You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The institutions set limits on the discourse - in the case of Westminster, it means that only a narrow set of right-wing views are heard.
Really?
I think that Dennis Skinner & Jeremy Corbyn (and of course the late Tony Benn and his mate agent Boot of the KGB) long standing membership of the HOC might point away from that, and I don't think you can really say that any of them have been less than vociferous in successfully making their views heard in & around Westminster over the years!
I could probably throw in Gorgeous George and countless others into that mix as well.
Let me just cancel out richmtb then.
I have to think you are going to be very dissappointed if you think the actual system is going to change.
To be fair, even the adoption of PR would make a real difference to the political system. I assume that's what they'll use?
jambalaya - Member
...I have to think you are going to be very dissappointed if you think the actual system is going to change. You are going to have the same career politicians working with the same real world problems as the every other country making pretty much the same choices as do all the others.
Aye, but none of them will be Lords and all of them will be elected, so at some stage we can get rid of them.
That plus PR is a major improvement.
Scots
No 55%, Yes 45% (for scots, so not so far from real polls)
Aye polls are closing too, just like the real world!
No (I'm Scottish) (8%, 36 Votes)
Yes (I'm Scottish) (8%, 33 Votes)
47.8% yes, 52.2% no! 😆
all of them will be elected,
Hmm, 'Additional Members' are elected by who?
How would you vote out a particular AM at an election?
Is it? partially, but not fully. I dislike the secondary vote element because that is picked from party lists. Anything which perpetuates the party system rather than making it about the individuals being elected I see as fundamentally flawed because they're there on their party's merits not their own. So where is their primary loyalty? Party or constituency?That plus PR is a major improvement
think we are up to 1,043 time now..big_n_daft - Membervote yes for project feart
Mr Farage is dead keen to strip away much of Scotland's share of the UK govt's expenditure. That of course, will only be possible if we vote No.
As apposed to if you vote YES, you'll be stripped of 100% of the UK govt's expenditure?
think we are up to 1,043 time now..
Well it's got to be funny eventually, right?
Anyhow, Better Together are handing these out to students:
[img] 
[/img]
But I though No voters had Nae Baws! 😀
Aye, but none of them will be Lords and all of them will be elected, so at some stage we can get rid of them.
I think you overestimate the role of the Lords!
😀
The RMT union has backed Scottish independence.
It seems they are getting their baws handed to them! 😆ninfan - Member
But I though No voters had Nae Baws!
Not about policies?
Could have sworn the DO was banging on about the bedroom tax on a daily basis (almost!) and evil Tory policies. I guess we can dismiss privatising (sic) the NHS too, especially since the DO is matching the Tories at this.
So.. with the oil then.. isn't it being extracted by private companies? What revenue does the govt get? And surely some of the companies involved with extraction and refining are British?
The government gets lots of tax on the oil... after the cost of extraction is removed from the barrel price, governments get up to 95% of the remaining profit on a barrel depending on what was agreed at the time of the production license was granted. In some parts of the world e.g. iraq the private companies are just paid a flat rate of a couple of dollars for each barrel they produce, with all the oil going direct to the government. I don't know the UK figures, but I do know the Norwegians have a flat 75% tax rate on the barrel price (after extraction deductions).
It does amuse me when people keep on going on about the profits the oil companies make... but its a pittance compared with the various governments takes!
iS would have to renegotiate all the productions contracts I would guess ? But I would imagine that they would probably just rubber stamp all the ones currently in place.
I guess we can dismiss privatising (sic) the NHS too, especially since the DO is matching the Tories at this.
Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it any more true.
especially since the DO is matching the Tories at this.
He's really not. Should I start calling you the SDO - Second Deceitful One?
Aye, but none of them will be Lords and all of them will be elected, so at some stage we can get rid of them.That plus PR is a major improvement.
@eipc - I very much doubt you'll notice the lack of a house of lords, not unless you follow the detail of law making. I would say AS is just the sort of leader that needs a house of lords keeping tabs on him but I appreciate he's your leader not mine.
PR, yes it could be. You will have much more coalition politics though, hopefully that doesn't turn into the highly fragmented / numerous election system the Italians have. Also I am not sure coalitions deliver radical change, much more likely to get more of the same.
. I would say AS is just the sort of leader that needs a house of lords keeping tabs on him
Right winger says elected politicians need to be kept tabs on by unelected members of the aristocracy - shockerooni
Westminster too can have coalitions...
Right winger says elected politicians need to be kept tabs on by unelected members of the aristocracy - shockerooni
I think he means a second chamber with long tenure. The fact that they are unelected isn't actually that important IN PRACTICE. And personally, I don't think party politics has a place in the Lords - electing members would probably bring it in don't you think?
molgrips - Member
I think he means a second chamber with long tenure. The fact that they are unelected isn't actually that important IN PRACTICE....
They would like you to believe that.
Do you know what actually goes on in the Lords?
IMO party politics is already thoroughly entrenched in the Lords
molgrips - Member
Do you know what actually goes on in the Lords?
Deals and self-interest.
Nothing vaguely democratic.
Deals and self-interest.Nothing vaguely democratic.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/13/terrorism-uksecurity1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4810482.stm
Bastards!
Andrew Neil taken to task over the NHS:
😀
And personally, I don't think party politics has a place in the Lords - electing members would probably bring it in don't you think?
Not if there wasn't a house of lords it wouldn't.
I want to live in a democracy and that means elected representation
Deals and self-interest.
Links?
There are Scots that DO care what happens to the NHS in Endland and Wales. I do not wish to see it privatised and have many family and friends reliant on it. There is a very real possibility I may require NHS care in England one day.
I would like to be able to vote for a party at Westminster to try to prevent privatisation.
I am aware of the cancer services at the hospital in Gateshead that Salmond mentioned in the tv debate. My wife's cousin used their services before sadly passing away a few years ago at the age of 33.
The difference between Salmond and myself is that I actually care what goes on there.
Farage reckons that well over 50% of Scots live on benefits.
What have we done to deserve Salmond and Farrage at the same time? The next thing we know there will be Galloway involved, oh wait a minute.....
A Farrage Salmond BS bingo fest next? Would either of them be able to last an hour without saying something true?
I love him! Especially for the next fortnight. Boris and CmD as well,they should get them on a bus with THM,do a tour... that'll save the union.
Ducks you do say some extraordinary things - if you keeps you amused.
Farage reckons that well over 50% of Scots live on benefits.
I'll bet that more than 50% of the UK population "live on benefits of some kind":
Pension
Housing benefit
Child benefit
Tax credit
Disability living allowance
Job seekers
etc
What percentage of the UK's adult population is dependent on the welfare state?The welfare state is a big part of British family life, with 20.3 million families receiving some kind of benefit (64% of all families), about 8.7 million of them pensioners. For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income (30% of all families), around 5.3 million of them pensioners. The number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer now because of changes to child tax credits that mean some working families who previously got a small amount now get nothing.
The number of people who receive more in benefits and public services than they pay in tax is at record levels, official figures show.
More than half of households now take more from the public purse than they contribute, thanks to a generation of surging Government expenditure.
It has left a minority of middle class taxpayers bearing a growing share of the tax bill.
Well-off families now receive £1 in benefits and services for every £5.10 they contribute in tax.
Some 52 per cent of households, or 13.8 million families, received more in benefits and public services than they contributed in taxes last year, according to the Office for National Statistics.Households with an average income of £104,000 paid £30,000 more in tax than they received from the state last year, ONS figures show.
The top ten per cent of earners contributed £26,984 in income and council tax, plus £10,303 in indirect taxes such as alcohol duty and VAT – a contribution to the public purse of £37,287.
They received £2,284 in state cash benefits, which include child benefit, maternity pay and pensions.
The cost of educating their children came to £1,274, while they used NHS treatment worth £3,410 – meaning their total cost to the Exchequer was £7,264.
By contrast, a family with the national median income of £23,069 received £3,798 more in benefits and services than they paid in taxes last year.
They paid £4,620 in direct tax and £5,029 in indirect taxes, but received £6622 in cash benefits. They received schooling worth £2623 and NHS services worth £4,202.
In total, they paid in £9,649 and received £13,477. It means for every £1 they paid in, they got £1.40 back.
The poorest ten per cent of families, with wages of £3,875 a year, paid £4,611 in direct and indirect taxes and received £13,559 in cash benefits and services. It means they received £2.94 in state support for every £1 they paid in tax.
Farage reckons that well over 50% of Scots live on benefits
A couple of years out of date, but, for a change, he might not be talking complete nonsense.
[url= https://fullfact.org/factchecks/nine_out_of_ten_88_scots_scottish_burden_state-28539 ]Maybe 60%[/url]
Nope TMA,peas in a pod. Still,14 days to save your retirement/holiday plans! Still as confident as you were a couple of weeks ago?
With public sector on the radar.
Has anybody else noticed a really big drop in car stickers these last few days?
Depends what you do,there is a blanket ban on anybody in education,certainly in my authority,displaying anything. I just park outside the gates...
molgrips - Member
'Deals and self-interest.'
Links?
[url= http://socialinvestigations.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/compilation-of-parliamentary-financial.html?m=1 ]Maybe you'll find something in here?[/url]
duckman - Member
Nope TMA,peas in a pod. Still,14 days to save your retirement/holiday plans! Still as confident as you were a couple of weeks
I can see why you like the DO - your ability to misrepresent is legendary. No wonder "peas in a pod" slips so easily off the tongue!!! It's an amazing ability for a ref to have.
But since you asked
teamhurtmore - Member
At the end of the day, this is going to be a very, very close vote.
POSTED 1 DAY AGO #
Said the same thing in the early pages too. Pays to be consistent.
If yS creates chaos, property prices will respond accordingly and I will be very happy in one respect. It's those who will lose out from the BS that I feel sorry for.
Interesting article old bloke. Whimbrel I think the key phrase you quote is
.received more in benefits and public services
That is factoring in things like NHS treatment and education.
I have no doubt that Farage being a first class sphincter meant to give the impression that scots are lazy and content to collect their bru money.
What have we done to deserve Salmond and Farrage at the same time? The next thing we know there will be Galloway involved, oh wait a minute.....A Farrage Salmond BS bingo fest next? Would either of them be able to last an hour without saying something true?
😆
I like Galloway though, largely for his attack on the US senate.
cancelled out by his being a creep to the Saddam regime and other scumbag enterprises.
bencooper - Member
The institutions set limits on the discourse - in the case of Westminster, it means that only a narrow set of right-wing views are heard.
POSTED 7 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
I respectfully disagree with you. Westminster operates in the context of global capitalism, and I tend to think that is more important than constitutional...constitution in setting the parameters and substance of political discourse. that's also why I think iScotland won't be much fairer or equitable than the UK is - it will still have the same fundamental relationship with global capitalism. like you said above, same crab, smaller bucket.
like you said above, same crab, smaller bucket.
Even to the extent of [s]privatising the nhs[/s] encouraging and outsourcing the provision of health services to the private sector.
Depends what you do,there is a blanket ban on anybody in education,certainly in my authority,displaying anything. I just park outside the gates...
Thought it was across the board tbh. Several boards at that.
Anyway I'm seeing a lot less. And the cars parked up on my road that had them no longer do. I can't believe they've all changed their minds so assumed they where public sector.
Kind of makes me curious as to the breakdown of voting intentions and employment in my local area.
that's also why I think iScotland won't be much fairer or equitable than the UK is - it will still have the same fundamental relationship with global capitalism
Possibly. But the UK (including Scotland) is one of the most unequal of the developed countries, so I don't think that's an inevitable result of global capitalism. There's lots we could do but haven't because of entrenched interests at Westminster - just look at who owns the big Highland estates for a start.
So you're right that global capitalism is a power we'll have to deal with, but I think an independent Scotland could do that better than the broken Westminster parliament ever will.
Even to the extent of privatising the nhs encouraging and outsourcing the provision of health services to the private sector.
Oh, good grief. Evidence please.
Anyway I'm seeing a lot less. And the cars parked up on my road that had them no longer do.
I've not noticed a difference, but I wonder if the increasing bile from union supporters is the reason. What I'm worried about is what the knuckle-dragging, Rangers-supporting, Orange Order bigots will do if there is a Yes vote.
just look at who owns the big Highland estates for a start.
There's an estate near Crieff owned by a Scandinavian (Norsk iirc) who is a total, selfish, get off my land, ****er
Edit, nope not sure, might be a Swede.
Nob head anyway.
I'm worried about is what the knuckle-dragging, Rangers-supporting, Orange Order bigots will do if there is a Yes vote.
Yeh, well you will live in the rough end of Scotland. Much more civilised over here on the Tayside Riviera.
bencooper - Member
...What I'm worried about is what the knuckle-dragging, Rangers-supporting, Orange Order bigots will do if there is a Yes vote.
They'll all head down to England waving their Union flags. There they will be stopped at the new border and get locked up in concentration camps for illegal immigrants. 😆
Aye, though actually around here it seems very solid Yes - loads of signs in windows, the Yes Maryhill shop always looks busy.
What have we done to deserve Salmond and Farrage at the same time?
You did't get Salmond, we did because we voted for him. We got Farage because you voted for him. And Cameron. Not sure what we did to deserve those two
Evidence Ben? Look in the gov stats, it's all there although some of the key data is hidden near the back. Under nice mr salmond Scottish NHS spends more money on private sector healthcare that Wales and England on a per capita basis.
So if this is the indicator of privatisation (it isn't, but the DO likes to deceive folk into believing that it is) then you are further down the privatisation road than the rest of us. Funny old world.
Aye, though actually around here it seems very solid Yes - loads of signs in windows, the Yes Maryhill shop always looks busy.
I thought we'd banned 'ayes'
To be honest. I'm just referring to car stickers. And there aren't enough 'no' stickers on cars for me to notice any significant drop. Although the one car on the street still has it, but I only notice that because the driver is both very friendly and err... attractive. Not as attractive as the girlfriend, obviously....
I have looked at various stats, do you have a link?
Because the stuff I've seen says Scotland spends about 1% of the NHS budget with private companies, whereas it's around 6% south of the border - and the figure for Scotland includes paying locums and the like.
In addition, in Scotland the private companies are not bidding for NHS contracts as they are south of the border - they're only being hired by the NHS for specific services.
[quote=bencooper ]
In addition, in Scotland the private companies are not bidding for NHS contracts as they are south of the border
Not until TTIP kicks in
I don't think I've ever seen a No car sticker...
I don't think I've ever seen a No car sticker...
Sure you have, he was driving like a twunt remember?
Iirc a white bmw
On yes! Good memory, that was ages ago. Another I feel sorry for is the one No person in the big block of flats at Finnieston, surrounded by a dozen Yes flats. That must make for some uncomfortable silences in the lifts 😉
Ben, you make Scotland sound like one big happy family.
teamhurtmore - MemberEvidence Ben? Look in the gov stats, it's all there although some of the key data is hidden near the back. Under nice mr salmond Scottish NHS spends more money on private sector healthcare that Wales and England on a per capita basis.
Care to actually show them? The ones quoted most recently were for "subcontractors", which was represented in the press and by the No campaign as meaning private contractors but in fact 7/10ths of these "subcontractors" were councils and charities.
Ben, you make Scotland sound like one big happy family.
It is!
Okay, it isn't. But I think there is a shared sense of something - community, a certain sense of humour, a "f*** you then" attitude to people telling us we can't do something.
Okay, it isn't. But I think there is a shared sense of something - community, a certain sense of humour, a "f*** you then" attitude to people telling us we can't do something.
I'm sorry, but the last bit really does make Scotland sound like a stroppy teenager and is one on the reasons I will vote no. More to the point: would you suggest that England leaves the EU on the basis that we have a Stiff upper lip and a sense of fair play not shared by Johnny Foreigner? This is just a national myth making. A bit like when Scotland boasted of how anti-racist and welcoming to other people it was.... right up until asylum seekers were house in Glasgow and lo and behold it transpired that Scotland had just as many racist bigots as anywhere else. Don't believe the self-serving stories that Nationalists (in general not just Scottish) tell about themselves.
I'm sorry, but the last bit really does make Scotland sound like a stroppy teenager and is one on the reasons I will vote no
Well I'm making my voting decisions on a bit more than a random comment on the internet by someone who's had quite a lot of home-made cider - but if that's why you're voting no then that's your choice 😉
You under-estimate what an influential opinion former you are.
I really hope that's not true!
Well I'm making my voting decisions on a bit more than a random comment on the internet by someone who's had quite a lot of home-made cider
Oh, I assumed you were quoting Alex. Or is it him who's been drinking home-made cider - it would explain a lot.
It is very good cider, even if I do say so myself - light, not too sweet, a very pleasant aftertaste.
a very pleasant aftertaste.
So quite unlike Scottish Independence
😀
Okay, it isn't. But I think there is a shared sense of something - community, a certain sense of humour, a "f*** you then" attitude to people telling us we can't do something.
I'm not so sure that it's "**** you then" more "watch me". We're told we can't do things because we're not allowed to not because we're incapable of doing them. Eventually that will end in rebellion...
just look at who owns the big Highland estates for a start
This is an interesting point. If the land is privately owned, will it be confiscated? What would be done with it if it weren't shooting estates?
Genuine questions not rhetoric (GQNR)
Anyway I think Ben is seriously damaging the Scottish economy by posting on here and not being busy pimping out bikes for rich City bankers
This is an interesting point. If the land is privately owned, will it be confiscated? What would be done with it if it weren't shooting estates?
Lesley Riddoch's Blossom has lots of good stuff on this. Ending primogeniture would be a very good start, that would naturally lead to the breakup of the big estates. Making community buyouts easier would help. Relaxing planning laws would make a big difference. Forests could be community owned instead of the FC, meaning locals get a lot more say in things. We could have a much more outdoorsy culture - Scotland has around 300 forest huts (mostly at Carbeth), Norway has 300,000.
It's not about massive development, it's about meaning locals can build houses for themselves, it's about small communities being able to build a football pitch without having to negotiate for years with the local laird. It's about people actually having a connection to the land instead of it being an investment vehicle for offshore owners. In Scandinavia, fishing, hunting and sailing are things that most people do, here they're things really only for the wealthiest. That doesn't have to be the case, but the reason for it is that so much land is locked up away from ordinary people.
Land ownership is a major issue all over Scotland. Google Andy Wightman to find out more.
molgrips - Member
"just look at who owns the big Highland estates for a start"
This is an interesting point. If the land is privately owned, will it be confiscated? What would be done with it if it weren't shooting estates?
The land was stolen originally, so confiscation seems appropriate.
It could be used for hunting toffs. 🙂
A combination of the Hunger Games, and Upperclass Twit of the Year?
I'd watch that 😉
aracer - Membera very pleasant aftertaste.
So quite unlike Scottish Independence
Posted 8 hours ago #Report-Post
An increasing number of us disagree.