The Politics Thread

[shull]

 

 

[bazil85]

Clear Shull hasn’t moved with his Right Wing, Tory, Unionist POV but interested to know if anyone has changed their stance on independence? I was yes in 2014 but I wouldn’t want to put my cards on the table just yet with the current situation.

I do fully agree another referendum is justified though.

[Tommy]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Clear Shull hasn’t moved with his Right Wing, Tory, Unionist POV but interested to know if anyone has changed their stance on independence? I was yes in 2014 but I wouldn’t want to put my cards on the table just yet with the current situation.

I do fully agree another referendum is justified though.

I was yes in 2014 while I was working.

Not 100% sure now that I have retired, but would likely say yes again pending on any more power being moved from London to Edinburgh.

I would also ask my son and daughter their view since it would effect them more than me. 

I also feel an other referendum is justified. 

[Cornwall_Saint]

14 hours ago, shull said:

 

 

I don’t see anything wrong with what Mr Bonnar is doing.

Why in the 21st century, do we still have a royal family taking huge sums of our tax revenue whilst we endure a period of austerity which has shafted those with the least money?

Well done Stephen Bonnar. 

[St.Ricky]

I don't disclose where I cast my vote but can be described as a floating voter. I see nothing wrong though with the Scottish People making a choice or having the right to do so. I'd find it difficult to believe that the act of union was established with perpetuity in mind. 

[salmonbuddie]

 

 

 

I was yes in 2014 while I was working.

Not 100% sure now that I have retired, but would likely say yes again pending on any more power being moved from London to Edinburgh.

I would also ask my son and daughter their view since it would effect them more than me. 

I also feel an other referendum is justified. 

 

More power is likely to move from Edinburgh to London if reports are to be believed. Just another broken promise from 2014 if that turns out to be the case.

 

[windae cleaner]

18 hours ago, shull said:

 

 

My brother and uncles done this when joining the army

Needs must for a job

[Tommy]

3 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

 

 

 

 

 

More power is likely to move from Edinburgh to London if reports are to be believed. Just another broken promise from 2014 if that turns out to be the case.

 

Wouldn't surprise me. 

[windae cleaner]

18 hours ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

I don’t see anything wrong with what Mr Bonnar is doing.

Why in the 21st century, do we still have a royal family taking huge sums of our tax revenue whilst we endure a period of austerity which has shafted those with the least money?

Well done Stephen Bonnar. 

This is why

Shull and his pals give their view

 

[DougJamie]

TBF- Alex Salmond is a twat...………...

Must be at least 20 brain cells between the lot of them

 

To balance this

 

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by DougJamie

[Cornwall_Saint]

1 hour ago, windae cleaner said:

This is why

Shull and his pals give their view

 

I’ve seen that abomination of a video before.

Fantastic advert against both being a Sevco fan and a unionist.

Couldn't help but find it hilarious about the guy with the Div 2 champions t-Shirt, I’d be too embarrassed to wear one if our club ever fell to such a level.

[bazil85]

20 hours ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

I don’t see anything wrong with what Mr Bonnar is doing.

Why in the 21st century, do we still have a royal family taking huge sums of our tax revenue whilst we endure a period of austerity which has shafted those with the least money?

Well done Stephen Bonnar. 

The Royal Family make far more for the country than they cost tax payers. If they weren't a monarchy & generated the kind of income through public interest, they'd have a claim on many times more than what they take in tax. Pro or anti Royal Family, this is beyond doubt. 

Personally I have no issue with them and what they do, but no particular interest. They're pretty much used as a tourist trap & for public interest stories, if that was the life I was born into, I would feel entitled to financial compensation as well. 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

The Royal Family make far more for the country than they cost tax payers. If they weren't a monarchy & generated the kind of income through public interest, they'd have a claim on many times more than what they take in tax. Pro or anti Royal Family, this is beyond doubt. 

Personally I have no issue with them and what they do, but no particular interest. They're pretty much used as a tourist trap & for public interest stories, if that was the life I was born into, I would feel entitled to financial compensation as well. 

This argument is put forward on a regular basis however is there any substance behind it?

Tourists come to see the castles and palaces, indeed if there was no monarchy and wider family living in them it could be argued that there would be more access to the buildings and estate therefore more tourist income.

France does OK for tourists visiting it "royal palaces"

 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

I was yes in 2014 while I was working.
Not 100% sure now that I have retired, but would likely say yes again pending on any more power being moved from London to Edinburgh.
I would also ask my son and daughter their view since it would effect them more than me. 
I also feel an other referendum is justified. 

What has changed your view, or at least made you more hesitant since retiring?

[Cornwall_Saint]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

The Royal Family make far more for the country than they cost tax payers. If they weren't a monarchy & generated the kind of income through public interest, they'd have a claim on many times more than what they take in tax. Pro or anti Royal Family, this is beyond doubt. 

Personally I have no issue with them and what they do, but no particular interest. They're pretty much used as a tourist trap & for public interest stories, if that was the life I was born into, I would feel entitled to financial compensation as well. 

I would have replied to this but Slarti and TPAF have covered what I would have said.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, Slartibartfast said:

You know what I'm going to ask for, don't you? 

You can ask whatever you want or look into the research. People not willing to educate themselves on a subject (not saying anyone in particular wont) doesn't invalidate it. 

[salmonbuddie]

I would have replied to this but Slarti and TPAF have covered what I would have said.

So you did anyway?

[emoji846]

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:

This argument is put forward on a regular basis however is there any substance behind it?

Tourists come to see the castles and palaces, indeed if there was no monarchy and wider family living in them it could be argued that there would be more access to the buildings and estate therefore more tourist income.

Yes there is, the Royal Family in themselves and their history are public interest. The reason why people go visit their castles and other attractions and by memorabilia is why they are tourist attractions. There are arguments for the extent we use them as tourist traps but there is no doubt that the people themselves generate public interest that results in financial gain. If you don't believe this, contact some of the many magazine publishers and other entertainment outlets that desperately want to cover royal weddings and other events of the family. 

France does OK for tourists visiting it "royal palaces"

I would wager it isn't close to what the UK generates

 

[bazil85]

54 minutes ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

I would have replied to this but Slarti and TPAF have covered what I would have said.

Slarti used his go to and TPAF engaged in quite decent debate which I responded to. 

From the Crown estate alone, roughly £330 million a year is made and the RF only keep about 25% of that. If it was a family of private land owner and made £330 million, the family would keep a lot more than that, reducing government income.

If we take this point alone, abolish the RF and give the Royal Estate to private land owners, we see a fair chunk of government income fall, because I doubt anyone would agree to the same conditions of 75% of their profit going to the government. 

[BuddieinEK]

I wish I was an expert on everything with unlimited knowledge!

Still.

I'm fortunate to have one on here willing to share that knowledge and wisdom at every opportunity! [emoji850]

[bazil85]

13 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

I wish I was an expert on everything with unlimited knowledge!

Still.

I'm fortunate to have one on here willing to share that knowledge and wisdom at every opportunity!

Who? Must have missed them.

My wish is that more people were passable in using Google rather than needing an "expert" on the forum. 

[shull]

It's okay to be a googler. 

[Tommy]

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

On 12/19/2019 at 1:37 PM, Tommy said:

I was yes in 2014 while I was working.
Not 100% sure now that I have retired, but would likely say yes again pending on any more power being moved from London to Edinburgh.
I would also ask my son and daughter their view since it would effect them more than me. 
I also feel an other referendum is justified. 

What has changed your view, or at least made you more hesitant since retiring?

My trust of the SNP leadership had gone well down by the way they have been dealing with a health issue my wife has.

1st health minster was Alex Neil, and he did the right thing by not believing everything his advisers told him.

2nd health minster was Shona Robison, who was a waste of space and believe everything she was told by her advisors.

3rd health minster is the current 1 called Jeane Freeman, who seems to be listening more to the patients rather than her advisors.

The advisors were mostly surgeons who get funded by the big companies for reports and trials but have conflict of interest.

In 6 years of campaign, it was only last month when the campaigners finally got a meeting with the 1st minster.

 I have meet dozens of MSP in the last 6 years and only a handful of them would I trust.

I have really found out in the last 6 years how the general public is treated by most politicians in government, and I don't like what I see.

So to answer your question, it is trust or the lack of it that has maybe turned me away from the SNP.

www.scottishmeshsurvivors.com  

[Guest TPAFKATS]

My trust of the SNP leadership had gone well down by the way they have been dealing with a health issue my wife has.
1st health minster was Alex Neil, and he did the right thing by not believing everything his advisers told him.
2nd health minster was Shona Robison, who was a waste of space and believe everything she was told by her advisors.
3rd health minster is the current 1 called Jeane Freeman, who seems to be listening more to the patients rather than her advisors.
The advisors were mostly surgeons who get funded by the big companies for reports and trials but have conflict of interest.
In 6 years of campaign, it was only last month when the campaigners finally got a meeting with the 1st minster.
 I have meet dozens of MSP in the last 6 years and only a handful of them would I trust.
I have really found out in the last 6 years how the general public is treated by most politicians in government, and I don't like what I see.
So to answer your question, it is trust or the lack of it that has maybe turned me away from the SNP.
www.scottishmeshsurvivors.com  

Thanks.
I know this is a subject close to your heart from previous posts.

I thought it was more connected to you retiring

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Slarti used his go to and TPAF engaged in quite decent debate which I responded to. 
From the Crown estate alone, roughly £330 million a year is made and the RF only keep about 25% of that. If it was a family of private land owner and made £330 million, the family would keep a lot more than that, reducing government income.
If we take this point alone, abolish the RF and give the Royal Estate to private land owners, we see a fair chunk of government income fall, because I doubt anyone would agree to the same conditions of 75% of their profit going to the government. 

The Crown Estate is a vast historic land grab that includes coastline and part of estuary and sea bed if I recall.

The money generated from it, isn't necessarily dependent on having a royal family and its only recently that the Queen agreed to give up some of the money made from it.