Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 6
Discussion
fluffnik said:
davepoth said:
Property is theft.
Property is theft.
Not always by any means, but claiming the Crown Estate as personal property would indeed be theft.Property is theft.
andymadmak said:
fluffnik said:
davepoth said:
Property is theft.
Property is theft.
Not always by any means, but claiming the Crown Estate as personal property would indeed be theft.Property is theft.
"The Crown Estate - FAQs
www.thecrownestate.co.uk › Our business
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne. But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch."
If we became a republic it would all return to the state and also whatever the RF are given every year does come from the taxpayer. Unquestionably.
fluffnik said:
Not always by any means, but claiming the Crown Estate as personal property would indeed be theft.
How do you figure that then? Google "Crown Estate" and see what the first link says."Property owned by the Sovereign of the United Kingdom "in right of the Crown" "
It's not owned by the state. Let's consider the 1837 Civil List Act, which appears to be the earliest Civil List law available online.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1837/2/pdfs/uk...
"Your Majesty placed unreservedly at their Disposal those Hereditary Revenues which were Transferred to the Public by Your Majesty's immediate Predecessors, "
(my emphasis)
It's not owned by the state.
So to sum up: It's not owned by the state.
REALIST123 said:
Flufnik's right:
"The Crown Estate - FAQs
www.thecrownestate.co.uk › Our business
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne. But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch."
If we became a republic it would all return to the state and also whatever the RF are given every year does come from the taxpayer. Unquestionably.
Let's go for the full quote, shall we?"The Crown Estate - FAQs
www.thecrownestate.co.uk › Our business
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne. But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch."
If we became a republic it would all return to the state and also whatever the RF are given every year does come from the taxpayer. Unquestionably.
The Crown Estate said:
Who owns The Crown Estate?
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne. But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch.
The Government also does not own The Crown Estate. It is managed by an independent organisation - established by statute - headed by a Board (also known as The Crown Estate Commissioners), and the surplus revenue from the estate is paid each year to the Treasury for the benefit of all UK taxpayers.
To explain further, one analogy that could be used is that The Crown Estate is the property equivalent of the Crown jewels - part of the national heritage and held by Her Majesty The Queen as sovereign, but not available for her private use.
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne. But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch.
The Government also does not own The Crown Estate. It is managed by an independent organisation - established by statute - headed by a Board (also known as The Crown Estate Commissioners), and the surplus revenue from the estate is paid each year to the Treasury for the benefit of all UK taxpayers.
To explain further, one analogy that could be used is that The Crown Estate is the property equivalent of the Crown jewels - part of the national heritage and held by Her Majesty The Queen as sovereign, but not available for her private use.
andymadmak said:
fluffnik said:
davepoth said:
Property is theft.
Property is theft.
Not always by any means, but claiming the Crown Estate as personal property would indeed be theft.Property is theft.
Building zero net energy flats for longterm let is both profitable and a social good, I am at ease with it.
When it comes to IHT I'd be inclined to increase the personal allowance whilst completely removing the avoidance available to trusts, Dutchies, and the like.
As I have no kids it matters little to me, I'll be leaving everything to medical research.
fluffnik said:
davepoth said:
So to sum up: It's not owned by the state.
It will do when the Crown is absorbed and digested by a new Republic and the Windsors become common Citizens just like everyone else.No vestige of feudal theocracy should remain.
fluffnik said:
NoNeed said:
How do you make them all "renounce" titles?
Perhaps by criminalising any claim to abolished titles. If they prefer jail and massive fines, so be it.
(all the "K" should go too)
and what's K?
Also how do you legally abolish a title when a law to do that needs royal assent?
The nationalists' bile of this thread appears to be taking a breather from attacking Dave, his evil Tory henchmen and the rest of Westminster and turned its attention to offloading its bitter-and-twistedness against the Monarchy. I thought the SNP wanted to retain the Queen as Head of State (or have I got that one wrong?) or will she become the next target for the SNP and its band of followers if independence is gained.
What then when the land of milk & honey doesn't miraculously appear? Uprisings against the President or whatever republican leader is put in a more or less a like-for-like position? Perhaps that will just be the rather pathetic and mainly unelected top administration of the obviously corrupt (we daren't publish our accounts) EU the SNP seem to like so much!
What then when the land of milk & honey doesn't miraculously appear? Uprisings against the President or whatever republican leader is put in a more or less a like-for-like position? Perhaps that will just be the rather pathetic and mainly unelected top administration of the obviously corrupt (we daren't publish our accounts) EU the SNP seem to like so much!
A question for the PH gassers on scottish politics:
I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
finnie said:
A question for the PH gassers on scottish politics:
I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
There is no disconnect, just dishonesty. I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
The SNP is looking to smash Labour in Scotland, and then to use the platform of most Scottish MPs being from the SNP as a basis from which to launch a new referendum within 5 years ( the will of the Scottish people blah blah blah)
However, to smash Labour the SNP need to persuade lots of Labour voters to switch to the SNP and this is where the problem lies because many of those voters will be folk who voted NO in the referendum.
If they thought that voting SNP to Westminster was essentially the same as voting YES to independance then many would not vote SNP, so Ms Sturgeon has to reassure them that its nowt to do with independance, and everything to do with " making sure that Scotlands voice is heard in Westminster" . Be under no illusions though. Once the SNP has its platform it WILL push again for that second referendum. Want to avoid a second referendum, and 5 more damaging years for investment in Scottish jobs? Vote Labour, Tory, Lib Dem as appropriate to lock out the SNP.
I think thats my point, they are trying to get votes to better represent scotland in westminster. But the existing SNP public want to split. The leaders say they will have a referendum if the people want it. They seem to want it so the leaders will have to give it. Exactly opposite to what they are saying to existing no voters to get them to vote SNP.
I think I am far less likely to vote SNP now than I was to vote Yes in the referendum because of this. I doubt I am alone in this, so are we going to see another shock silent vote on Firday???
I think I am far less likely to vote SNP now than I was to vote Yes in the referendum because of this. I doubt I am alone in this, so are we going to see another shock silent vote on Firday???
fluffnik said:
It will do when the Crown is absorbed and digested by a new Republic and the Windsors become common Citizens just like everyone else.
No vestige of feudal theocracy should remain.
It almost sounds as though you have a deep-seated inferiority complex. That someone inheriting a title make you feel inadequate. No vestige of feudal theocracy should remain.
Feudal?
We don't have peasants anymore. The aristocracy are not required to raise armies for the monarchy. Parliament is sovereign. What are you on about?
Theocracy?
No-one, not even (I suspect) Lizzie Windsor, believes her power comes from some sky fairy. Yes, she takes her religious role seriously but she takes all of her state roles seriously.
It has become a toothless tradition amongst many quaint traditions that their country has. It is a tradition that attracts droves of tourists to visit. The alternative ideas for an elected president are equally unattractive.
The House of Windsor will one day cock up and things will change. They probably would have gone if Edward VIII had been on the throne in WWII.
For now, the British people are content with a constitutional monarchy exactly because they can see it is NOT a feudal theocracy. If you think it is, I think you need your bumps felt.
simoid said:
Strocky said:
Not really, I agree with the vast majority of their core policies but I'm not goin to spite my nose because of a few things I don't agree with
Do you agree with every Tory policy?
Or is there a red line policy for you?
What's the Tories got to do with anything?Do you agree with every Tory policy?
Or is there a red line policy for you?
Edited by Strocky on Saturday 2nd May 12:52
andymadmak said:
finnie said:
A question for the PH gassers on scottish politics:
I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
There is no disconnect, just dishonesty. I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
The SNP is looking to smash Labour in Scotland, and then to use the platform of most Scottish MPs being from the SNP as a basis from which to launch a new referendum within 5 years ( the will of the Scottish people blah blah blah)
However, to smash Labour the SNP need to persuade lots of Labour voters to switch to the SNP and this is where the problem lies because many of those voters will be folk who voted NO in the referendum.
If they thought that voting SNP to Westminster was essentially the same as voting YES to independance then many would not vote SNP, so Ms Sturgeon has to reassure them that its nowt to do with independance, and everything to do with " making sure that Scotlands voice is heard in Westminster" . Be under no illusions though. Once the SNP has its platform it WILL push again for that second referendum. Want to avoid a second referendum, and 5 more damaging years for investment in Scottish jobs? Vote Labour, Tory, Lib Dem as appropriate to lock out the SNP.
Also he mentioned that while the SNP party members may vote for a second referendum on the SNP manifesto for 2016, this will be the minority of scottish voters again dictating where the nation should be going with regards to yet another referendum and plunging scotland into yet more uncertainty.
I can buit hope the SNP get half of the seats the polls expect them too (i.e. their 'kinnock' moment) or the Tories get enough seats for a small majority.
Rick_1138 said:
Also he mentioned that while the SNP party members may vote for a second referendum on the SNP manifesto for 2016, this will be the minority of scottish voters again dictating where the nation should be going with regards to yet another referendum and plunging scotland into yet more uncertainty.
I can buit hope the SNP get half of the seats the polls expect them too (i.e. their 'kinnock' moment) or the Tories get enough seats for a small majority.
If the SNP win a majority in Holyrood 2016, would you then accept it's then fair and democratic if another referendum is held?I can buit hope the SNP get half of the seats the polls expect them too (i.e. their 'kinnock' moment) or the Tories get enough seats for a small majority.
TBH I don't see another referendum for at least the next 10 years minimum
If the UK is pulled out of the EU and Scotland votes to remain I foresee Scotland unilaterally declaring independence
finnie said:
A question for the PH gassers on scottish politics:
I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
Possibly, but it keeps their core support enthusiastic, and that is a necessary evil for them to succeed; it's a lot easier to control the election story of the day when you've got a large, united and very assertive support base. If it's a bad story, publicly identify the source on social media and question their motives. If it's a good story, retweet ad infinitum whilst complaining of being ignored by the 'MSM'.I watch the TV and see the SNP politicians go on about that this election is not about a referendum on independance. Namely last night on BBC One it was repeated several times that membership in westmister is not a path to independance. However every comment I see/hear/read from the "45" go on and on abut how we will be better on our own - ie independant. The leaders also go about another referendum if the people want it. From what i see the nationalist public do want it.
Is there not a disconnect here between the party and the people? The leaders are on TV saying one thing with the public they represent wanting another
You won't find any journalists in Scotland going through SNP policy a la Paxman or Andrew Neil; those who might be tempted are cognisant of last year's rally against BBC 'bias' and the pasting some of their colleagues get on social media from angry Nats.
Ultimately this means that the Nats get a fairly light grilling of their policies, so they can promise any old st and blame somebody else if it doesn't materialise:
'You know how we promised everybody a unicorn? Sorry, but the Tories killed them with the bedroom tax in a foodbank. Not our fault'
Strocky said:
Rick_1138 said:
Also he mentioned that while the SNP party members may vote for a second referendum on the SNP manifesto for 2016, this will be the minority of scottish voters again dictating where the nation should be going with regards to yet another referendum and plunging scotland into yet more uncertainty.
I can buit hope the SNP get half of the seats the polls expect them too (i.e. their 'kinnock' moment) or the Tories get enough seats for a small majority.
If the SNP win a majority in Holyrood 2016, would you then accept it's then fair and democratic if another referendum is held?I can buit hope the SNP get half of the seats the polls expect them too (i.e. their 'kinnock' moment) or the Tories get enough seats for a small majority.
TBH I don't see another referendum for at least the next 10 years minimum
If the UK is pulled out of the EU and Scotland votes to remain I foresee Scotland unilaterally declaring independence
basically i am saying the SNP should be saying publicaly that there will be no further ref vote for at least 15-20 years, the fact they wont speaks volumes.
Also, Scotland cannot declare independance, they have to get permission to secede from the union from westminster, and again, if more than half scots dont want to split, then it wont, unless some 75% of scots wanted to leave then i cant see it being feasible as it would ruin the country with the infighting and hatred between groups after the split. The crap you see about online from both sides would get worse and worse and there would be a lot of trouble.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff