Scotland's Sturgeon says: I can win an independence vote

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

When all else fails, digress, the topic is about the possibility of another Scottish referendum.

To clarify, are you saying that there is not currently a majority of English MP's in the UK cabinet and that the UK cabinet is not trying to prevent the Scottish government from holding said referendum.

 

There is a majority of MP's at Westminster representing English constituencies because that's where the majority, by a big majority live. Including many Scots or of Scottish heritage.

 

As to the regional origination of those MP's - don't know. Do you? 

 

The UK cabinet is not trying to prevent anything. The Scottish assembly are trying to act above and beyond their powers and force what they want at a time of their choosing and quite frankly sod the rest of the UK. Something in their own interests, not the UK's and not necessarily Scotland's. The UK government must do their job and represent the whole of the UK not a minority within one region.

[Baerboxer]

7 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I'm not so sure about that. It's a completely different deal. The Danes seem to be happy enough! I found their system worked great. ?

 

As Ms. Sturgeon and her associates refuse to divulge their financial plans no one knows.

 

But, given their less than willingness to listen to any voice but their own, they will no doubt have plans that will be imposed should they ever be in a position to do so.

 

Sturgeon did say, I think to Andrew Neil, that "I never said being Sottish would be easy". She said that when avoiding his questions on tax increases, services cuts and improving the deficit etc.

 

Some time ago it was suggested a "property tax" and quite a hefty one, would be levied on all private homes and house holders. The SNP refused to comment. Add to that potential increases in income tax, VAT and increased taxes on alcohol, tobacco and fuel and you might start to get the picture.

 

[transam]

26 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I'm not so sure about that. It's a completely different deal. The Danes seem to be happy enough! I found their system worked great. ?

YOU found their system worked great....Can you divulge how you were taxed...?....You know, % etc...

[baboon]

29 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

There is a majority of MP's at Westminster representing English constituencies because that's where the majority, by a big majority live. Including many Scots or of Scottish heritage.

 

As to the regional origination of those MP's - don't know. Do you? 

 

The UK cabinet is not trying to prevent anything. The Scottish assembly are trying to act above and beyond their powers and force what they want at a time of their choosing and quite frankly sod the rest of the UK. Something in their own interests, not the UK's and not necessarily Scotland's. The UK government must do their job and represent the whole of the UK not a minority within one region.

Just one thing about this post that really annoys me - I only get to 'like' it once...

[7by7]

A while back I asked why Sturgeon and the SNP do not want to wait until after the Brexit deal has been finalised before holding Indyref2.

 

I asked because by waiting until after the Brexit deal is finalised the Scottish people would know which would be better for Scotland; remaining in the UK outside the EU, or independence seeking entry to the EU.

 

None of the pro independence posters have answered that question; I wonder why.

[Grouse]

46 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

There is a majority of MP's at Westminster representing English constituencies because that's where the majority, by a big majority live. Including many Scots or of Scottish heritage.

 

As to the regional origination of those MP's - don't know. Do you? 

 

The UK cabinet is not trying to prevent anything. The Scottish assembly are trying to act above and beyond their powers and force what they want at a time of their choosing and quite frankly sod the rest of the UK. Something in their own interests, not the UK's and not necessarily Scotland's. The UK government must do their job and represent the whole of the UK not a minority within one region.

Wow! Represent the whole of the UK! They typically just act in their own best interests - The Con Party. I certainly don't see them paying much interest to the views of the Scots 

[transam]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Wow! Represent the whole of the UK! They typically just act in their own best interests - The Con Party. I certainly don't see them paying much interest to the views of the Scots 

The UK is not run by the conservative party, they never won the election..At the mo it is a joint venture......Unless I missed something....

[citybiker]

Maybe you can point out where I mentioned anything about voting.
My point was made in the context of the whole post, that their 'views', with reference to the SNP, expressed in any campaign should be given serious consideration and not overshadowed by those that may be clouded from the past.

Valid point reference voting within your post.

However, you say the views of young should be given priority of older people.

It affects all, the young will do what generations did before them....adapt, adjust and overcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grouse]

29 minutes ago, transam said:

YOU found their system worked great....Can you divulge how you were taxed...?....You know, % etc...

As an employee, about 60% net.

 

But my salary (same American company) was much higher. Huge child benefits and 100% mortgage interest (and every other kind of interest) deductible. 180% car tax (there is no motor industry). At that time, mortgages stayed with the house at fixed interest rates. Quite commen to take over five existing mortgages! No poverty any where. Seriously, happy, industrious, civilised society! ( Don't tell anyone)

[Baerboxer]

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Wow! Represent the whole of the UK! They typically just act in their own best interests - The Con Party. I certainly don't see them paying much interest to the views of the Scots 

 

Then the Conservative Party must have something in common with the SNP. Because the SNP only pay attention to the views of Scots who agree with them.

 

And the minority of Scots who support the SNP don't pay any attention to anyone but themselves.

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, transam said:

The UK is not run by the conservative party, they never won the election..At the mo it is a joint venture......Unless I missed something....

As far as I am aware, The Con Party have an overall majority and 100% of the executive are Cons.

 

( significantly better/safer when Lib/Dems kept them on a tight leash)

 

I'm aware of powers devolved to the regions

[Grouse]

6 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Then the Conservative Party must have something in common with the SNP. Because the SNP only pay attention to the views of Scots who agree with them.

 

And the minority of Scots who support the SNP don't pay any attention to anyone but themselves.

The SNP seem to be the favourite Party by miles even with PR. Labour are dead in the water, The Cons widely despised. Lib Dems could be useful counter weight as could the greens but all three are pro EU I believe 

[DILLIGAD]

As an employee, about 60% net.
 
But my salary (same American company) was much higher. Huge child benefits and 100% mortgage interest (and every other kind of interest) deductible. 180% car tax (there is no motor industry). At that time, mortgages stayed with the house at fixed interest rates. Quite commen to take over five existing mortgages! No poverty any where. Seriously, happy, industrious, civilised society! ( Don't tell anyone)

Wow, that's interesting. Gawd knows how the Sturgeon and her tiddlers could change Scotland into something like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7by7]

53 minutes ago, Grouse said:

The SNP seem to be the favourite Party by miles even with PR. Labour are dead in the water, The Cons widely despised. Lib Dems could be useful counter weight as could the greens but all three are pro EU I believe 

 In the 2016 Scottish parliament elections the SNP received 46.1% of the constituency vote and 41.7% of the regional vote. The Conservatives received 22% and 22.9%; Labour 22.6% and 19.1%; LibDems 7.6% and 5.2%; Greens 0.6% and 4.7%.

 

So the pro independence parties, SNP and Greens, received 46.7% of the constituency vote and 46.4% of the regional vote.

 

If this were to be reflected in an independence referendum then the SNP would lose; not by much, but lose they would.

 

Indeed, it is well known that 10 to 15% of SNP voters do not support Scottish independence, but vote SNP for other reasons. So the SNP's loss in another referendum would be higher.

 

Perhaps that is why Sturgeon is in such a rush to hold another referendum. Having had two referenda and two national elections in the last 3 years in Scotland, maybe she hopes voter fatigue would be a factor and a low turnout would give her the result she craves.

[7by7]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

As an employee, about 60% net.

 

But my salary (same American company) was much higher. Huge child benefits and 100% mortgage interest (and every other kind of interest) deductible. 180% car tax (there is no motor industry). At that time, mortgages stayed with the house at fixed interest rates. Quite commen to take over five existing mortgages! No poverty any where. Seriously, happy, industrious, civilised society! ( Don't tell anyone)

 This isn't a topic about Denmark; but it isn't the paradise you want to paint it.

 

Poverty on the rise in Denmark

Quote

According to new figures from the EU statistics keeper Eurostat, the percentage of Danes at risk of poverty or social exclusion increased from 16.3 to 17.7 percent from 2008-2015.

The figure is the highest in the Nordic region and well ahead of Norway (15.0 percent), Sweden (16.0), Finland (16.8) and Iceland (13.0).

 

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 This isn't a topic about Denmark; but it isn't the paradise you want to paint it.

 

Poverty on the rise in Denmark

 

Hi, Nontabury! Why would you like it if Denmark was not quite as good as I painted it? Interesting!

 

Anyway, a third "at risk"

 

Whats the actual?

 

I was there many years ago and maybe the place has fallen apart. I doubt it though.

 

They are suffering from accepting too many refugees though.

 

Finally, this is about Scotland. However, a poster asked about small EU countries. This is an example. OK?

 

read the whole article

http://cphpost.dk/news/poverty-on-the-rise-in-denmark.html

 

Next....

 

[sandyf]

5 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

There is a majority of MP's at Westminster representing English constituencies because that's where the majority, by a big majority live. Including many Scots or of Scottish heritage.

 

As to the regional origination of those MP's - don't know. Do you? 

 

The UK cabinet is not trying to prevent anything. The Scottish assembly are trying to act above and beyond their powers and force what they want at a time of their choosing and quite frankly sod the rest of the UK. Something in their own interests, not the UK's and not necessarily Scotland's. The UK government must do their job and represent the whole of the UK not a minority within one region.

It is a fact of life that England is the largest part of the UK and what England says goes and it is also a fact of life that the majority of people from England will never acknowledge that fact. It is only a United KIngdom when you say so.

 

I have to assume from this statement "The UK government must do their job and represent the whole of the UK not a minority within one region." 

that you would consider it perfectly acceptable for the UK government to sell out Gibraltar to Spain in order to obtain their concept of brexit.

 

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 This isn't a topic about Denmark; but it isn't the paradise you want to paint it.

 

Poverty on the rise in Denmark

 

Hi, Nontabury! Why would you like it if Denmark was not quite as good as I painted it? Interesting!

 

Anyway, a third "at risk"

 

Whats the actual?

 

I was there many years ago and maybe the place has fallen apart. I doubt it though.

 

They are suffering from accepting too many refugees though.

[Grouse]

17 hours ago, 7by7 said:

A while back I asked why Sturgeon and the SNP do not want to wait until after the Brexit deal has been finalised before holding Indyref2.

 

I asked because by waiting until after the Brexit deal is finalised the Scottish people would know which would be better for Scotland; remaining in the UK outside the EU, or independence seeking entry to the EU.

 

None of the pro independence posters have answered that question; I wonder why.

As I understand it, the proposed referendum would take place after the deal was finalized but before implementation. That sounds ideal to me. What is wrong with that?

[7by7]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

As I understand it, the proposed referendum would take place after the deal was finalized but before implementation. That sounds ideal to me. What is wrong with that?

 Then your understanding is incorrect.

 

As the Scottish Secretary, Davis Mundell, has said; people will not know the full terms of Brexit until the deal is finalised and it is not appropriate to hold an independence referendum until then.

 

Sturgeon's stated preferred timing for an independence referendum is sometime between autumn 2018 and spring 2019. The timetable for the Article 50 process supposed to be two years, but even so the chances of the Brexit deal being finalised by then are slim.

 

If granted her wish, what would she do if the Brexit terms aren't finalised by the date of her referendum; postpone it?

 

[Grouse]

15 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Then your understanding is incorrect.

 

As the Scottish Secretary, Davis Mundell, has said; people will not know the full terms of Brexit until the deal is finalised and it is not appropriate to hold an independence referendum until then.

 

Sturgeon's stated preferred timing for an independence referendum is sometime between autumn 2018 and spring 2019. The timetable for the Article 50 process supposed to be two years, but even so the chances of the Brexit deal being finalised by then are slim.

 

If granted her wish, what would she do if the Brexit terms aren't finalised by the date of her referendum; postpone it?

 

They idea is entirely pragmatic: AFTER the deal is finalised but BEFORE implementation. What is wrong with that? Yes, if Brexit is not finalised then delay the referendum. 

 

Personally, I expect the Con Party to engineer a situation that makes the EU appear intransigent and then crash out!

 

I truely believe Scotland would do well as an EU member state.

[transam]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

They idea is entirely pragmatic: AFTER the deal is finalised but BEFORE implementation. What is wrong with that? Yes, if Brexit is not finalised then delay the referendum. 

 

Personally, I expect the Con Party to engineer a situation that makes the EU appear intransigent and then crash out!

 

I truely believe Scotland would do well as an EU member state.

Wow, you believe....sure we will all take note of that........Tell us you EU business plans when the UK has left....Could be good reading...

[7by7]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

They idea is entirely pragmatic: AFTER the deal is finalised but BEFORE implementation. What is wrong with that? Yes, if Brexit is not finalised then delay the referendum

As already said; Sturgeons preferred timing means that the referendum would probably be held before the Brexit deal is finalised.

 

Rather than risk endless possible postponements, what is wrong with waiting until the Brexit deal is definitely finalised before holding the referendum?

[mommysboy]

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

They idea is entirely pragmatic: AFTER the deal is finalised but BEFORE implementation. What is wrong with that? Yes, if Brexit is not finalised then delay the referendum. 

 

Personally, I expect the Con Party to engineer a situation that makes the EU appear intransigent and then crash out!

 

I truely believe Scotland would do well as an EU member state.

"I truely believe Scotland would do well as an EU member state."

 

That's rather a bold and nebulous statement.

 

Things would be very tough at first- quite possibly a whole generation would have their lives blighted as Scotland would have to effect extreme spending cuts to qualify for EU membership.  Thereafter it would have to run a tight ship, and would have little room for fiscal stimulus.  An obvious example would be Italy.  Associate status would likely reduce the impact.  We are talking a decade perhaps two before Scotland could likely join as a full member.

 

If you had written : I truly believe Scotland would do well as an independent state then that would be more reaslistic, but not much more. We can surmise that Scotland would survive, much impoverished but it would survive.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, transam said:

Wow, you believe....sure we will all take note of that........Tell us you EU business plans when the UK has left....Could be good reading...

Yes, that is MY belief.

 

Just saying. No need for you to agree. It's a discussion.

 

I just see Scotland slotting in nicely as another small Northern European nation.

 

My businesses are all in Thailand now (I've been here for 17 years). However, Denmark was great for start up entrepreneurs and I could see Scotland doing something similar to leverage their undoubted inventive capabilities.

 

The UK was always more difficult for start ups though I did raise venture capital on three occasions. Seed capital is very difficult to obtain and UK tax regime is not helpful.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

As already said; Sturgeons preferred timing means that the referendum would probably be held before the Brexit deal is finalised.

 

Rather than risk endless possible postponements, what is wrong with waiting until the Brexit deal is definitely finalised before holding the referendum?

I agree, after finalisation but before implementation.

 

BUT, I don't actually expect a deal anyway.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, mommysboy said:

"I truely believe Scotland would do well as an EU member state."

 

That's rather a bold and nebulous statement.

 

Things would be very tough at first- quite possibly a whole generation would have their lives blighted as Scotland would have to effect extreme spending cuts to qualify for EU membership.  Thereafter it would have to run a tight ship, and would have little room for fiscal stimulus.  An obvious example would be Italy.  Associate status would likely reduce the impact.  We are talking a decade perhaps two before Scotland could likely join as a full member.

 

If you had written : I truly believe Scotland would do well as an independent state then that would be more reaslistic, but not much more. We can surmise that Scotland would survive, much impoverished but it would survive.

Well it's a glass half full / half empty discussion.

 

Scotland seems to have similar attributes to other small (population) Northern European countries. I don't see why Scotland could not emulate their successes.

 

Yes there would be great upheaval, but I think where there's a will. Tax rises with increased benefits, tax allowances would be the way to go.

 

Maybe SNP should organise weekend tours to Scandinavia to show the numpties what it's all about ?

[Baerboxer]

On 4/15/2017 at 6:12 PM, Grouse said:

The SNP seem to be the favourite Party by miles even with PR. Labour are dead in the water, The Cons widely despised. Lib Dems could be useful counter weight as could the greens but all three are pro EU I believe 

 

So you should have no trouble proving your assertion. How many people % wise voted for the SNP?

 

The last pole I saw said the support had gone up - but was still way below 50%. Which means they still aren't supported by the majority of the electorate.

 

Perhaps they'll suggest lowering the voting age to 12?

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Well it's a glass half full / half empty discussion.

 

Scotland seems to have similar attributes to other small (population) Northern European countries. I don't see why Scotland could not emulate their successes.

 

Yes there would be great upheaval, but I think where there's a will. Tax rises with increased benefits, tax allowances would be the way to go.

 

Maybe SNP should organise weekend tours to Scandinavia to show the numpties what it's all about ?

 

Maybe the SNP should publish details of their economic and financial plans for an independent Scotland.

 

Then we could all see if they're numpties or not.

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

Well it's a glass half full / half empty discussion.

 

Scotland seems to have similar attributes to other small (population) Northern European countries. I don't see why Scotland could not emulate their successes.

 

Yes there would be great upheaval, but I think where there's a will. Tax rises with increased benefits, tax allowances would be the way to go.

 

Maybe SNP should organise weekend tours to Scandinavia to show the numpties what it's all about ?

 

It's the incredible debt that Scotland would have to assume that makes misery inevitable for the first decade.  I think it could be upwards of 130% of GDP.  There would have to be massive cuts.  It's not glass half full at all imo.

 

What's more being part of EU would put constraints on how Scotland can deal with its problems, whereas the rest of UK is much more free.

 

Apart from that, yes, without a doubt it can flourish.  But there's no simple way of cutting that debt free, other than default.