Westminster Voting Intentions

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Surely the self proclaimed proud no voting Scots should be delighted that one of our own absolutely stormed that debate last night?

Nicola came across very well and the opinion I am getting from a good few English folk after last night is she and the SNP should be embraced, not feared, many of them even wanting her as the next PM.

It was a very successful night for Scottish politics and we should all be proud of our First Minister.

Lots of folks in English constituencies stating that they wish they could vote snp and wanting Nicola Sturgeon to be PM after last nights programme #massdebate

[Stuart Dickson]

Surely the self proclaimed proud no voting Scots should be delighted that one of our own absolutely stormed that debate last night?

Nicola came across very well and the opinion I am getting from a good few English folk after last night is she and the SNP should be embraced, not feared, many of them even wanting her as the next PM.

It was a very successful night for Scottish politics and we should all be proud of our First Minister.

Ok, so by the same token surely the Yes voting xenophobes will take great pride in Danny Alexander and Michael Goves performance on Question Time

[Stuart Dickson]

So it was your debit card she had, then.

Assuming that you are right (can't be arsed checking, so I'll take your word for it), then as long as Scotland is part of the UK, it is possible to end poverty in Scotland.

Depends on which definition you use. If it's to mean poor as we've all understood it then it's already ended. There is no-one in Scotland living in that definition of poverty.

However if you use the statistical definition of poverty that politicians use to batter each other then no, it would not be possible in any of the region's in the UK. It may be possible in an Independent Scotland. To achieve it you'd need bring everyone earning above median wage down to the point where each household earns less than 50% more than the lowest income household in Scotland. It's not a place I'd want to live in and I can't imagine 45% of Scots voting to slash their incomes but who knows. The same 45% have proved brainless in just about every other area

[Sergie's no1 fan]

Ok, so by the same token surely the Yes voting xenophobes will take great pride in Danny Alexander and Michael Goves performance on Question Time

Why would that be?

Alexander did the same as Murphy on QT recently, they both let other panellists and Audience members talk down Scotland as scroungers ect, the country they were spilling their heart about in September. It was actually Yasmin Alibhai-Brown who was sticking up for us last night. Jim "Irn Bru" Murphy sat back while Janet Street-Porter tore into the Nation he is so patriotic about, the other week.

Goves performance was brilliant, his arse totally collapsed.He admitted he would rather have Labour in power than the SNP anywhere near Westminster . Can't wait to see his reaction in May.

[Sergie's no1 fan]

Lots of folks in English constituencies stating that they wish they could vote snp and wanting Nicola Sturgeon to be PM after last nights programme #massdebate

http://wingsoverscotland.com/new-friends/

Really proud of Nicola, she was excellent. It was a good night for Scotland. I think a few Southerners are swayed , the SNP will be a good thing for them too.

[davidg]

I thought wee Nicola nailed it last night, far better performance than Salmond ever delivered and came across as a much more likeable person.

I've been a Labour voter in the past but look likely to vote SNP next month.

Edited April 3, 2015 by davidg

[Stuart Dickson]

You are aware that you tend to find xenophobes more to the right, politically, than to the left, aren't you? This is due to their xenophobia shaping their beliefs/opinions. You call the SNP socialists and then claim that people who agree with them are xenophobes. It doesn't really add up.

I never saw the debate or QT so I'm not passing comment on either - until I do.

That's simply not true. We know for example in modern history that the people of Russia were incredibly xenophobic, as are the North Koreans, and the Chinese. We also know that the German National Socialists were very xenophobic too - and they are the party in history that I would most closely align the Scottish Nationalist Party with, as you well know.

[Stuart Dickson]

Or you can do the opposite and raise wages at the lower end by a larger amount than you raise wages at the higher end.

You've got it round the wrong way. You also say "possible" when you should really say "likely" or "practical" or such like.

It is not impossible to get rid of poverty, just unlikely and impractical. If everyone was on the exact same income then there would be no poverty by the definition you give. Is that likely to happen, no it isn't but it isn't impossible. Just because something never happens, it doesn't mean that it is impossible.

Well it's nice to see you admit that Nicola Sturgeons claims last night were unlikely and impractical. I guess we can call that progress

Lets put your theory to the test though. Percentage figures for the number of children living in "poverty" in the UK are widely available. As we all know New Labour introduced the National Minimum Wage. They also increased benefit payments ahead of the retail price index every single year they were in office. Yet look at what happened to the percentages.

2004/5 - 21% were living in poverty

2005/6 - 22% were living in poverty

2006/7 - 22% were living in poverty

2007/8 - 23% were living in poverty

2008/9 (when the global financial banking collapse happened) - 22% were living in poverty

2009/10 (when the coalition came to power) - 20% were living in poverty

2010/11 - 18% were living in poverty

2011/12 - 18% were living in poverty

2012/13 - 17% were living in poverty

As we can see Labour's policies of increasing payments to those on lowest incomes did not eradicate poverty as defined by all European Nations, instead what happened was the levels of "poverty" INCREASED, and it was only when the global recession hit, unemployment increased, and the wages of top earners in the country took a massive hit that we see Labour managing to reduce the number of people living in poverty.

The coalition government, who have reputedly been far tougher on benefit payments, have actually had a massive effect on reducing the number of children living in poverty in the UK.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/397233/foi-14-uk-child-poverty.pdf

Edited April 3, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Stuart Dickson]

Why would that be?

Alexander did the same as Murphy on QT recently, they both let other panellists and Audience members talk down Scotland as scroungers ect, the country they were spilling their heart about in September. It was actually Yasmin Alibhai-Brown who was sticking up for us last night. Jim "Irn Bru" Murphy sat back while Janet Street-Porter tore into the Nation he is so patriotic about, the other week.

Goves performance was brilliant, his arse totally collapsed.He admitted he would rather have Labour in power than the SNP anywhere near Westminster . Can't wait to see his reaction in May.

I thought Gove spoke well, and looked more honest than Andy Burnham who claimed that his party had ruled out any possibility of any agreement with the SNP to get Labour into power. Not many, if any of the audience believed that.

I wouldn't normally say this of a "wet" but Gove was actually spot on in terms of how I feel about the coming election. I have little time for Milliband, or for the Labour Party and I think to have them in power would set the UK economy back massively. However I'd still rather see Labour take power in May than see the SNP anywhere near a ruling party at Westminster. Oh and I give it till Tuesday before many of those English voters you refer to wake up to the fact that in the event of the SNP forming a governing coalition Nicola Sturgeon wouldn't be anywhere near it. She'll still be First Minister in Scotland. Instead they'll find Alex Salmond trying to dictate to Westminster politicians - and that will go down about as well as Hitler walking into a bar mitzvah.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Stuart Dickson]

Or maybe public outcry at the likes of bankers' bonuses, which led to a lot of the high earners being embarrassed into refusing or handing back bonuses led to the higher earners getting less and so bringing down the "average" income. Maybe a lot of high earners emigrated to be replaced by low earning immigrants, which would also bring the "average" income down. I don't know all the reasons for it and neither do you. What was the "average" income for each of those years you are talking about?

And why do you keep bringing up comparisons to Labour when replying to me? I've never tried to defend anything Labour, especially New Labour.

Percentages can also be a bit of a red herring. Depends on what the absolute numbers are, too. Of course, politicians will use whichever one backs up their argument.

So now you agree that the way to cut poverty is to reduce the median wage. Good. Glad we are in agreement.

[FTOF]

A very competent performance from our first minister.

Although to be fair, given the quality of politician that she was up against, it was probably not much of a challenge for her.

It's quite telling that there seems to be a sizeable proportion of non-scots queuing up to compliment her on her performance.

It would seem the penny has finally dropped for them, that the individuals who currently pull the strings at Westminster would give Co Co the clown a run for his money.

[salmonbuddie]

Ending poverty will never happen. Doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to it, though.

[Stuart Dickson]

Ending poverty will never happen. Doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to it, though.

Why would you aspire to have a society where no-one can earn more than 50% more than someone on the dole? That's bonkers - but that's exactly the reality of the kind of pish Nicola Sturgeon keeps spouting and you seals keep on clapping. Bizarrely the last Labour Government even passed a law stating that Child Poverty had to end by 2020 - f**k knows how anyone could ever accomplish that using the present method of measure.

A far better aspiration would be to improve living standards for everyone and the economic statistics show that's exactly what the coalition government has been doing with the median wage now above the point where it was pre banking crisis and child poverty reduced to it's lowest point in 10 years. And to be honest I can't understand the level of hate being aimed at David Cameron from Scots when his party is pledging to cut Government waste to bring the country back into surplus so we can have further tax cuts. How can anyone of sane mind have any issue with that at all.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Stuart Dickson]

Don't be daft. I'm saying that using the stats you provided is not a realistic way of determining whether anyone is in financial hardship. Just throwing numbers and percentages about without context is pointless. It's like when you see headlines like "average wage in the Congo is £5 a week" or such like. It means absolutely nothing without knowing what the quality of life is like in the Congo on £5 per week or how many people it actually affects or the disparity in earnings etc. It's also like all they things you have a habit of linking to where the headline has no relation to the actual detail in the article.

I notice you avoided answering the question.

So why does Nicola Sturgeon do it then? I agree with you. The poverty figures banded about by the likes of Sturgeon mean nothing - but you guys lap them up. Another Alias pointed out previously that those classed as living in poverty in the UK today can still afford large screen TV's, the latest games consoles, the latest smartphones and often foreign holidays to the likes of Turkey.

Sturgeons claims last night on that issue were bizarre. Increasing borrowing to spend more on infrastructure to end poverty - really? And people think we'd have had a viable economy with people like her in charge?

[salmonbuddie]

Why would you aspire to have a society where no-one can earn more than 50% more than someone on the dole? That's bonkers - but that's exactly the reality of the kind of pish Nicola Sturgeon keeps spouting and you seals keep on clapping. Bizarrely the last Labour Government even passed a law stating that Child Poverty had to end by 2020 - f**k knows how anyone could ever accomplish that using the present method of measure.

A far better aspiration would be to improve living standards for everyone and the economic statistics show that's exactly what the coalition government has been doing with the median wage now above the point where it was pre banking crisis and child poverty reduced to it's lowest point in 10 years. And to be honest I can't understand the level of hate being aimed at David Cameron from Scots when his party is pledging to cut Government waste to bring the country back into surplus so we can have further tax cuts. How can anyone of sane mind have any issue with that at all.

Whooooosh!

Spot the man who just doesn't get it. Or want to even think about getting it. Quite sad, really.

[Stuart Dickson]

Whooooosh!

Spot the man who just doesn't get it. Or want to even think about getting it. Quite sad, really.

I've spotted you....

[smcc]

Why would you aspire to have a society where no-one can earn more than 50% more than someone on the dole? That's bonkers - but that's exactly the reality of the kind of pish Nicola Sturgeon keeps spouting and you seals keep on clapping. Bizarrely the last Labour Government even passed a law stating that Child Poverty had to end by 2020 - f**k knows how anyone could ever accomplish that using the present method of measure.

A far better aspiration would be to improve living standards for everyone and the economic statistics show that's exactly what the coalition government has been doing with the median wage now above the point where it was pre banking crisis and child poverty reduced to it's lowest point in 10 years. And to be honest I can't understand the level of hate being aimed at David Cameron from Scots when his party is pledging to cut Government waste to bring the country back into surplus so we can have further tax cuts. How can anyone of sane mind have any issue with that at all.

Dicko, what world do you live in?

I don't believe that anyone would aspire to have a society where no one can earn more than 50% more than someone on the dole. I do, however, aspire not to live in a society where the fat cats can earn several thousand times this level.

The main reason that the median income has risen is that the income of bankers and chief executives have risen to astronomical levels in this time of austerity while that of those lower down the pecking order has reduced in relative terms. If this is you idea of a healthy society, heaven help you.

And, if child poverty is at its lowest level for years, why do I keep seeing reports that the number of childeren living in poiverty has increased and is likely to continue increasing with the proposed reduction in benefit levels.

As usual you don't let facts get in the way of your delusions.

[Stuart Dickson]

Dicko, what world do you live in?

I don't believe that anyone would aspire to have a society where no one can earn more than 50% more than someone on the dole. I do, however, aspire not to live in a society where the fat cats can earn several thousand times this level.

The main reason that the median income has risen is that the income of bankers and chief executives have risen to astronomical levels in this time of austerity while that of those lower down the pecking order has reduced in relative terms. If this is you idea of a healthy society, heaven help you.

And, if child poverty is at its lowest level for years, why do I keep seeing reports that the number of childeren living in poiverty has increased and is likely to continue increasing with the proposed reduction in benefit levels.

As usual you don't let facts get in the way of your delusions.

I've provided the official figures. Just click on the link to see it. I'm sure even you will be able to understand it.

I'm living in the real world, not some fantasy SNP ideal that can never be achieved. Consider the stupidity of the pledge made by Nicola Sturgeon last night. Her method of "ending poverty" would be to INCREASE BORROWING. That borrowing would carry interest as well as needing to be repaid which obviously increases the burden on the taxpayer year on year. She then said she would spend this increased borrowing on infrastructure projects to end poverty. We know the vast majority of our construction workers are already earning above median wages. Increasing the demand for those skilled employees would only have the effect of pushing their wages up further still and as you all appear to now be beginning to understand that would have the effect of pushing up the median wage, which then pushes MORE CHILDREN INTO POVERTY.

I'm a Pipefitter, not an economist or a politician but it's clear as anything that to make claims like that on National TV last night we now have proof that Nicola Sturgeon either doesn't have an understanding of how the economy works, or she was simply dishing out ridiculous platitudes in the hope of conning the stupid into supporting her.

[FTOF]

II'm a Pipefitter, not an economist or a politician but it's clear as anything that to make claims like that on National TV last night we now have proof that Nicola Sturgeon either doesn't have an understanding of how the economy works, or she was simply dishing out ridiculous platitudes in the hope of conning the stupid into supporting her.

No shit Sherlock.

Why then do you insist in making a rip roaring cúnt of yourself every time you post comments in relation to economics?

[FTOF]

Fantastic to see the desperate Whitehall civil servants shitting themselves so much on the account of the SNP,that they can't even get their lies straight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32177315

This latest lie by the old boy's network combined with Millibellend's ill thought out response, should guarantee another few thousand SNP votes.

They can run, but they can't hide.......................................

[Seaside Nipper]

Fantastic to see the desperate Whitehall civil servants shitting themselves so much on the account of the SNP,that they can't even get their lies straight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32177315

This latest lie by the old boy's network combined with Millibellend's ill thought out response, should guarantee another few thousand SNP votes.

They can run, but they can't hide.......................................

It is quite remarkable how Englandshire and more specifically the Home Counties are now realising that there is some intelligent life up north. It is most amusing indeed to see the establishment as you say, frankly foaming at the gash at the thought of scotland chiselling into Westminster.

It almost makes all the politics and the talking head showcase moderately interesting.

[Stuart Dickson]

Did you ever consider the idea that it might be you who doesn't understand how the economy works? Just saying, like.

As already mentioned, I haven't seen the programs yet so can't comment on what was said but increasing borrowing does not necessarily increase the financial burden on the country. It depends on the amount of the increase and where and on what the borrowed money is spent. I thought that would be obvious, even to a pipefitter.

What is obvious is that to eradicate poverty in the UK you would have to ensure that no-one in the country had a household income of more than 50% greater than that of a person on job seekers allowance.

Would you be happy to take the pay cut to help wee Nicola hit her target?

[Guest TPAFKATS]

That's simply not true. We know for example in modern history that the people of Russia were incredibly xenophobic, as are the North Koreans, and the Chinese. We also know that the German National Socialists were very xenophobic too - and they are the party in history that I would most closely align the Scottish Nationalist Party with, as you well know.

Attention seeking c**t

[Stuart Dickson]

There is a difference between being insular and being xenophobic.

The German Nazi party was right wing, don't try and kid yourself that they weren't just because of their name.

From your favourite source of info:-

Nazism (/ˈnaːtsɪzᵊm/, alternatively spelledNaziism),[1] or National Socialism (German:Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice of the German Nazi Party and state. It is sometimes applied to other far-rightgroups. Usually characterised as a form offascism that incorporates scientific racismand antisemitism, Nazism arose from pan-Germanism, the Völkisch German nationalist movement and the anti-communist Freikorpsafter World War I.

Also, North Korea is a dictatorship, the same as the USSR was, especially under Stalin. As you can see from the quote from Wiki below, they don't "practice" communism ideology any more.

Originally a close ally of Stalin's USSR, North Korea has gradually distanced itself from the world Communist movement. Juche, an ideology of self-reliance, replaced Marxism–Leninism as the official ideology when the country adopted a new constitution in 1972.[15][16] In 2009, the constitution was amended again, quietly removing the brief references to communism (Chosŏn'gŭl: 공산주의).[17]

As for China, they tend to be more "superior". They don't fear other cultures, they just think they are better than other cultures.

Oh really!

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/03/world/asia/china-foreigner-crackdown-florcruz/

You aren't very good at this....

[Stuart Dickson]

Did you actually read that article? If you did and you still linked to it to "prove me wrong" then you are, once again, showing yourself up to be an utter buffoon.

Nobody really needs to disagree with you on anything, they just need to wait for you to link to your next bit of "proof" to prove you wrong.

I notice that you didn't disagree about the German Nazi party being right wing.

There's a strong argument to be said that there wasn't a hell of a lot of difference between the German Nazi State and Stalins USSR in terms of ideology or in practice with perhaps the only obvious difference being that in Nazi Germany private companies were allowed to exist and prosper so long as they became Nazi Party Members and they weren't owned by Jews, whilst in Stalins USSR everything was owned and run by the state but the individual could enjoy a better life if they joined the Communist Party so long as they weren't Jewish.

Of course the Scottish Natsi's showed recently that they were quite happy to cuddle up to big business so long as big business was willing to state their public support for Independence and the grassroots party membership continue to call for a boycott of industries that failed to support their political goals.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Stuart Dickson