|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 8:55:24 GMT
If Scotland do vote yes, Cameron is finished..for good. I'm not so sure he will be. Most folk, when asked, didn't see it as reflecting on his leadership, more a case of the Scots wanting away from Westminster in general which included all the parties. But he'll definitely be weakened and lose a little more authority. I'm also not so sure he'll be around much longer anyway. Boris is hovering nicely in the background. The Tories are probably not going to win a majority at the next election. That'll be two he's failed to win despite the cards being stacked so heavily in his favour which starts to taint him as a bit of a loser. Dangerzone Dave also doesn't really want to go to the country for an EU referendum being pro-Europe himself and he's done almost 10 years as leader and 5 as PM. I think, like Hague, he's probably eyeing a much more lucrative life outside politics already.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Sept 9, 2014 8:59:08 GMT
When this all first started to get talked about I was always of the opinion that I'd sooner London fuck off than Scotland, but having seen the actions of the Jocks over the last few months (I can still see this one woman screaming at the camera with a big "Ooooo" sound coming out of her mouth the big fat fucking cow) Scotland can just go & fuck off. (And incase they happen to vote to remain a part of the Union, we should then be given the vote asto whether we want them to remain, & hopefully we'll then kick them out!)
Lets not pussy foot about though, if they're gone then they're gone. All Army/Navy/Airforce stuff that is in Scotland, whether it be building things or bases or missiles or whatever, the lot of it should all be imediately moved to places in England, infact all English/British companies should all move to England the second this vote is counted, with all Scots fired on the spot (The English employees can have the option of keeping their jobs if they wish) The boarder should be set-up so that any English unfortunate enough to live up there can come & go as they please, but any Scots who wish to travel into England should have to pay a minimum of £100 each time they wish to cross into our country.
We'd better not give them any help with anything either, don't give 'em a fucking penny for anything. Scotland can become as important to England as Somalia is. We should refuse any aeroplanes heading to Scotland the use of British airspace, the same applies to ships using our waters. Rip up the main trainlines at Carlisle & Newcastle. Don't allow them to watch our TV or read our newspapers etc...
Just completely cut the fuckers off. You wanted your independance Scotland 'cos you could do things so much better without our help, so there you go, enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 9:02:13 GMT
Slightly bitter sounding, dumped by a Scottish lass?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 9:02:16 GMT
I think you are being a dick about this - most commentators look at net borrowing as the deficit figure, since it includes investment spending. So whether its simplistic or not, it's the way it's done. Surely an economics expert like yourself knows this. No, you said it's easy to have socially progressive policies when you're spending other people's money. I replied saying every government borrows and spends other people's money which, according to you, was "daft lies". You assumed that a budget surplus meant no borrowing. It doesn't. I've just shown you that even when a budget surplus is in place, governments still borrow money from other people to spend. They all do (in the UK at least). If you don't understand basics like this I'm not surprised you think the way you do. That is the fundamental problem here, a big lack of genuine understanding. It's really not as simplistic as you think it is. I know it's not simplistic but it's made simplistic so that the majority understand it. Many people borrow for different reasons - even when they don't need. Some borrow to get better terms and pay off debts with larger interest rates - doesn't really mean they needed to borrow it. The point as you well know is that it is easy for Scotland to have such policies when it's being funded by the UK government as whole.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 9:19:56 GMT
When this all first started to get talked about I was always of the opinion that I'd sooner London fuck off than Scotland, but having seen the actions of the Jocks over the last few months (I can still see this one woman screaming at the camera with a big "Ooooo" sound coming out of her mouth the big fat fucking cow) Scotland can just go & fuck off. (And incase they happen to vote to remain a part of the Union, we should then be given the vote asto whether we want them to remain, & hopefully we'll then kick them out!) Lets not pussy foot about though, if they're gone then they're gone. All Army/Navy/Airforce stuff that is in Scotland, whether it be building things or bases or missiles or whatever, the lot of it should all be imediately moved to places in England, infact all English/British companies should all move to England the second this vote is counted, with all Scots fired on the spot (The English employees can have the option of keeping their jobs if they wish) The boarder should be set-up so that any English unfortunate enough to live up there can come & go as they please, but any Scots who wish to travel into England should have to pay a minimum of £100 each time they wish to cross into our country. We'd better not give them any help with anything either, don't give 'em a fucking penny for anything. Scotland can become as important to England as Somalia is. We should refuse any aeroplanes heading to Scotland the use of British airspace, the same applies to ships using our waters. Rip up the main trainlines at Carlisle & Newcastle. Don't allow them to watch our TV or read our newspapers etc... Just completely cut the fuckers off. You wanted your independance Scotland 'cos you could do things so much better without our help, so there you go, enjoy. why would you want London to fuck off? Doesn't London financially support the rest of us...including socially, progressive Scotland? communists, socialists... never seem to understand where the money comes from
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 9:33:54 GMT
Didn't have you down as a socialist, mcf, but you seem to fit your own description neatly
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Sept 9, 2014 9:34:49 GMT
why would you want London to fuck off? Doesn't London financially support the rest of us...including socially, progressive Scotland? communists, socialists... never seem to understand where the money comes from It was more to do with having far more in common with the people of Scotland than the people of London. It was all just a bit of a joke, nothing serious. As for your second sentance. It's a name on a forum, nothing more, nothing less. Don't try drag me into your sad little political arguements about left verves right & all that bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by spuddymagoo on Sept 9, 2014 9:35:03 GMT
I can't admit to understanding the issues for or against independence, there is an awful lot of facts wrapped up in myth that make both sides of the argument appear rationale. However, I do understand that the union originally came about due to scots pride and the subsequent fall due to their failed investments in Panama. It seems they were envious of the English East India company and wanted to create a similar entity but in South America, when it all went tits up they came cap in hand and the union was formed. We saved their bacon! There were other political and religious motives, but the Panama debacle was the catalyst for the union at the time. I am not too concerned if they stay or go, it's up to them. However, if they do go, I certainly would not want to support them financially in any way and would also seek to 'repatriate' assets and make them pay their share of assumed debt. I would not want them using and abusing the £pound and would not allow them to have any position of status quo to facilitate any transfer of assets or goodwill. If they go, they need to go and we need to leave them to it in the same way we would leave Lichtenstein to it! My worry for them is Alex Salmond, I mean they guy will say and do anything to secure independence and the scots seem to see him as an honest man?? This is the man who wanted Scotland to create the 'crescent of wealth' that was Ireland, Iceland and Scotland....well that went well! Ireland are on their knees as our Iceland and now Alex Salmond wants to replicate Norway. This is the Norway that has done sensible things with oil wealth over the last 40 years, when oil was free flowing and cheap to extract, but he wants to do it now, when oil revenues are falling. It may work for 10-20 years, but then what? How is the ageing population of Scotland (the biggest in the UK) going to fund their health service, education, infrastructure, overseas obligations such as embassies, membership of various global 'clubs'? I love the way the SNP just ignore facts, "you can't just be in the EU" say the EU "yes we can, you just try and stop us" say the SNP "you can't use the pound" says the Bank of England "yes we can, just try and stop us" say the SNP!!! It's madness. I do worry that hey have all been watching too much Braveheart and have all gone a bit Disney! I can see them in my lifetime begging the IMF for funds and (post oil) becoming a very poor country indeed. www.flamingosky.com
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 10:04:40 GMT
Didn't have you down as a socialist, mcf, but you seem to fit your own description neatly I think I would be if they weren't so selfish and greedy
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 10:12:16 GMT
why would you want London to fuck off? Doesn't London financially support the rest of us...including socially, progressive Scotland? communists, socialists... never seem to understand where the money comes from It was more to do with having far more in common with the people of Scotland than the people of London. It was all just a bit of a joke, nothing serious. As for your second sentance. It's a name on a forum, nothing more, nothing less. Don't try drag me into your sad little political arguements about left verves right & all that bollocks. I'm only playing/joking hence the smiley face you big girl.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 10:15:29 GMT
Didn't have you down as a socialist, mcf, but you seem to fit your own description neatly I think I would be if I weren't so selfish and greedy A moment of lucidity at last
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 9, 2014 10:24:48 GMT
If Scotland do vote yes, Cameron is finished..for good. How can you say that. If Scotland vote yes it's democracy in action. Without the Scottish seats labour could very likely fail to get a majority. Independence has more serious consequences for labour and ed. And if you are predicting failure for Dave he will be very happy. It's like the chairmans vote of confidence in reverse As it's the conservative AND unionist party I think you'll find it's equally damaging for Cameron, the PM who allowed the Union to break up. Summoned for a bollocking by the queen, his own party plotting to get rid of him, it's all over the papers Al. And he's now relying on Gordon Brown to save it all? You couldn't make it up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 10:35:22 GMT
Right about Ed but wrong about the Tories. If the current British Government is not prepared to stand up for the Union (however unpopular they are in Scotland), the only reasonable assumption is that they don't care. They have stood up to it. But they left the campaign to labour And as far as the no vote is concerned that was the correct course of action .....the Connservatives will cut no ice with the Scots as they only have a single MP , the crux of the matter is that the Labour Party has to convince it's supporters to continue with that support and not to defect to the Nationalists , it is apparent that it's support is dwindling from recent opinion polls , they need to consolidate their support or it will result in a vote for Independence , which will certainly be a catastrophe for Labour and most likely for Scotland in the future . David Cameron will probably be a spent force anyway after the election .......It's Milliband and Labour who have much more to worry about
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 9, 2014 10:42:24 GMT
They have stood up to it. But they left the campaign to labour And as far as the no vote is concerned that was the correct course of action .....the Connservatives will cut no ice with the Scots as they only have a single MP , the crux of the matter is that the Labour Party has to convince it's supporters to continue with that support and not to defect to the Nationalists , it is apparent that it's support is dwindling from recent opinion polls , they need to consolidate their support or it will result in a vote for Independence , which will certainly be a catastrophe for Labour and most likely for Scotland in the future . David Cameron will probably be a spent force anyway after the election .......It's Milliband and Labour who have much more to worry about I think Cameron had been leader long enough and although he's done a decent job in the circumstances I do think a fresh impoteus would be welcomed. Most jobs on the forces last two years for this very reason. Regardless of the vote a change in leadership to Boris would help win the next election. You are right about Scotland though. It has to be an independence vote not a anti Tory vote. And that is why the Labour Party had to do the campaigning and if that means rolling Gordon brown out then so be it. The union of the uk is more important than the Eu IMO. But again when it comes to the crunch they will vote to remain in it. It may be close but it puts the debate to bed once and for all. I'd rather have a labour government than no Scotland.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 10:42:35 GMT
How can you say that. If Scotland vote yes it's democracy in action. Without the Scottish seats labour could very likely fail to get a majority. Independence has more serious consequences for labour and ed. And if you are predicting failure for Dave he will be very happy. It's like the chairmans vote of confidence in reverse As it's the conservative AND unionist party I think you'll find it's equally damaging for Cameron, the PM who allowed the Union to break up. Summoned for a bollocking by the queen, his own party plotting to get rid of him, it's all over the papers Al. And he's now relying on Gordon Brown to save it all? You couldn't make it up. But Labour hold the key to the success of a No campaign ......it's basically them against the Nationalists .....ironic as it may seem it's vital that Brown manages to exert his influence ( if he has any left ) ....the Conservatives have no influence any more in Scotland .....as both parties are at one on the outcome of this poll it makes perfectly good sense to me
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 10:46:30 GMT
And as far as the no vote is concerned that was the correct course of action .....the Connservatives will cut no ice with the Scots as they only have a single MP , the crux of the matter is that the Labour Party has to convince it's supporters to continue with that support and not to defect to the Nationalists , it is apparent that it's support is dwindling from recent opinion polls , they need to consolidate their support or it will result in a vote for Independence , which will certainly be a catastrophe for Labour and most likely for Scotland in the future . David Cameron will probably be a spent force anyway after the election .......It's Milliband and Labour who have much more to worry about I think Cameron had been leader long enough and although he's done a decent job in the circumstances I do think a fresh impoteus would be welcomed. Most jobs on the forces last two years for this very reason. Regardless of the vote a change in leadership to Boris would help win the next election. You are right about Scotland though. It has to be an independence vote not a anti Tory vote. And that is why the Labour Party had to do the campaigning and if that means rolling Gordon brown out then so be it. The union of the uk is more important than the Eu IMO. But again when it comes to the crunch they will vote to remain in it. It may be close but it puts the debate to bed once and for all. I'd rather have a labour government than no Scotland. I agree, much as it pains me to say it , I would prefer that as well, rather than a break up of the Union
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 11:18:46 GMT
Get that fucking wall re built.....
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 9, 2014 11:24:54 GMT
Maybe a better solution would be a federal Britain. Each country having its own independant parliaments for local interests but also having a full parliament made up equally from the four counries for the more serious matters.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 11:34:40 GMT
I think Cameron had been leader long enough and although he's done a decent job in the circumstances I do think a fresh impoteus would be welcomed. Most jobs on the forces last two years for this very reason. Regardless of the vote a change in leadership to Boris would help win the next election. You are right about Scotland though. It has to be an independence vote not a anti Tory vote. And that is why the Labour Party had to do the campaigning and if that means rolling Gordon brown out then so be it. The union of the uk is more important than the Eu IMO. But again when it comes to the crunch they will vote to remain in it. It may be close but it puts the debate to bed once and for all. I'd rather have a labour government than no Scotland. I agree, much as it pains me to say it , I would prefer that as well, rather than a break up of the Union I have no idea why anyone south of the border would fear a split. I imagine there would be some short term pain but medium to long term it surely would be a benefit.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 9, 2014 11:43:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 11:57:21 GMT
I agree, much as it pains me to say it , I would prefer that as well, rather than a break up of the Union I have no idea why anyone south of the border would fear a split. I imagine there would be some short term pain but medium to long term it surely would be a benefit. I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 12:00:16 GMT
I have no idea why anyone south of the border would fear a split. I imagine there would be some short term pain but medium to long term it surely would be a benefit. I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it you must fear it if you would prefer a labour government rather than a break up. i don't believe that you don't a fear a labour government
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 9, 2014 12:01:12 GMT
I have no idea why anyone south of the border would fear a split. I imagine there would be some short term pain but medium to long term it surely would be a benefit. I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it There was alot of romanticism about this country up until about 20 years ago. Alot of people need to ask themselves whether they want their kids to grow up in how it is now or how they themselves grew up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 12:18:46 GMT
I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it you must fear it if you would prefer a labour government rather than a break up. i don't believe that you don't a fear a labour government Governments come and go ......of either persuasion .....democracy it's called, I believe , you have to grit your teeth and accept what you get and wait for better times to come around again , and they always do , rather that than have the break up of the Nation .But your correct in surmising that I would fear a Labour government ....I always do and always have , but there was always ever going to be a return to Labour after five years in which this Coalition was on a hiding to nothing , after trying to sort out what they had inherited ....it was always going to take years to put things right .....years that you never get enough of in circumstances like this
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 12:22:20 GMT
I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it There was alot of romanticism about this country up until about 20 years ago. Alot of people need to ask themselves whether they want their kids to grow up in how it is now or how they themselves grew up. Those days have gone I'm sad to say , they will never return , we have gone too far down this path that we are on for things to revert back .
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 12:57:48 GMT
I'm not sure abandoning PMQs and sending the three stooges up to Scotland sends the right message to a country which wants to be free from Westminster governance! They're shitting themselves right enough. Perhaps the Queen insisted they go up there and "sort this dreadful mess ite, one will hev you all hung drawn and quartered than lose Balmoral, you know" ?!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 13:03:36 GMT
The only thing that could save us now is if Middleton lifts up her skirt in the Scottish Parliament and shouts " who wants it .?
The queue could be all the way up to Balmoral.....and I am unanimous.
|
|
|
Post by sergiogomes on Sept 9, 2014 15:33:28 GMT
I have no idea why anyone south of the border would fear a split. I imagine there would be some short term pain but medium to long term it surely would be a benefit. I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it Bullshit. North Sea oil has been underwriting "the city" for decades. RumpUK is ruined minus Scotland hence the blind panic across Westminster as they realise their propaganda has failed. www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 9, 2014 16:06:04 GMT
I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it Bullshit. North Sea oil has been underwriting "the city" for decades. RumpUK is ruined minus Scotland hence the blind panic across Westminster as they realise their propaganda has failed. www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependencywe will see
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 16:26:19 GMT
I didn't say that I feared a split , I'm absolutely certain that we would not suffer from it .....but where is the need for it ? , If the Scots in their shortsightedness vote for it then it's their pigeon and they must live with any consequences of it . I prefer not to see the break up of 300 years worth of unity , tradition and history ,some may see that as nothing more than romanticism on my part ,but there you have it Bullshit. North Sea oil has been underwriting "the city" for decades. RumpUK is ruined minus Scotland hence the blind panic across Westminster as they realise their propaganda has failed. www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependencyWe shall see whether it's " Bullshit " if and when it happens won't we ?....... Easy to make a sweeping statement like that when it can't be clarified until some point in the future ......for every link like the one you've posted there are others to be found that take the opposite view
|
|