On 15/05/15 20:13, d wrote:
There are some good well meaning people in the party who have genuine concerns
about control by Brussels.

Yeah, right, and the Socialist Workers' Party is full of people with a
genuine concern for the poor.

But unfortunately they're outnumbered by the idiots
and you can see what happens when idiots get voted into power - towit the
SNP.

The SNP were almost voted into power in 2007 and formed a minority
government. That was sufficiently popular that they were properly voted
into power as a majority government in 2011. That was sufficiently
popular that they were voted in to represent Scotland in 56 out of 59
Scottish constituencies this month. It's therefore a little hard to see
what disasters you think happened.

Mind you, it's always amusing to here UKIP supporters such as yourself
use precisely opposing arguments to explain why (a) Scotland MUST stay
in the UK and (b) why the UK MUST leave Europe. It sounds like a pretty
good example of cognitive dissonance which is easily resolved by
recognizing that UKIP are a bunch of loony little Englanders who loathe
all foreigners and classify Scots as foreign.

Ian

On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:51:16 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 15/05/15 20:13, d wrote:
But unfortunately they're outnumbered by the idiots
and you can see what happens when idiots get voted into power - towit the
SNP.

The SNP were almost voted into power in 2007 and formed a minority
government. That was sufficiently popular that they were properly voted
into power as a majority government in 2011. That was sufficiently
popular that they were voted in to represent Scotland in 56 out of 59
Scottish constituencies this month. It's therefore a little hard to see
what disasters you think happened.

You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

Mind you, it's always amusing to here UKIP supporters such as yourself

Actually I vote Tory, but I sympathise with UKIPs main message and
it seems 15 million other people did too.

use precisely opposing arguments to explain why (a) Scotland MUST stay
in the UK and (b) why the UK MUST leave Europe. It sounds like a pretty
good example of cognitive dissonance which is easily resolved by

I don't give a flying **** about the scots. Seems to me so long as
they have their benefits, booze, heroin and can carry on with their
self pitying sense of entitlement and have a nice long whinge (300
years and counting) most of them will be as happy as McLarry. My
only reason for wanting scotland to stay in the UK is for military
reasons.

recognizing that UKIP are a bunch of loony little Englanders who loathe
all foreigners and classify Scots as foreign.

Keep taking the pills, one day you may even find a clue in the bottle.

--
Spud

On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight
years of SNP government in Edinburgh or from a week of high SNP
representation in Westminster.

Ian

On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:20:04 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight

I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

Around about now with an independent Scotland Sturgeon would be heading
off to Brussels with a begging bowl to join the queue behind greece
and spain.

--
Spud

In uk.railway d twisted the electrons to say:
I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

This would be the alternative timeline where the SNP formed a majority
rather than minority government in the period 2007-2011 and was thus able
to pass it's referendum bill in that session of parliament, and in a
further change to our timeline people voted for it?

Because in our timeline, the proposal from the SNP was (in the event of
"Yes" winning) that independence would come about in May 2016. Meanwhile
Better Together was claiming that was agressively optimistic and that it
might take much longer than that to achieve independence in the event of
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...

So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to be
dumb enough to fall for it?

Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS. The SNP knows this which is why its so
pro EU because once its waved bye bye to westminster and the hand outs stop
it'll need Brussels to provide the money. Of course the privosos that will
come with it will be far worse than Westminster would ever ask for but by
then Salmond and Sturgeon will be doing the after dinner circuit basking in
their self righteousnous and won't give a ****.

--
Spud

In uk.railway d twisted the electrons to say:
On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...
So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to
be dumb enough to fall for it?

Nope, I've no real opinion on the future price of oil (other than it
having a general upward direction). I was commenting on the absurdity of
your apparent belief that Scotland would've been inpendenct already if
the vote had gone the other way back in September.

However you really should try getting your economic "facts" from
somewhere other than the Daily Wail! As it happens it isn't the case
that everyone in Scotland either works in the oil industry, the public
sector or lives on benefits ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On 17/05/15 12:35, d wrote:
Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS.

The per capita GVA of Scotland is greater than any part of England
(including Yorkshire) except for London and the South-East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countri...GVA_per_capita

Ian

On 17/05/2015 12:35, d wrote:
On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...

So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to be
dumb enough to fall for it?

Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS. The SNP knows this which is why its so
pro EU because once its waved bye bye to westminster and the hand outs stop
it'll need Brussels to provide the money. Of course the privosos that will
come with it will be far worse than Westminster would ever ask for but by
then Salmond and Sturgeon will be doing the after dinner circuit basking in
their self righteousnous and won't give a ****.

--
Spud


As Orwell wrote in a different context, Scotland is no more capable of
being independent than a cat or a dog. I am not hostile to the people,
but they are being led.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

On 16/05/15 18:45, d wrote:
I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument.

What you wrote was "But unfortunately they're outnumbered by the idiots
and you can see what happens when idiots get voted into power - towit
the SNP." I am sill not sure what you think has happened since the SNP
was voted into power.

Around about now with an independent Scotland Sturgeon would be heading
off to Brussels with a begging bowl to join the queue behind greece
and spain.

UK budget deficit last year: £105,000,000,000.

Ian