Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
cockles1987

Tories Shown Their Real Colours

Recommended Posts

I accept that you have always been open to debate but as you know a fair number of us on the forum don't live in Scotland and during the debate leading up to the vote a few of us who had the temerity to raise issues were more or less told to f**k off.

With regard to your second paragraph, I'd remind you that a company's profits belong to the shareholders. Corporation tax is levied at 40% on the company's net profits. That's if the company pays corporation tax. See Starbucks, Amazon and Google among others. The UK government can and does come to arrangements with foreign companies whereby they can get corporation tax relief if they set up a company. An independent Scotland would be in competition with England for this kind of business and England would hold most of the cards. Size alone is part of that. Is it worth 100% corporation tax relief to attract jobs? Probably. In the past it wasn't up to Scotland to make these decisions but I think we got our fair share. In the future England ( and Wales and Northern Ireland too) will get them nearly all with little Scotland not being able to compete. They might get some. Size matters. Size of economy I mean.

I didn't really mean to debate this today but it was another of the reasons that I recognised a long time ago as an inhibiting factor for an independent Scotland. If you go along with the belief that England is a cheating big bastard so far as business is concerned, just imagine what they might be like when an Independent Scotland and England go head to head for a foreign company bringing let's say 10,000 jobs.

We could just become a tax haven and only have to compete with the likes of Switzerland and Luxemburg. :whistle:

Heeeere fishes, come to daddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's a sore point. I had the misfortune to be born on New Year's Day 1947. Only daft women are coy about their age. Folk of around my age and I'm sure younger suffer having our birthdays so near Christmas. When I were a lad, things were tough in post-war Britain. Not a lot of money around. (I don't actually remember but I still hear it said) So for starters it was quite common to get one present that was meant to cover Xmas and birthday. My parents didn't do it but some folk did. Then after the age of about 9 or 10 I spent part of my birthday either at Love Street or Rugby Park. Sometimes wur team gave me a birthday win. When I was old enough to go first-footing (12), and then all the years until I got married, some drunken sod remembered it was my birthday, usually about 4 o'clock in the morning. And some other bum decided it would be a big laugh to give me my nips and dumps. (Is it still called that?) F**king hilarious. So whatever you do, don't mention my birthday. Or the war.

OK, Basil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't implying unfairness or cheating, I understand the whys and wherefores, all I was saying was that a lump of what's reported as London/SE profits is actually generated elsewhere in the UK, including Scotland. The bulk of that won't disappear, not while it's money making anyway. I do believe that these figures need to be factored in when you're trying to work things out but they (the establishment, if you like) ignore them when they publish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe it or not my post was intended to be moderately friendly and my opening remarks were tongue in cheek. I don't really think you have carers but your response makes me wonder if I touched a raw nerve. Now, work out for yourself whether you think I'm being serious.

I've replied only to counter your SNP-bad remark. Keep that for Dicko. I've never said the SNP are bad. I have said naive but the worrying thing is that they aren't naive but are presenting a future for Scotland which they know well is not affordable. You along with others don't care. You want independence at any cost and so do Sturgeon and Wee Eck. An independent Scotland will survive but without the beneficence of RUK they would struggle. Their sums don't add up. And what will the party situation be in an independent Scotland? Labour almost doesn't exist and yesterday's election result could make Churchill's wilderness years seem like a long weekend. No, there are too many unanswered questions but of course I have no right to ask them. I'm beyond the pale. Appropriate,I suppose, because I do live in Ireland. And talking about Ireland, an independent Scotland, when Angela Merkel says 'Shit', like Eire will only be able to ask 'OK, where?' No veto of any nature. Giving up the UK to suck EU ass even harder. You would need to.

Another problem for your party is that although you have brains at the top, quite a number of your MP's are ragtag and bobtail and you and your leadership know it. Thank God George Osborne still has a hold on the purse strings.

Right, game over. SNP-good. Everybody else bad. Will just add that I don't particularly like any party but once they are in power, I always hope they get it right. I never want to see a government f**k up so 'my' party can get in. That's if I had a party.

You are misrepresenting my words when you say I don't care.

I don't care in the short term because I believe in the long term things will be much better with independence.

BTW........

I have no idea what you are getting at.......

My party?

My leadership?

My MPs?

I voted SNP recently but they are not MY anything. They are the only party interested in Scotland. That's why they are currently getting my vote.

No other party cares about my country. The rest put party first. For that they deserve contempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are misrepresenting my words when you say I don't care.

I don't care in the short term because I believe in the long term things will be much better with independence.

BTW........

I have no idea what you are getting at.......

My party?

My leadership?

My MPs?

I voted SNP recently but they are not MY anything. They are the only party interested in Scotland. That's why they are currently getting my vote.

No other party cares about my country. The rest put party first. For that they deserve contempt.

Ach, you're far more gullible than I ever gave you credit for. You only need to look at how Salmond and Sturgeon are troughing it to know they only care about their own careers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ach, you're far more gullible than I ever gave you credit for. You only need to look at how Salmond and Sturgeon are troughing it to know they only care about their own careers.

When any SNP MP or MSP attempts or succeeds in getting their personal moat cleaned at taxpayers expense maybe I'll listen to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ach, you're far more gullible than I ever gave you credit for. You only need to look at how Salmond and Sturgeon are troughing it to know they only care about their own careers.

#thichasfcuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are misrepresenting my words when you say I don't care.

I don't care in the short term because I believe in the long term things will be much better with independence.

BTW........

I have no idea what you are getting at.......

My party?

My leadership?

My MPs?

I voted SNP recently but they are not MY anything. They are the only party interested in Scotland. That's why they are currently getting my vote.

No other party cares about my country. The rest put party first. For that they deserve contempt.

We'll have to differ about the prognosis for an independent Scotland's economic health then. Can I ask, though, what you think is a short period? There is no going back as we all know and I believe that the SNP have a jam tomorrow attitude. Independence at any cost and short term hardship is OK at any cost. But of course no political party can say that. Honesty is often in short supply from most of them.

I'll admit my 'my party' thing was badly worded. But it's laughable the notion that the SNP's raison d'etre means the demise of the SNP in the unlikely event that they achieve their aim. It has been suggested. They're on the pig's back now and loving it. They'll rebrand themselves as 'The Party That Saved The World' or some such and carry on franically trying to suss economic reality. Your final two sentences are pure bollocks but you are entitled to your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll have to differ about the prognosis for an independent Scotland's economic health then. Can I ask, though, what you think is a short period? There is no going back as we all know and I believe that the SNP have a jam tomorrow attitude. Independence at any cost and short term hardship is OK at any cost. But of course no political party can say that. Honesty is often in short supply from most of them.

I'll admit my 'my party' thing was badly worded. But it's laughable the notion that the SNP's raison d'etre means the demise of the SNP in the unlikely event that they achieve their aim. It has been suggested. They're on the pig's back now and loving it. They'll rebrand themselves as 'The Party That Saved The World' or some such and carry on franically trying to suss economic reality. Your final two sentences are pure bollocks but you are entitled to your opinion.

I don't think it's going to be sunshine, lollipops and rainbows if we get independence - never did. I want an independent Scotland because I think that politically and culturally we're different from the English, as I heard Henry McLeish say at about 7:40am the morning after the referendum, and that the Scottish branches of our political parties are dictated to by the London head offices, as Johann Lamont said when she resigned her post barely a month after the referendum.

Despite the fluctuating price of oil and the orchestrated threats of mass pull-out by the multi-nationals I think our economic prospects would be better served by a Hollyrood parliament which considers Scotland's needs first rather than Westminster and even if I am wrong it doesn't matter to me as if something is worth having then it's worth paying for.

Frankly the attitude of the Conservative & UKI parties the morning after the election that "you had your chance to leave but you chose not to so now you'd better just knuckle under" sickened me and the "once in a generation opportunity" talked of by Alex Salmond shouldn't be binding given the lack of good faith shown by the present government. I don't reckon the current political situation is sustainable and that within 10 years either the SNP vote will collapse or we will get independence.

Independence for Scotland would be better for England too - better a friendly neighbour than an unhappy tenant!

********************

PS - When is the demographic see-saw due to tilt in your part of the world?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few things didnae ring quite right for me in your post. Not massive, but an interpretation of a reality I don't recall...

I don't think it's going to be sunshine, lollipops and rainbows if we get independence - never did. I want an independent Scotland because I think that politically and culturally we're different from the English, as I heard Henry McLeish say at about 7:40am the morning after the referendum, and that the Scottish branches of our political parties are dictated to by the London head offices, as Johann Lamont said when she resigned her post barely a month after the referendum.

I'd agree that politically and culturally Scots are different from many English. Not all, by any means.

And the head office of the Labour Party in London (and the UK) has been regularly headed up by Scots. Johann Lamont is not someone I would ever have pinned my aspirations on nor cited as a font of knowledge.

Despite the fluctuating price of oil and the orchestrated threats of mass pull-out by the multi-nationals I think our economic prospects would be better served by a Hollyrood parliament which considers Scotland's needs first rather than Westminster and even if I am wrong it doesn't matter to me as if something is worth having then it's worth paying for.

For 'fluctuating' try 'falling' or more accurately 'plummeted'. I genuinely don't believe economic prospects would be improved by separation, though I wholly agree that Scots could more accurately consider what the smaller pot should be spent on.

However, I would bet that Highland and Island Scots won't share the same vision as those in the Central Belt.

Brent's low price will continue to be kept at those levels whilst Saudi wants it to be that low. Saudi is ensuring that Brent and similarly high cost (of extraction) supplies, such as US fracked, does not become a competitor for its massive resources. It'll fluctuate when the Saudis say so... and for me that's just as niggly and subservient a position to be in than to have a friendly, understanding neighbour with a shared history and culture, steering the same boat as the one I'm sitting in.

Frankly the attitude of the Conservative & UKI parties the morning after the election that "you had your chance to leave but you chose not to so now you'd better just knuckle under" sickened me and the "once in a generation opportunity" talked of by Alex Salmond shouldn't be binding given the lack of good faith shown by the present government. I don't reckon the current political situation is sustainable and that within 10 years either the SNP vote will collapse or we will get independence.

To me, the morning-after attitude was more "thank goodness the majority of Scots chose to stay with the Union". I'm surprised at you choosing the same world vision as those who blamed the ref for Saturday's second half capitulation by Saints. It was a defeat, that is all.

Independence for Scotland would be better for England too - better a friendly neighbour than an unhappy tenant!

The only unhappy tenants are those in the SNP camp, who see themselves as tenants, ruled by wankers. The majority of Scots are unhappy with the political situation nation-wide (and by nation, of course I mean UK). The Jeremy Corbyn election manifestly demonstrates that there is widespread disenchantment by the electorate.

As I burbled on often in the past, the elephant in the room is the city state of London. It distorts all aspects of UK public life. Freedom under Nicola would not change that. She's happily in bed with arch-capitalists.

At least Corbyn says he will try to change the dread impact of Capitalism in the UK implement policies that are more fair, moral and equal, (even though his own party members and the media were already bleating about how he would have become more moderate to survive only minutes after the result was announced).

Edited by bluto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll have to differ about the prognosis for an independent Scotland's economic health then. Can I ask, though, what you think is a short period? There is no going back as we all know and I believe that the SNP have a jam tomorrow attitude. Independence at any cost and short term hardship is OK at any cost. But of course no political party can say that. Honesty is often in short supply from most of them.

I'll admit my 'my party' thing was badly worded. But it's laughable the notion that the SNP's raison d'etre means the demise of the SNP in the unlikely event that they achieve their aim. It has been suggested. They're on the pig's back now and loving it. They'll rebrand themselves as 'The Party That Saved The World' or some such and carry on franically trying to suss economic reality. Your final two sentences are pure bollocks but you are entitled to your opinion.

I reckon it will take us 10 to 20 years to get sorted out fully but it might be less than that.

I don't believe it will take any longer than that though.

During the 10-20 year transition period, I think the vast majority will see no real difference to their standard of living.

I'm not really interested in what the SNP or any other party thinks as regards "jam" on any particular day in the future.

It's not politicians who will make the transition work, it will be business and the citizens.

People who gain independence from living at home generally struggle at first before finding their feet and outperforming their parents.

I see independence as a country in exactly the same way.

Too many citizens waiting to be told what to do is bad for our economy.

We need more people who understand we are on our own and then react positively accordingly to create the new small and medium businesses required for us to thrive.

I have total faith in our people that they will react that way.

This is a difference between us. You think it will be down to the SNP to make it work.

I strongly believe it can only be the people of our country who can make it work.

That's why, for me, it's irrelevant how much jam the SNP promise - it won't be them providing it.

Under Westminster rule we are being provided with fish.

I want our people to learn how to fish themselves.

Yeah I know my last two sentences are probably bollox but it's hard to come to any other conclusion when people insist another country must determine our finances and what we spend it on.

IMO that is treachery, cowardice and an unwillingness to accept personal responsibility.

I have absolutely zero respect for those who cannot accept personal responsibility and who sell that personal responsiblity for a few quid on their pension.

As for what the SNP do after independence? Frankly I couldn't care less.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree that politically and culturally Scots are different from many English. Not all, by any means.


And the head office of the Labour Party in London (and the UK) has been regularly headed up by Scots. Johann Lamont is not someone I would ever have pinned my aspirations on nor cited as a font of knowledge.



Different enough to have radically different governments if independence had occurred, with the proposed boundary changes when will we see another Labour government at Westminster? My opinion on Ms. Lamont is similar to yours but she was the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland and she said what she said.




For 'fluctuating' try 'falling' or more accurately 'plummeted'. I genuinely don't believe economic prospects would be improved by separation, though I wholly agree that Scots could more accurately consider what the smaller pot should be spent on.


However, I would bet that Highland and Island Scots won't share the same vision as those in the Central Belt.



Brent's low price will continue to kept at those levels whilst Saudi wants it to be that low. Saudi is ensuring that Brent and similarly high cost (of extraction) supplies, such as US fracked, does not become a competitor for its massive resources.



Other than Stu-D who knows what the price of oil will be two or even five years from now? Even if the price stays low it's still an asset to the country and not a liability. As to people in the Highlands & Islands having a different perspective from those in the Central Belt it wasn't reflected in the results of the General election.



To me, the morning-after attitude was more "thank goodness the majority of Scots chose to stay with the Union". I'm surprised at you choosing the same world vision as those who blamed the ref for Saturday's second half capitulation by Saints. It was a defeat, that is all.



I'd say Nigel Farage writing a letter to all Scottish MP's the morning after the referendum regarding what issues they should be allowed to vote and David Cameron saying he wanted Scottish MP's to be barred from voting on taxes, spending and benefits in England the same day comes closer to my interpretation than yours.



The only unhappy tenants are those in the SNP camp, who see themselves as tenants, ruled by wankers. The majority of Scots are unhappy with the political situation nation-wide (and by nation, of course I mean UK). The Jeremy Corbyn election manifestly demonstrates that there is widespread disenchantment by the electorate.


As I burbled on often in the past, the elephant in the room is the city state of London. clap.gif It distorts all aspects of UK public life. Freedom under Nicola would not change that. She's happily in bed with arch-capitalists.



At least Corbyn says he will try to change the dread impact of Capitalism in the UK implement policies that are more fair, moral and equal, (even though his own party members and the media were already bleating about how he would have become more moderate to survive only minutes after the result was announced).



I'd be happy to see a Corbyn led Labour government in Westminster and might even consider voting Labour if it was likely as I am well aware that the SNP are no socialists but the scaremongering has started already and as you so rightly say nothing will be allowed to affect the City State of London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few things didnae ring quite right for me in your post. Not massive, but an interpretation of a reality I don't recall...

One thing you haven't considered in your analysis, that the oil companies and all UK governments have

Investment in the north sea continues, some deferred, some re-focussed and some cancelled, the reason is that, in the future, energy security will be ever more important. The north sea could well become a more strategic asset than it currently is as uncertainty continues.

If the Saudis dont deal with theproblems on their on doorstep (i think they will make them worse) then it doesnt matter how low the price is, they won't get the oil out of the country anyway

Edited by beyond our ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you haven't considered in your analysis, that the oil companies and all UK governments have

Investment in the north sea continues, some deferred, some re-focussed and some cancelled, the reason is that, in the future, energy security will be ever more important. The north sea could well become a more strategic asset than it currently is as uncertainty continues.

If the Saudis dont deal with theproblems on their on doorstep (i think they will make them worse) then it doesnt matter how low the price is, they won't get the oil out of the country anyway

I did consider it. And I share your thoughts about the future of the house of Saud. :)

We have (we are) managing without the source of oil that was once considered impossible to relinquish. Iraq. Oil is still coming from there.

Losing Saudi oil to insurgents is as important and relevant as the possibility that Scottish Nutters rise, be a nation again and turn off the oil supplies in Scotland. It will cause a blip, a hiccup then will be sorted. Even insurgents (or as was the case in Iraq - Nationalists nationalising the oil fields) need income.

As long as oil is desirable - and for carbon capture sake we are meant to be turning away from it, thus apparently diminishing demand - then that need will be serviced.

But it'll be serviced by whatever (and wherever) source of oil is easiest and cheapest to produce.

North Sea oil is hard to get at and to bring home. The fields are old and coming to an end of their life, too. New and easier UK/Scottish fields would be good to find...

Since Iraq Petroleum Company got kicked out of Iraq in the 70s, dozens of new sources of Oil have been exploited. Cheaper, easier and from more stable locations such as Abu Dhabi, Qater, and the various 'Stans in Asia.

(IPC also owned QPC and ADPC as well as many others. IPC was a front - a cartel - for Shell, BP, CFP, Esso and Gulbenkian had a 5% share in it, too.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree that politically and culturally Scots are different from many English. Not all, by any means.

And the head office of the Labour Party in London (and the UK) has been regularly headed up by Scots. Johann Lamont is not someone I would ever have pinned my aspirations on nor cited as a font of knowledge.

Different enough to have radically different governments if independence had occurred, with the proposed boundary changes when will we see another Labour government at Westminster? My opinion on Ms. Lamont is similar to yours but she was the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland and she said what she said.

For 'fluctuating' try 'falling' or more accurately 'plummeted'. I genuinely don't believe economic prospects would be improved by separation, though I wholly agree that Scots could more accurately consider what the smaller pot should be spent on.

However, I would bet that Highland and Island Scots won't share the same vision as those in the Central Belt.

Brent's low price will continue to kept at those levels whilst Saudi wants it to be that low. Saudi is ensuring that Brent and similarly high cost (of extraction) supplies, such as US fracked, does not become a competitor for its massive resources.

Other than Stu-D who knows what the price of oil will be two or even five years from now? Even if the price stays low it's still an asset to the country and not a liability. As to people in the Highlands & Islands having a different perspective from those in the Central Belt it wasn't reflected in the results of the General election.

To me, the morning-after attitude was more "thank goodness the majority of Scots chose to stay with the Union". I'm surprised at you choosing the same world vision as those who blamed the ref for Saturday's second half capitulation by Saints. It was a defeat, that is all.

I'd say Nigel Farage writing a letter to all Scottish MP's the morning after the referendum regarding what issues they should be allowed to vote and David Cameron saying he wanted Scottish MP's to be barred from voting on taxes, spending and benefits in England the same day comes closer to my interpretation than yours.

The only unhappy tenants are those in the SNP camp, who see themselves as tenants, ruled by wankers. The majority of Scots are unhappy with the political situation nation-wide (and by nation, of course I mean UK). The Jeremy Corbyn election manifestly demonstrates that there is widespread disenchantment by the electorate.

As I burbled on often in the past, the elephant in the room is the city state of London. clap.gif It distorts all aspects of UK public life. Freedom under Nicola would not change that. She's happily in bed with arch-capitalists.

At least Corbyn says he will try to change the dread impact of Capitalism in the UK implement policies that are more fair, moral and equal, (even though his own party members and the media were already bleating about how he would have become more moderate to survive only minutes after the result was announced).

I'd be happy to see a Corbyn led Labour government in Westminster and might even consider voting Labour if it was likely as I am well aware that the SNP are no socialists but the scaremongering has started already and as you so rightly say nothing will be allowed to affect the City State of London.

You'll be safe from having to ponder that one.

The UK left is split so badly its not going to govern for the foreseeable. Corbynites v the more social democratic labour types. And tartan clad dafties dreaming the dream in Scotland. The result of this is tories in power for as long as that situation remains. Enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll be safe from having to ponder that one.

The UK left is split so badly its not going to govern for the foreseeable. Corbynites v the more social democratic labour types. And tartan clad dafties dreaming the dream in Scotland. The result of this is tories in power for as long as that situation remains. Enjoy.

Spot on and great news for the country.

The Tories can now cut the bloated public sector and public spending as much as it's needing cut without having to worry about losing in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll be safe from having to ponder that one.

The UK left is split so badly its not going to govern for the foreseeable. Corbynites v the more social democratic labour types. And tartan clad dafties dreaming the dream in Scotland. The result of this is tories in power for as long as that situation remains. Enjoy.

Spot on and great news for the country.

The Tories can now cut the bloated public sector and public spending as much as it's needing cut without having to worry about losing in 2020.

This is the sort of hubris, shown on here and all the way up the Tory party tree to Davidson & Cameron, that will lead to a second independence referendum.

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a second resounding victory for the union smile.png

Perhaps but it's going to happen - that's why Kezia Dugdale is trying to find a semi-neutral position for the Scottish Labour Party and UK politicians like Tim Farron and Digby Jones have both offered their own views, unsolicited, within the last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a first resounding victory before you get a second.

:)

How many hundred thousand does it have to be before it's resounding?

The margin of victory was more than the entire population of the cities of Aberdeen and Dundee combined .

It wasn't even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps but it's going to happen - that's why Kezia Dugdale is trying to find a semi-neutral position for the Scottish Labour Party and UK politicians like Tim Farron and Digby Jones have both offered their own views, unsolicited, within the last week.

Kezia Dugdale is an irrelevance, just like her party. I doubt most of the electorate have even heard of her.

As for the other two... Again... Who cares?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...