BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Oct 14 - 12:45 PM

""Young people have less grasp on the history, recent or long standing, and are more likely to favour novelty. Look at the age range imposed by ...............""

You mention the Quebec analogy. Recent surveys indicate young voters there are less interested in separation today, and are mostly interested in economic concerns than independence from Canada. (Things could change, and situations may differ- but, these current indicators in this location suggests that time may lesson, versus strengthen, youth interest in separation).

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Oct 14 - 01:31 PM

I think you are right achmelvich, I saw the phenomenon at first hand, saw young people taking an interest in the campaign for independence.....a generation whom I thought had no interest in the political system, how wrong I was....these young folks are now signing up in droves to make a material difference to the status of our country.
We are in for a few interesting years, if I was a betting man, I would have my house on Scotland being free by 2017.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 03:00 AM

Does that mean I'll get it at a bargain knock down price? Add in the cost of a builder to put it right...

It'd take a couple of years for the property's reputation to die down but you'd be surprised what people will put up with for a cheap holiday.

Holiday lets for next year took off after the vote. Talking to two cottage letting agents over the last couple of weeks, it isn't just mine either. Confidence in Scotland has shot up. The Dutch and Belgians who had been waiting for the outcome, they are the main ones booking, followed by English who waited to see how it panned out. By the way, I am a betting man and although the odds were lousy, (bookies understand The Scots better than SNP do) I still made just over £200 on my bet.

Scotland keep supplying the faux cheesy tartan, I'll keep supplying the punters. Win win.



On a serious note, it'll not be so easy to get criminal tax avoiders to register to vote next time, so I doubt even SNP, if they wish to carry on as a day to day party will dare another humiliation.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 03:07 AM

Achmelvich is correct. The Yes campaign lost the vote but the No campaign had already given up trying to win it on the terms they chose to fight it on. Prior to the campaign the various polls showed that of the three options (status-quo; independence; or some form of devomax) the devomax option was the most popular among ordinary Scots. Though not their favoured option the Scottish gvt was willing to have a third devomax question on the ballot paper. It was the unionist parties and the UK gvt who threw this out. The ballot was to be about a straight 'in or out' question. Any idea of further devolution was to be a question for the future and not for the referendum. And remember some were hostile to the idea of further devolution. Ruth Davidson in her leadership campaign for the Tories declared that the Scotland Bill was the line in the sand. There would be no more powers!!

The No campaign expected to win the referendum easily so in the last few weeks when it looked far too close for their comfort it was suddenly declared that there would be more powers. Not a question of if but a question of what and when. The people who took the original Ruth Davidson stance were pushed aside in the panic and were told they were getting no voice on the matter. There would be more powers whether they liked it or not. An aspect of this which seems to have been completely ignored. We are a split household in that I was a Yes whilst my wife was not only a No but actually through her association with the Tories actively worked for Better Together. Her original stance was further devolution shouldn't be on the table because "why should Alex Salmond have a consolation prize?". Didn't think it was the most logical position to take but it was her position never the less. She's forgotten that now and isn't it great all these powers Cameron is going to give us is the position!!!

As to who the long time winners will be. It is hard to say but it could well be just that it has been delayed for a while. Out of a room of 20 people who voted it was only 11-9 to retain the union. Out of said room only one person need be swayed to make it even so despite what some claim about a big victory it was much closer than people expected and it doesn't seem to have done the Nats any harm in the short term. Not only are they well ahead in the polls for Holyrood but they are also even ahead on the voting intentions for Westminster which must be making Labour nervous in the extreme. Their core support, at least in the short term, seems to have mushroomed. I don't know if that stat has been distributed widely throughout the UK?

At the time of the referendum the membership of the SNP was around 25,000 members which equated to just about as many members as the other three main parties combined. Labour have something like 13,000 and the Tories 11,000 though I can tell you the bulk of Tory membership in Scotland is quite elderly. In the several weeks since the vote SNP membership has rocketed without, they admit themselves, them even trying to obtain new members. It now stands officially at over 75,000 and I've seen reports that this does not include a few thousands applications yet to be processed as thousands have been applying every day. People are talking about 100,000 members within a few weeks if it continues! Plus the membership of the Greens has rocketed too.

Whether this is of any long term significance or not only time will tell but it must be a bit of a hollow victory especially for ardent status-quo unionists. They've had their views brushed aside by their unionist partners without getting their say in a referendum on the issue - and now see their polar opposites flourishing rather than skulking away as a beaten movement.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 03:10 AM

Musket the poll tax thing was a red herring. In lasw it is seemingly written off in Scotland after 20 years. No-one could be chased for it. Salmond took an Aberdeen councillor to bits on a live radio phone in over the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 05:31 AM

The problem with basing your analyses on the opinion polls, Allan, is that they got it wrong: the margin in the actual vote was quite a bit bigger than they predicted. That distorted the political judgements, in particular spurring the No change of policy. Now, rightly or wrongly founded, that change of policy was real, and should be delivered on if possible in the time between now and the election: and thereafter if the Conservatives remain in power.
But the real point of this meme is not what it means for Scotland, rather than what it means for the rest of the UK. The somewhat childish defering of the question until after the next election just lost them my vote, for one thing: they just don't get the message from 38 Degreees and Change that they can no longer treat their electorate with contempt.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 05:46 AM

There is no demographic split. There are no pensioners, no young people, no indigenous Scots, no immigrants, no people born elsewhere in The UK.

The only demographic is people going into the polling booths with a vote. A vote on the basis they live in Scotland. And they voted. The vote was counted and the will of the democratic majority carries the day.

Full stop.

All this assuming people are gullible, thick, taken in by politicians? Works both ways. Either way, looking down on people and saying they were wrong isn't going to win any favours.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 06:59 AM

People ARE "taken in by politicians", I've met about a dozen who voted NO because they believed they were promised more powers for Scotland AND the "security" of remaining within the UK.
They now understand that they have been conned.

This does not assume that they are "thick", most of them are well educated business people, but they trusted the Westminster party leaders to tell the truth and were misled.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:02 AM

To state that there are no demographics in politics.... or health care.... is simplistic, misleading, and ridiculous.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:03 AM

""People ARE "taken in by politicians""

Yes, some are- but, on all sides of any issue;)

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:04 AM

The victory for No though wasn't larger than most of the polls had shown. It was only in the fortnight before the vote that they got really tight which caused the unionists to come up with the Vow. Prior to that No had a pretty clear lead throughout and up until say the beginning of this year it was a huge lead. There is no saying what the result would have been had they not come up with the Vow. I take it some people must have been swayed by it? How many we can't be sure!

Musket has a point. Breaking it down into sections of the population is perhaps interesting but not that significant overall. Everyone's vote had the same value. The truth is if we look at it from a start point then if you class success by how many people you persuade then the Yes side won more people over but they didn't win enough to take the vote itself. That saying the core Yes movement is in a stronger position now than it was prior to the said referendum. On the other side possibly only the Scottish Tories have come out of it well. Seem to have maybe shored up and perhaps consolidated their vote. The Lib Dems and Labour are perhaps sitting less well for the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:46 AM

If all the votes are not considered equal by the losing side, then is it logical to assume they will never accept votes from those Scottish citizens who, for whatever reason that mattered to them, voted the other way a few weeks ago?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 08:25 AM

Spooky, that came out as guest.

I'm the only one here who tells bigots to get back in their hole...

Ed. That is indeed the case, reading some of the comments. A referendum was held. All sides were required by the enabling legislation itself to respect the outcome. We had an outcome.

Nobody is interested in whether someone accepts it or not. The point is, it happened and we have the same number of UK subjects now as before.

Nothing to see here.

Move on.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 09:16 AM

That came out as guest too.

Right. Try again.

Cookie seems to be crumbling eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 11:02 AM

(almost) regardless of the result, i think it is more interesting that there was a great deal of enthusiasm and democratic involvement than in any other recent political event. i'm sure we can all agree it would be a good thing if that enthusiasm is maintained and that the political leaders of all the main parties are seriously held to account for the promises they make before polling days. the alternative is to say 'well, politicians will say anything to get your vote - but we can't expect them to actually mean any of it' That would be to accept their cynicism and lies and to approve it - they will have succeeded in bringing us down to their level.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 11:15 AM

"...i'm sure we can all agree it would be a good thing if that enthusiasm is maintained.""

A good approach, unfortunately, in many of this type of situation, a small number show negative, sour-grape type of attitudes and choose to play the blame game, versus enthusiasm and respect for the choice of others- who merely see things differently than they do.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 02:20 PM

Only a matter of time chaps, There are a huge number of as yet unprocessed membership applications sitting in in SNP offices, final figures of over 150,000 members are being seriously considered

The SNP could very soon have the largest membership in the UK....then the cat would be really amongst the pigeons. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 02:37 PM

Very wide range of opinions amongst the former Yes supporters not least on how best to achieve their aims. Some wish to have a re-vote, others a referendum further down the road, while many also believe it's legitimate to seize power unilaterally with an SNP majority in Holyrood or even 50%+1 Scottish MPs at Westminster.

They'll all be fighting like ferrets in a sack.

However, no matter how large the membership, they are still only a minority of the electorate.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 03:48 PM

Rather small minority. 3.5 million people voted and by voting accept the outcome or have no argument to put forward.

SNP are a political party. An independence referendum is nothing to do with party politics. The stance of SNP is that they need independence in order to carry out their programme.

Not much point in voting for them in an election then... A pity in some ways as their actual ideas are based on social justice and equality. Alex Salmond delivered marriage as a right for all despite the huge influence religious bigotry and a cultural Calvinist outlook has in Scottish society.

I fully agree that the debate sparked interest and awareness in politics. A pity then that neither side in the debate rose to the opportunity to show politics in a positive light.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 03:49 PM

SNP membership over 100,000 and rising.


From Huffington post,

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 04:48 PM

100 000's not even 2% of the population. This Yes campaign is simply a rehash of Scottish history, divided until it's too late, then forming a pointless coallition with more mouth than trousers. Probably why they wear kilts, to allow the hot air out.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 05:54 PM

I am delighted with the 100,000, but its going to be 150,000 very soon and I know what that means at party level.

What percentage of the UK population are members of any of the Westminster parties? :0)
What a ridiculous post guest, you really haven't a clue about what's happening up here, do you?

Alex Salmond brought a small fringe party from oblivion to become the Scottish Government in a few short years....almost single handed...against all odds. The most able politician of his generation.
He is still motivating our young people and when independence is achieved he will be there to take his rightful place.

The vow was a damned lie.....most of us knew it was a lie, but enough believed it to lose us the referendum......but there are more ways than one to skin a cat!

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 06:16 PM

I think that the idea that there is not much point in voting for the SNP in an election is way wide of the mark. To put it simply when asked which party do you believe will stand up for Scotland's interests within the UK the fact is that far more people trust the SNP to do that that any of the other parties.

As to the possibility of another referendum well Salmond himself said 'in his opinion' it should be settled for a generation. Sturgeon said circumstances would decide whether there would be another one which seems a pretty sensible and obvious thing to say. She believes it is a matter of when rather than if. Considering they were only just defeated in this referendum and their support is growing then it seems not too fanciful an idea to believe. Salmond pointed out that there was more ways to obtain independence than another referendum. This to me seemed to be in response to comments like Jack Straw's when he suggested Westminster should now settle it and make Scottish indepedence illegal. Salmond was only pointing out that the people of Scotland are sovereign not the Westminster parliament. I can't imagine there would be another vote unless the Yes side was clearly and consistently ahead in polls. One thing is clear though we were consistently told during the campaign that should we vote Yes there would never be any going back - the same was not claimed with the No vote. Never was it suggested that if Scotland voted No then it could never be independent!!

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 06:55 PM

I don't agree with much of what The SNP have done in Government particularly in relation to law and order issues, increased centralisation etc but I've got to admit they've done a very efficient job and many voters trust them. So it's highly likely, they'll continue to be The Gov after 2016.

Unfortunately, The Tories, Lab, Lib Dems etc haven't had that high a regard for Holyrood until recently. The SNP have always put up their "first team" for election whereas the other parties have focused on Westminster and seem to have relied on their "reserves" for Holyrood.
This is an attitude which will have to change.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:05 PM

The will of Westminster is sovereign.

Last month, the people of Scotland were asked if they wished to remain so, and they voted for the soverienty of Westminster.

Westminster legislation allows for sub committees. The same Westminster allowed an independence referendum. I can't see an argument for another, as the will of the residents of the constituencies that make up the area called Scotland have given their answer.

Responsible people are getting on with the future, not hankering for a past that never delivered for their ancestors anyway. The referendum may have been needed to clear the air but was damaging for business and in the final analysis, nothing else matters. The Scottish Parliament has enough on dealing with an aging population, health inequalities that make your eyes water, an overburdening public sector and huge social issues. It gets more per head of health and social care funding than most of the rest of The UK so politicians serve their population best by using it wisely, concentrating on the neefs of the people and do what they promised they would do.

Dreamers have the luxury of dreaming without the responsibility of dreams becoming true.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 06 Oct 14 - 07:24 PM

Musket, Scotland is a COUNTRY not an area.

While I don't want Independence, I have to say that I don't agree with all your arguments
either. We may get a little more out but we also put more in..... I'm happy to believe the figures which show this.

Ake wiĺ accuse me of sitti g on the fence again, no doubt.   ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 02:27 AM

Yes Johnny J Scotland is a country, a country that has had it's own Parliament since 1999, a Parliament that is responsible for the day-to-day running of the country. The elected Government of the country you refer to should put the best interests of the country first - Could you, Akenaton, or Allan Conn tell the rest of us why they singularly haven't done that?

You state that you thought that the SNP had "done a very efficient job and many voters trust them" - Hate to disillusion you but they have done a far from efficient job and instead of looking after the best interests of Scotland they have consistently put their own agenda and interests before those of the nation. They have consistently pursued "populist" policies and promoted "populist" give-aways that cannot ever be sustained in order to bribe the electorate. That simple fact is evident in the absolute shambles that was demonstrated throughout the referendum campaign when it was patently obvious that the Scottish Government and the SNP could answer even the most rudimentary questions related to finance, taxation, budgets, pensions, interest rates or currency. The SNP put the SNP first and the country second.

In the second of the televised debates Darling was deplorable, Salmond was wittering on about the NHS {Actually the Scottish NHS over which his government and the Scottish Parliament have full financial control}, job creation, foodbanks and the number of Scottish Children that were about to be "put-into-poverty" - Yet not one single person, Darling included, had the sense to ask Alex Salmond why, if these problems needed addressing, that his Scottish Government hadn't done anything about it - Correct me if I am wrong here but since it was created the Scottish Parliament has had the power to raise taxes in Scotland by 3% - Can you, Akenaton, or Allan Conn tell me why they have never made the slightest attempt to use those powers to solve what are perceived as being "Scottish problems"? The Scottish Parliament has failed in 15 years to use the devolved powers they already have can you tell us why, all of a sudden they are going to start using these powers and more now?

"Responsible people are getting on with the future, not hankering for a past that never delivered for their ancestors anyway. The referendum may have been needed to clear the air but was damaging for business and in the final analysis, nothing else matters. The Scottish Parliament has enough on dealing with an aging population, health inequalities that make your eyes water, an overburdening public sector and huge social issues. It gets more per head of health and social care funding than most of the rest of The UK so politicians serve their population best by using it wisely, concentrating on the needs of the people and do what they promised they would do.

Dreamers have the luxury of dreaming without the responsibility of dreams becoming true." - Musket

No truer words ever stated.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 02:30 AM

Apologies - "They have consistently pursued "populist" policies and promoted "populist" give-aways that cannot ever be sustained in order to bribe the electorate. That simple fact is evident in the absolute shambles that was demonstrated throughout the referendum campaign when it was patently obvious that the Scottish Government and the SNP could answer even the most rudimentary questions related to finance, taxation, budgets, pensions, interest rates or currency. The SNP put the SNP first and the country second."

Should of course read:

"They have consistently pursued "populist" policies and promoted "populist" give-aways that cannot ever be sustained in order to bribe the electorate. That simple fact is evident in the absolute shambles that was demonstrated throughout the referendum campaign when it was patently obvious that the Scottish Government and the SNP COULD NOT answer even the most rudimentary questions related to finance, taxation, budgets, pensions, interest rates or currency. The SNP put the SNP first and the country second."

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 02:56 AM

The Scottish Government is obliged to balance the books each year unlike Westminster and, so far, have managed this.
Savings and cuts obviously do have to be made elsewhere and there has been under investment in health generally, other areas of education, and local authorities have also been strapped for cash especially with the council tax freeze. As I say, there is quite a lot I disagree with but it doesn't mean that they are inefficient.

Also, I agree that the referendum has been a distraction and many Government policies have not been scrutinised by the electorate as their attentions have been elsewhere.

I should point out too that The SNP have only been in power for the last seven years and can't be held to account for everything which has occurred in the last fifteen years. The first term(2007), they were actually elected as a minority Government.

In my opinion, this is why further tax powers are important and SHOULD be used so as the Gov are responsible for raising the bulk of their own income. Then the electorate can choose(via the ballot box)and determine how this is spent. It may well be that they will still see free prescriptions(They don't actually cost an awful really as the majority of those on long term treatments, low income, over 60s never needed to pay anyway) and other of your so called "give aways" etc as a priority but, on the other hand, they might just prefer lower taxation.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 03:10 AM

Scotland is indeed a country. But the people, when asked did not wish it to be a sovereign country.

When using the word "country" it isn't a bad idea to recognise the two legally different interpretations of the word.

Either way, the SNP led legislative body is responsible for delivering many things SNP blame failures on Westminster for. The vote suggests that despite the low opinion some on here have of their neighbours, that many see that and dismiss SNP arguments to the contrary.

There is certainly work to be done in confidence rebuilding. A look at doctor vacancies in BMJ, covering UK and Eire shows that as of yesterday, over 24% of all consultant grade vacancies are in Scotland. By my reckoning, you would expect it to be 8%. I have very loose connections with Edinburgh medical school and they are concerned that their hitherto excellent reputation for student and house officer (foundation as they are now called) placements is compromised which leads to not being so high on the list of aspiring students. Mrs Musket was such a student and is involved over the road at The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, and they share the concern.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 04:42 AM

Teribus, your diatribe is simply "old politics" rehashed to suit your own views.....all the questions you ask were answered in the campaign, except those which had to be negotiated AFTER independence.
Salmond made it clear that there would be years of negotiations after a YES vote, and any sensible person should understand that.
All the YES campaign could do was give their VIEWS on what agreement the negotiations would lead to....as in the currency issue.

The shared currency was obviously the best option for everyone, but the NO campaign could hardly admit to that while trying desperately to keep the Union intact.

The devolved powers that Scotland has at present, like Health, is totally dependent on how much money is granted to Scotland by the Westminster exchequer....we do NOT have a blank cheque.

What is developing now in the "YES Scotland" campaign is apolitical, huge numbers of people from all parties coming together in support of one goal ....Scottish independence. It is being driven by the newly enfranchised young people and is NOT to be controlled by the SNP. It is a national movement, rather than a "Nationalist" one.

Of course the new strength of the SNP in financial terms and at the ballot box, will give additional impetus.

All arguments on the subject are academic, Scottish Independence is a reality now.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 06:23 AM

Reminds me of the title at least of the Si Khan song

What you do with what you've got.

Especially when Holyrood set the budget.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 08:15 AM

Akenaton and Johnny J having read through your waffle can you please explain to me in simple terms why no Scottish Government since 1999 (All of which have been "socialist" governments in nature) has ever used the tax raising powers they have always had to address what they perceive as being "Scottish problems".

The Referendum cost the Scottish tax payer ~£13.3 million.

Anymore for anymore?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 08:28 AM

Teribus...the devolved tax raising powers are very limited, and why should we punish our population further when they are already being robbed by Westminster.
Do you think we should increase taxes to subsidise what we lose in the Barnet formula?......Isn't that a bit like punishing the victims?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 08:36 AM

Perhaps this can clarify why tax rates have not been amended under SNP rule.

"No Scottish government has varied the income tax rate. The Parliament can only increase all the rates simultaneously or reduce all the rates simultaneously. This provides very little flexibility since the number of rates, the banding of them, and eligibility remain wholly UK responsibilities. Scotland also has no control over the tax thresholds.

For instance: the basic rate of income tax is 20%. The higher rate is 40%. The additional rate is 45%.

When the Scotland Act comes into effect in 2016, a Holyrood Government could choose to reduce the rates to 10%, 30% and 35%, or they could increase them to 30%, 50% and 55%. All three rates would have to move in tandem.

The Personal Allowance defines how much income you can earn before paying income tax. The tax threshold is £9,440 for 2013-14. This will still be controlled by Westminster.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 08:49 AM

Sorry slipped up there To tax the rich at a higher rate, would mean taxing the poor at a DISPROPORTIONALLY higher rate.

Anymore for anymore!

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 09:39 AM

"Akenaton and Johnny J having read through your waffle can you please explain to me in simple terms why no Scottish Government since 1999 (All of which have been "socialist" governments in nature) has ever used the tax raising powers they have always had to address what they perceive as being "Scottish problems"."

The 1999-2007 Gov wasn't socialist (Neither is the present SNP actually, it's social democratic) and was even a coalition with Lib Dems. At that time, Labour were also in power at Westminster and, presumably, Scottish Labour didn't want to be at odds with their English colleagues re taxation.

I can't speak for why The SNP Gov didn't use these powers...The Swinney One allowed them to expire
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11792876
but they were a minority Gov and would have had difficulty getting it agreed anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 03:51 PM

"Scottish independence is a reality now"

Can I tell him? 😂

The Scottish people rejected independence.

Easy

You'll be dead and buried before it comes up again. Which it probably won't as parochialism is old fashioned in sophisticated well educated countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 07 Oct 14 - 07:42 PM

that would be the sophisticated, well-educated countries where 60% of the population vote for 2 or 3 parties that can only manage to offer a politics that will only promise variants of what the daily mail approves of and then fail to deliver on that. and the rest think that neo-fascist idiots are a radical alternative? where liars, spivs or cheats are the only option. defeated, cynical countries where hope for anything better from our politicians is treated with scorn and derision. those sort of countries?

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Oct 14 - 03:19 AM

Rather intrigued by this:

"The 1999-2007 Gov wasn't socialist"

The 1999-2003 was a Labour/Lib Dem Coalition that Labour drove
59% turnout; 2.35 million voted; Labour gathered 908,392 votes; 33.64% of votes cast. Represents 23% of the electorate who voted for the Government they got in the Scottish Parliament - 41% of the electorate "couldna gie a f**k" leaving almost two-thirds of those who did vote voting against Labour.

The 2003-2007 was more of the same
49.4% turnout; 1.89 million voted; Labour gathered 659,879 votes; 29.3% of votes cast. Represents 17% of the electorate who voted for the Government they got in the Scottish Parliament - 50.6% of the electorate "couldna gie a f**k" again leaving two-thirds of those who did vote voting against Labour.

To say that either of these Governments were anything other than "socialist" in nature is ridiculous, to attempt to say that they were "social democrat" would be the greatest example of the "Tail-wagging-the-dog" ever seen.

2007-2011 Minority SNP Government
51.7% turnout; 2.02 million voted; SNP gathered 664,227 votes; 31% of votes cast. Represents 17% of the electorate who voted for the Government they got in the Scottish Parliament - 48.3% of the electorate "couldna gie a f**k" again leaving two-thirds of those who did vote voting against the SNP.

2011-Present Majority SNP Government
50% turnout; 1.99 million voted; SNP gathered 902,915 votes; 44.04% of the votes cast. Represents 22.6% of the electorate who voted for the Government they got in the Scottish Parliament - 50% of the electorate "couldna gie a f**k" again leaving 55% of those who did vote voting against the SNP.

(Odd that the supposed "landslide election win that brought the SNP to power in 2011 almost exactly mirrors the Independence Referendum result - Isn't it?)

But you see the pattern emerging - while the SNP may bang on about Westminster Parliaments not always delivering the Government Scotland wants - it can be clearly shown that large areas of Scotland never get the Government they naturally vote for - that is democracy - learn to live with it. The SNP's "populist" policies are driven by the imperative that they must win votes irrespective of whether or not such policies are "good" for the country, or in the country's best long term interest. The SNP have to be in power in order to call for a referendum to achieve independence for Scotland ( So all the division, rancor and harm done is only on the agenda of one single Scottish Party that the majority of people in Scotland never vote for or support).

Before we waste £13.3 million again the electorate of Scotland should be given a say on whether or not they want a referendum - a simple separate question on the Parliamentary ballot paper would determine that, and would remove any chance of only 22% of the electorate of Scotland putting the long term interest of the country in jeopardy.

On Tax Akenaton, IIRC when they introduced upper band of tax that only applied to the existing upper band all other rates stayed exactly the same as they had been. Besides if you do raise taxes right across the board the amount they are raised by would be less, and before you moan about the low earners being the worst hit - just remember that the vast majority of those low earners do not pay any income tax at all. Offhand I cannot remember precisely the percentage of wage earners in Scotland who receive more in benefits each year than they pay in tax, but I do recall that it is high.

To answer some of your other questions:
"why should we punish our population further when they are already being robbed by Westminster."

1: Because Governments are supposed to look to the national interests of the country and look after the population. If the elected Government of Scotland ("independent or not") cannot be arsed to act to address perceived problems, then can you tell me who should? That is the essence of Government - Providing Leadership ("Not a popularity contest, not merely delivering on political dogma") - addressing, overcoming and solving problems. Already robbed by Westminster??? - Populist SNP MYTH - I think the figures prove otherwise.

2: Income Tax Rates:
2014 to 2015 tax year
The current tax year is from 6 April 2014 to 5 April 2015.

Tax rate/Taxable income above your Personal Allowance
Basic rate 20%        - £0 to £31,865
Higher rate 40%        - £31,866 to £150,000
Additional rate 45% - Over £150,000

Example - Source gov.uk/income-tax-rates
You earn £35,000 of taxable income and your Personal Allowance is £10,000. You pay basic rate tax at 20% on £25,000 (£35,000 minus £10,000).

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Oct 14 - 03:47 AM

Achmelvich. This sophisticated country you describe. Scotland? England? Wales? The other one? (Hearing their new health minister the other day, perhaps Northern Ireland fails the "sophisticated" test.)

People vote in a parliament of politicians who do what politicians do. I fail to see the difference?

In fact, Scotland has the advantage of all the policies and acts that actually affect people's lives have been passed by majority of left leaning parties for 15 years now, more if you include a couple of Blair years before.

And still they blame the Tories for their own failings 😂😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Mr Red
Date: 08 Oct 14 - 04:48 AM

Young people have less grasp on the history, recent or long standing, and are more likely to favour novelty.

The consensus of the great and wise is just that. Experience brings an overview. Experience comes with age. It also brings caution and fear of irrational change. But that is why experience is valued. How do Yoof acquire that? Patronising is not the germain word, perspicacious more like. But then if you have an agenda any word that fits will do.

Why is personal debt so prevalent? Because people have to HAVE - look at the rise and rise of technology and who is doing the most buying? Borrowing is the way to buy.

As Mark Twain/Samuel Clemens said (allegedly) "When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years" (yea yea - his father died when he was twelve. That's Sammy for you)

and FWIW Cameron agreed to the referendum wording but only after a lot of hard bargaining, it was not his choice, merely his acceptance. Ditto voting age.
But if you have an agenda, the above can be re-worded to suit your ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Johnny J
Date: 08 Oct 14 - 05:55 AM

Teribus,

You are obviously a Tory if you believe that either Labour or The SNP are "socialists" these days.

Labour never really were and although they did and still do have members who believe in and espouse socialist views and ideals, they have always been a "broad church" albeit with a generally left of centre stance. The most radical Labour Governments were between 1945-1951 but even they believed in free market economy and had no ambition to set up a socialist state. All those since could easily have been labelled "Red Tories" even in the sixties and seventies but, of course, The Tories themselves were not as far to the right back then. "Butskillism" was regarded to be the political consensus in The UK at that time.

The SNP is also officially "left of centre" but by no means socialist either. While they may be left leaning in terms of welfare, they have different ideas regarding the economy, law and order etc. Salmond was once quoted as saying that he " "didn't mind the economic side" to ... Thatcher, but disapproved of the "social" implications of her policies ".


"(Odd that the supposed "landslide election win that brought the SNP to power in 2011 almost exactly mirrors the Independence Referendum result - Isn't it?)"

It's a little more complicated than that. Although the percentages are not that different   SNP in 2011(47%) YES in referendum(45), the make up is quite different. Many SNP voters voted NO in the referendum particularly those in SNP heartlands in The NE of Scotland etc. Those may have previously been Tory or Lib Dem voters in the past or have the potential to be so in the future. They would certainly not be "left wing".

However, many Labour voters from Central Scotland(and Dundee)...mainly Strathclyde region voted YES in the referendum in areas which were once Labour strongholds.

So while the total percentages may not be that dissimilar, the make up is not quite the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Oct 14 - 04:31 PM

I believe it was Michael Foot who said "you can call me a liar, you can call me a fool. But do not insult my socialism."

Most members of the Labour Party would consider themselves socialists. Most members of The Conservative Party would say Labout Party members are socialists too.

When we have finished with pedantry, Scotland has had over 15 years of "not Conservative" rule on the issues that affect peoples day to day lives, so blaming the Tories is rather laughable.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 03:54 AM

"
When we have finished with pedantry, Scotland has had over 15 years of "not Conservative" rule on the issues that affect peoples day to day lives, so blaming the Tories is rather laughable."

We have had a few years of "Scottish Government" with Westminster holding the financial reins.
I have explained below why the limited powers afforded to the Scottish government are so ineffective, as well as holding the reins, Westminster makes the rules......like the one about all taxrates to move in tandem and no control over tax thresholds, thereby constraining any attempt to implement socialist economic policy.

Whether you agree with socialist policy is neither here nor there, under Westminster rule it is simply impossible to implement.

My son registers new SNP members in our area, the response to the referendum has resulted in quadrupling of membership most being between 16 and 40.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: Musket
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 05:32 AM

I wonder if he heard from SNP communications after I emailed them with your details, claiming Salmond doesn't believe in his own policies?

You haven't explained anything other than some propaganda that you are thick enough to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 07:36 AM

Perhaps you require a visit to the optician Ian?

"No Scottish government has varied the income tax rate. The Parliament can only increase all the rates simultaneously or reduce all the rates simultaneously. This provides very little flexibility since the number of rates, the banding of them, and eligibility remain wholly UK responsibilities. Scotland also has no control over the tax thresholds.

For instance: the basic rate of income tax is 20%. The higher rate is 40%. The additional rate is 45%.

When the Scotland Act comes into effect in 2016, a Holyrood Government could choose to reduce the rates to 10%, 30% and 35%, or they could increase them to 30%, 50% and 55%. All three rates would have to move in tandem.

The Personal Allowance defines how much income you can earn before paying income tax. The tax threshold is £9,440 for 2013-14. This will still be controlled by Westminster.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 09:53 AM

( akenaton and musket - have you ever considered starting your own private thread, you could always choose different names for all the other ones)....anyway..... the recent referendum in scotland gave a great boost to participation in the democratic process - surely a good thing whichever way the scots voted. what was also evident was a widespread mistrust of the ridiculous westminster pantomime. is there a chance of any such positive developments south of the border as we approach the next general election? why should scots be able to understand our political process better than the english, where the only 'alternative' seems to be UKIP? surely we can do better than that?
(as interesting to some as the past tax raising powers of holyrood may be, it doesn't shed a great deal of light on how the rest of the UK can move forward positively)

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 12:29 PM

Well achmelvich, I don't really think the rest of the UK has very much going for it, the encouragement of cheap labour from abroad instead of realistic retraining programmes for our young folks, has led to a nightmarish racial landscape in England.
No thought was given to the long term effects of multiculturalism, and lack of integration.

Wales has very little to contribute the population being left to rot after the demise of engineering and mining.

NI is still a swamp of militant Unionism and resentful republicanism.

Sorry....they are all basket cases. Only Scotland has much to be positive about, and we have been thwarted for now by a posse of liars.

Subject: RE: BS: Yes Scotland.....and the rest of us?
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 09 Oct 14 - 06:50 PM

"local authorities have also been strapped for cash especially with the council tax freeze."

Not by any means all, in fact I suspect not many!

My own County Council is cutting services, while sitting on over twenty million pounds idle liquid dosh, earmarked, they say, "For a rainy day".

Newsflash! It's been pissing down for a couple of years, but you would rather have a dig at the government than do YOUR job!

This is representative of the mindset of those to whom some people suggest devolved powers should be given.

As for Scotland, I'm sure that would be King Alex will still be pushing to take Scotland in the direction he wants, and therefore an English parliament relieved of all who serve constituencies in Scotland is essential, and as soon as possible.

The Welsh and Northern Irish don't bother themselves with purely English matters, but the Scots, who decry rule from Westminster, still insist upon voting on such.