and a benefit to Scotland), border restriction , Duty on Scottish goods through out the whole of the EU, loss of goverment jobs, loss of Ship Building contracts.
To balance it out though a more scottish focused benefits system, a scottish currency and thus irate policy, a scottish defence committe (no more wars you don't agree with), a chance to stand on your own to feet as a nation rather than be sidelined by larger parts of the union, nuclear free.
So many benefits but also a few harsh realitys that aren't just bluster and reson we know this is the general election will see people in the rUK asking there MPs to give rUK the best deal rather than a fair deal.
pcvdriver said:
mpire said:
No ... why should the whole country ( if for the sake of argument,
we consider Scotland to be a country )
be subjected to an indeterminate economic future .. aka suffer. Simply to negate the
platform that the SNP is putting forward ?
A resounding " No " will marginalise the SNP just as effectively, and it's
left leaning MP's would still be able to go on and join the centre left
party of choice .... would they not ?
Hard of thinking .... you have a monopoly on rational thought I suppose ?
If so, I'd reconsider my pov on unrestricted immigration that you endorse on here ...
if I were you.
A resounding No would mean the SNP keep going.... not vice versa.we consider Scotland to be a country )
be subjected to an indeterminate economic future .. aka suffer. Simply to negate the
platform that the SNP is putting forward ?
A resounding " No " will marginalise the SNP just as effectively, and it's
left leaning MP's would still be able to go on and join the centre left
party of choice .... would they not ?
Hard of thinking .... you have a monopoly on rational thought I suppose ?
If so, I'd reconsider my pov on unrestricted immigration that you endorse on here ...
if I were you.
at the moment ...imho.
pcvdriver said:
McWigglebum4th said:
If salmond said after a yes vote everyones farts would smell of roses they would belive it and anyone who sayes otherwise is a dirty tory traitor
Why are you getting bent out of shape when someone criticises the Tory Party? I thought you were a kipper anyway..... What bothers me as the YES campaign is so far to the left that being called a tory is the ultimate insult
Nuclear Biscuit said:
Who then funds the pensions of these immigrants when they reach retirement? Ever increasing numbers of immigrants? Exponential population growth to support a ponzi scheme is madness.
I keep seeing this mentioned (more people in at the start to pay for those at the end) and thought it sounded like a ponzi myself. Can PCVdriver please explain how this can continue in perpetuity?iphonedyou said:
Nuclear Biscuit said:
Who then funds the pensions of these immigrants when they reach retirement? Ever increasing numbers of immigrants? Exponential population growth to support a ponzi scheme is madness.
I keep seeing this mentioned (more people in at the start to pay for those at the end) and thought it sounded like a ponzi myself. Can PCVdriver please explain how this can continue in perpetuity?They will drop dead before pension age
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff