Post Scottish referendum Question.....

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

Will all these YES men accept the result and shut up or will they continue to flog a dead horse?

[erniesspeedshop]

No and yes. Once a Scottish Fundamentalist.......:lol:

[dozy]

Will all these YES men accept the result and shut up or will they continue to flog a dead horse?How about if we turn the question on its head ,Will you as a NO voter leave Scotland if it gets off its knees and votes YES.

[erniesspeedshop]

How about if we turn the question on its head ,Will you as a NO voter leave Scotland if it gets off its knees and votes YES.It would be a bit quiet if more than half the population left wouldn't it?

[squidge]

In the event of a NO vote I will do what I have done all my life. That is knuckle down and get on with working to support people that I work with and try in a small way to improve their lives and the society we live in. I will be bitterly disappointed that we failed to take the opportunities independence offers to change society for the better but I will roll my sleeves up and do my best as I always have done.

[dozy]

But it would fix the housing problem . I do feel sorry that a NO vote will see the end of free education ,OaP care ,child care and prescriptions ,when King Cameron cuts the grant by £ 6.5 billion . Never have the weight of the Westminster chains been set to damaged the poor ,disabled and families by design. VOTE FOR THE KING OF GREED .

[Heisenberg]

It would be a bit quiet if more than half the population left wouldn't it?it would make way for all the immigrants.

[Heisenberg]

In the event of a NO vote I will do what I have done all my life. That is knuckle down and get on with working to support people that I work with and try in a small way to improve their lives and the society we live in. I will be bitterly disappointed that we failed to take the opportunities independence offers to change society for the better but I will roll my sleeves up and do my best as I always have done.I do hope you do squidge

[Rheghead]

In the event of a NO vote I will do what I have done all my life. That is knuckle down and get on with working to support people that I work with and try in a small way to improve their lives and the society we live in. I will be bitterly disappointed that we failed to take the opportunities independence offers to change society for the better but I will roll my sleeves up and do my best as I always have done.

Here here.

[Rheghead]

It would be a bit quiet if more than half the population left wouldn't it?

The Naesayers said that in 1999 and it never happened. Why should we believe them?

[Chook a demus]

Rumour has it Mr Putin has offered separatists a nice house in the Ukraine if they loose.

[luskentyre]

Rumour has it Mr Putin has offered separatists a nice house in the Ukraine if they loose.

The country is Ukraine, not "the Ukraine". How would you like it if the world referred to your country as "the Scotland"?

[luskentyre]

But it would fix the housing problem . I do feel sorry that a NO vote will see the end of free education ,OaP care ,child care and prescriptions ,when King Cameron cuts the grant by £ 6.5 billion . Never have the weight of the Westminster chains been set to damaged the poor ,disabled and families by design. VOTE FOR THE KING OF GREED .

What utter mince... More scaremongering from the increasingly desperate independence crew. You know full well that a "NO" vote will not (cannot) decrease the powers of the Scottish Parliament. It will in fact lead to greater devolved power to Scotland - but you don't really want people to know that do you?

[squidge]

I do hope you do squidgeWhy would I do anything else Heisenberg? My home is here, I love living here, my family are here. I have always tried to help people make a difference to their lives and in many individual cases I have succeeded. Not in earth shattering, blinding flashes of light sort of ways but in small quiet ways. I will carry on doing that but I think it's likely that I will move more towards campaigning hard for social change as I have thoroughly enjoyed the political debate the referendum has offered. Miles more than I thought I would having never been involved in formal politics much before, bar the odd CND march and Rock Against Racism stuff of the 80s and a 12 month spell as a union rep around 1994. Whatever happens I'm here to stay :)

[orkneycadian]

The country is Ukraine, not "the Ukraine". How would you like it if the world referred to your country as "the Scotland"?

Well, the ferryloupers keep calling this place "The Orkneys"!

[dozy]

What utter mince... More scaremongering from the increasingly desperate independence crew. You know full well that a "NO" vote will not (cannot) decrease the powers of the Scottish Parliament. It will in fact lead to greater devolved power to Scotland - but you don't really want people to know that do you?I find your comment strange as it's the NO campaign that's the scaremongers ,they are so hell bent on the scare tactics that's the only line they use. We have KING CAMERON backing the NO side and using the Labour idiots to do his bidding and he states " believe what the no campaign are saying ,they speak the TRUTH" . Then when Wednesday coming around and it's PM questions KING CAMERON is still blaming the Labour Party for the crash after 4years of his tenure. How can anyone support let alone believe what he has to say . Before you ask ,I don't have a vote .

[Chook a demus]

As the crash happened before Mr Cameron assumes the role as prime minister he's quite entitled to blame labour for the crash. Referring to him as king is a bit rich as the UK already has a head of state called The Queen but that's far to easy for some they like to use scare tactics and ripe rhetoric to win the day. It must be worrying for those yes campaigners seeing those few percentage points leaking away each month. Sept 19th we can enjoy the experience of seeing Mr Salmond having to announce he has lost the referendum.

[Rheghead]

As the crash happened before Mr Cameron assumes the role as prime minister he's quite entitled to blame labour for the crash.

Yes but it would still be pretty disingenuous of him as Gordon Brown held cross party talks on the crash and Cameron publically agreed that bailing out banks was the right thing to do.

[Chook a demus]

Yes but it would still be pretty disingenuous of him as Gordon Brown held cross party talks on the crash and Cameron publically agreed that bailing out banks was the right thing to do.

Bailing out the banks was the best choice for the country which shows that they are able to rise above petty party politics and act in the Best interests of the country.

Unlike separatists who have a narrow vision of the future and will burn everything to get independence regardless of the costs to the majority.

Separatists openly admit the road to independence will not be easy, that means job losses, turmoil, less money for your children, less job security, less financial security, less national security. All to aspire to a vain idea of Nationhood and Seperatism that should of been left alone after 1945

[Heisenberg]

I find your comment strange as it's the NO campaign that's the scaremongers ,they are so hell bent on the scare tactics that's the only line they use. We have KING CAMERON backing the NO side and using the Labour idiots to do his bidding and he states " believe what the no campaign are saying ,they speak the TRUTH" . Then when Wednesday coming around and it's PM questions KING CAMERON is still blaming the Labour Party for the crash after 4years of his tenure. How can anyone support let alone believe what he has to say . Before you ask ,I don't have a vote . What crash?

[Rheghead]

UK government have cut £90 million from the pensions of 50,000 Scottish pensioners who have saved up for their retirement under changes to Savings credit.

And they have the gall to say that pensions are safer if we are better together?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/50000-scots-lose-90m-under-uk-pensions-changes.24926019

[Chook a demus]

Pensions Minister Steve Webb said: "The very reason the Triple Lock exists, and the state pension is at its highest level relative to earnings since 1992, is because this UK Government brought it in."So it is disingenuous and absurd for anyone to cite it as a reason to support independence."

[orkneycadian]

I find your comment strange as it's the NO campaign that's the scaremongers

You mean you didn't see the comment on here the other night from the Yes camp saying that we would all die of poverty and insulin deficiency if we vote No?

[squidge]

Quite clearly you won't Orkneycadian as whenever posts highlighting the situation of the poorest in our society are made you very quickly tell us you are "alright jack". You go on to say that its their own fault for being too feckless to budget properly too lazy to grow their own food, too stupid to understand the system, or too disorganised to keep an appointment and if only they were all like you they would be fine. After all, living in a damp, flat in a crime ridden estate where drugs are rife, you suffer from anxiety and your benefit has been sanctioned because your bus was late trying to get through the commonwealth games traffic is JUST like being Orkneycadian and living in one of the most beautiful places in the world.

[Chook a demus]

Quite clearly you won't Orkneycadian as whenever posts highlighting the situation of the poorest in our society are made you very quickly tell us you are "alright jack". You go on to say that its their own fault for being too feckless to budget properly too lazy to grow their own food, too stupid to understand the system, or too disorganised to keep an appointment and if only they were all like you they would be fine. After all, living in a damp, flat in a crime ridden estate where drugs are rife, you suffer from anxiety and your benefit has been sanctioned because your bus was late trying to get through the commonwealth games traffic is JUST like being Orkneycadian and living in one of the most beautiful places in the world.
But if you don't take drugs and do budget carefully and knowing full well there is going to be disruption due to the commonwealth games get up a bit earlier and do your utmost to mitigate one of those problems like the vast majority of us have to then to some extent you are capable of overcoming most of those problems.
There will always be a few in society who due to disability or poor health are unable to overcome some of the problems we all have to deal with and in those cases it's quite right and fair for society to help support them.
Also the genuinely hard working who through no fault of their own find themselves out of work, but there is also a section of society who will always find excuses and blame everyone but themselves for their predicament.
Is it right or fair that we should support those who are too lazy, feckless or busy taking drugs to be bothered with the effort it takes to contribute to society rather than just take and demand hand outs.
Unfortunately there is a section of society who view it as everyone else's problem to make their life's comfortable. And there is a burgeoning third sector which require these people to maintain their behaviour to keep them in jobs.
So you end up with the unsavoury position where the genuinely needy who deserve societies support becoming pushed to the sides because those who can't be bothered and those whose jobs depend on them doing nothing,work to maintain a stasis where everything is an excuse for doing nothing.

It's easy to use exceptional cases to justify things but we can also ask how many pensioners or cancer patients could be treated if young girls weren't given breast augmentation or cosmetic procedures on the NHS.
How many diabetics or cancer patients treated because drug addicts are swallowing up vast sums of money.
How many pensioners kept warm in winter and not dying because we are giving expensive treatments to the obese.
How many disabled and mentally ill people cared for properly because we are housing feeding and clothing single mothers who won't name the father and pursue them for support.

Benefits should go to those who genuinely deserve them and it's quite right and fair for society to support them, but lifestyle choices are a different kettle of fish and is it right we support them because the people concerned can't be bothered to look after themselves.

[Heisenberg]

I totally agree with your last post chook.Of course there are those who will say that those who clog up the NHS through self harm (drug abuse, overeating, alcoholism, smoking etc) vanity are the real victims.

Of course in the post referendum YES vote independant utopian Scotland all of these problems will disappear along with all others. If we are to believe the YES propaganda.

[squidge]

Ok so you two.... If we don't treat the health conditions related to drug addiction, alcoholism, obesity and (conspicuous by its absence) smoking, what happens to those people?

Some would say that by failing to address mental ill health properly, particularly in young people, we fail to prevent alcohol and drug problems from developing in a significant percentage of cases.

Breast augmentation on the NHS? Well across the UK there were less than 4500 of such operations carried out and significant medical need had to be demonstrated for each one of those operations. As for "exceptional circumstances... well Sanctions in One area of Glasgow Rose by over 400% in the last year. Are all those people lazy, feckless and not bothered to look after themselves?

Heisenberg, nowhere is it being said that these problems will disappear although the opportunity to develop a different welfare system, to have control over taxation and spending gives us opportunities to tackle poverty and therefore the health issues which arise from such poverty in ways which Scotland does not have the power to do now.

[Chook a demus]

Well if you had taken the time to read my post I specifically mention poor health whether that be physical or mental young or old. I think you'd find mandatory drug and alcohol testing before any payment of benefits would moderate an awful lot of those inclined to go down that route as drug use is illegal anyway maybe some tougher sentencing for those using would be in order. Remove the drugs and alcohol first if need be put them into compulsory rehab centres to clean them up first it would still be cheaper than the methods used now which only prolong the usage and problem.

I notice you use numbers and percentages where it suits.

4500 breast augmentations how many of those were for reconstructive surgery after cancer in my opinion necessary and how many because of low self esteem or some other requirement not medically necessary but just to make themselves feel better.

A 400% uplift in sanctions is pretty meaningless unless you give a number 400% increase of 10 is not the same as 400% increase of 1000 so yes they could well be the lazy and feckless until those statistics are rendered down into why sanctions where applied nothing can be made of them.

Obesity is the curse of modern living, over consumption and lack of physical activity there are a few instances where it is due to medical conditions but for the vast majority the former is the reason.

The requirement of the state is to provide a safety net not a lifestyle choice or panacea for those less inclined to do well by themselves. I am not condoning some far right example of privatisation but what I am condoning is that those who through no fault of their own find themselves suffering poor health or unemployment be given what they need instead of supplementing the ever increasing numbers of can't be bothered's ,easier to let someone else do it's, or the state will sort me outs.

As for smoking well the days of smoking are looking numbered and within my lifetime I fully expect to see the age limit raised and more sanctions imposed on that habit until it's so punitive to purchase cigarettes and so socially stigmatised as to be not worth doing. Meantime the revenue raised by smokers over the years has pretty much paid for their treatment those it doesn't kill first .

[Heisenberg]

Of those included in the 400% increase and the other 100% of those upon which sanctions where used, many of a them will be lazy and/or feckllsess, many will be not bothered to look after themselves. When you ask are 'all' those people etc? I would answer, probably most of them.

[orkneycadian]

Quite clearly you won't Orkneycadian as whenever posts highlighting the situation of the poorest in our society are made you very quickly tell us you are "alright jack".

Far from it my dear. I posted a link to a map the other day that shows that Highland, Moray, Dumfries and Galloway are the 4 areas with the highest proprtion of people earning under £7 an hour. The data didn't include the PROOSWI, but we know from other sources that these areas have even lower incomes. Is it any coicidence that these areas are the most rural of Scotland, where things like agriculture are the biggest industries? How many farmers do you know who get more than the minimum hourly wage for all the hours they put in? Not many. If they were socialists, they would all be out on strike. Being on the dole has an infinitely higher hourly rate than being a farmer.


Also the genuinely hard working who through no fault of their own find themselves out of work,

In years by, everybody would provide for their own bad times, when they had their own good times. Folk who fished would literally "salt away" fish for the winter when it wasn't weather to go out in their boats. Farmers (still do) would "make hay whilst the sun shone" or, as more the case nowadays, "make silage when its not too weet!". Families, if they found themselves with a little surplus at the end of the week would put it into savings, or even simply but an extra tin of beans or sardines or whatever that would keep and might be handy for that "rainy day"

Of course now, no-one does that. If theres money left over at the end of the week, its "spend, spend, spend", whether that be on holidays, online betting or the biggest and best flat screen TV, safe in the knowledge that if we lose our jobs next week, we will be catered for by the government / other tax payers / food banks / the union or whoever.

The government, any government, doesn't help in that situation. They would rather that their population spends themselves to death, so that the government rakes in the money in the form of tax every time that money changes hand. "Pit by" does no government any favours, as they cannot get their hands on it when its under the mattress!

It would be interesting to hear what the SNP propose to alleviate this situation in the event of an independent Scotland. A resumption of "pit by" would obviously have a huge benefit to the people of Scotland, who would then find that, like their ancestors, they can actually manage to cope with the bad times as well as the good. Not so good for the Scottish Government however who would see a significant drop in their tax take.

What, Squidge, is the SNP / Yes camp line on this?

[squidge]

Of those included in the 400% increase and the other 100% of those upon which sanctions where used, many of a them will be lazy and/or feckllsess, many will be not bothered to look after themselves. When you ask are 'all' those people etc? I would answer, probably most of them.So how do you account for the high percentage of disallowances being overturned on appeal?

[Heisenberg]

So how do you account for the high percentage of disallowances being overturned on appeal?I don't, I know nothing of how the benefit system works. But I imagine someone stands up for the claimant and puts across a good case, of how "the poor unfortunate ........etc etc". It certainly does not mean that a high percentage of them are not lazy, feckless or can't be bothered (or even want) to help themselves, and I'm not saying that they definitely are.

[Chook a demus]

I don't, I know nothing of how the benefit system works. But I imagine someone stands up for the claimant and puts across a good case, of how "the poor unfortunate ........etc etc". It certainly does not mean that a high percentage of them are not lazy, feckless or can't be bothered (or even want) to help themselves, and I'm not saying that they definitely are.Looks like I must of got something right for a change it's yer turn fae a squidging !

[Heisenberg]

Looks like I must of got something right for a change it's yer turn fae a squidging !I dinnae mind a squidging, sure the lassies' nae so bad.She certainly seems tae see tha best in folk, sept us a course.

[Chook a demus]

I dinnae mind a squidging, sure the lassies' nae so bad.She certainly seems tae see tha best in folk, sept us a course.Aye reet she does mind I dinnae kno what she will do when tha neverendum is oer she will have nothing tae talk aboot,nae more squidgymess abounds

[squidge]

Well if you had taken the time to read my post I specifically mention poor health whether that be physical or mental young or old. I think you'd find mandatory drug and alcohol testing before any payment of benefits would moderate an awful lot of those inclined to go down that route as drug use is illegal anyway maybe some tougher sentencing for those using would be in order. Remove the drugs and alcohol first if need be put them into compulsory rehab centres to clean them up first it would still be cheaper than the methods used now which only prolong the usage and problem. I notice you use numbers and percentages where it suits. 4500 breast augmentations how many of those were for reconstructive surgery after cancer in my opinion necessary and how many because of low self esteem or some other requirement not medically necessary but just to make themselves feel better.A 400% uplift in sanctions is pretty meaningless unless you give a number 400% increase of 10 is not the same as 400% increase of 1000 so yes they could well be the lazy and feckless until those statistics are rendered down into why sanctions where applied nothing can be made of them.Obesity is the curse of modern living, over consumption and lack of physical activity there are a few instances where it is due to medical conditions but for the vast majority the former is the reason.The requirement of the state is to provide a safety net not a lifestyle choice or panacea for those less inclined to do well by themselves. I am not condoning some far right example of privatisation but what I am condoning is that those who through no fault of their own find themselves suffering poor health or unemployment be given what they need instead of supplementing the ever increasing numbers of can't be bothered's ,easier to let someone else do it's, or the state will sort me outs. As for smoking well the days of smoking are looking numbered and within my lifetime I fully expect to see the age limit raised and more sanctions imposed on that habit until it's so punitive to purchase cigarettes and so socially stigmatised as to be not worth doing. Meantime the revenue raised by smokers over the years has pretty much paid for their treatment those it doesn't kill first .

Ahhhh chook I have already said what I will be doing when the referendum is over.

You are absolutely right to say there should be rehab available chook but there are not enough places and actually to suggest that compulsory rehab will work shows a lack of insight into any addiction problems.

I use the numbers and percentages that are available to me. As the NUMBER of breast augmentations is the NUMBER provided by the NHS then it is the one I chose, the criteria for receiving this surgery is absolutely clear that it is not something that can be provided on the whim of a teenage girl. This is what the NHS says

"However, there are a few circumstances where breast implants may be available on the NHS. For example, you will be able to have a breast reconstruction, which may include the use of breast implants, on the NHS if you have had breast removal surgery (mastectomy) as part of your treatment for breast cancer.You may also qualify for breast implants on the NHS if it is clear the appearance of your breasts is causing you significant psychological distress or your breasts have not developed normally. For example, you may be able to have NHS-funded breast implants if your breasts are significantly uneven or breast tissue has failed to develop."

The percentage figure is one provided by Citizen's Advice Scotland for their excellent and shocking report. Heisenberg if you don't know much about sanctions and think I am using extreme examples or aren't aware of what is happening to people then this report is worth reading. It is a bit long tho The lack of information for claimants, the lack of notification, the underhanded way sanctions are imposed, the appalling appeals and reconsideration timescales and the lack of commonsense is appalling. http://www.cas.org.uk/system/files/publications/Sanctioned%20What%20benefit.pdf

Orkneycadian I'm not sure what you are asking me. Are you asking me what will help people put money aside for a rainy day? The work that the SG have done so far on supporting those on low incomes and paying the living wage; increasing modern apprenticeships, and the various programmes to help people into work where the SG is having much more success that the Westminster programme. In an independent Scotland, we will be able to use the full range of economic levers to build on these things. What does that mean? It means we can choose a better welfare system that concentrates on putting people into work not catching them out with sanctions, it means more apprenticeships, increases in wages and skills. It means having the opportunity to develop tax systems and pension systems which reward savers and not penalise them like rheghead showed is happening in his post about pension changes. Fundamentally Orkneycadian, it means making decisions which benefit business and people and give people more money in their pockets so that they can afford to save. An independent Scotland gives us the opportunity to grow our economy and spend our money in the way we choose to on priorities for Scotland. We are not able to do that fully, just now.

[Chook a demus]

A three fae one squidging early on a Sunday morning think I will go sit at e harbour and listen till tha scurries jabber

[Heisenberg]

Well squidge,

I briefly scanned through the 40 page link (will read in depth later if I loose the will to live). It seems to me that many who have sanctions imposed upon them, could have avoided them, perhaps with more self discipline. No system is perfect and voting YES won't change that.

If there are no jobs on offer for these people, remind me, why do we need immigrants?

[Chook a demus]

Well squidge,I briefly scanned through the 40 page link (will rBrief summary is most are sanctioned for not doing enough to find work. They claim they can't use the internet don't own a computer or a phone or didn't realise they had to send out x number of applications per week. Now taking it the majority if those where young I find it incredulous that they don't have access to phones haven't a clue how to use the internet and can't use or have access to a computer. Most of the answers sound like the typical ones you get from youngsters they expect you to believe they are thick as two short planks and aren't capable of doing anything. The just play dumb routine . These would be the same ones who probably waltz out of the centres laughing about how they mugged off the people inside with excuses. Sorry but most of its tosh no wonder they are being sanctioned if they expect people to believe those excuses.

[squidge]

Where did I say there were no jobs?

[Heisenberg]

Where did I say there were no jobs?is this an episode of 'ISIHAC' , where we must answer a question with a question?

[squidge]

You are right answering a question with a question is never particularly useful. Especially when asking those who Never answer questions in the first place. However, Immigration is needed in Scotland to address demographic issues. Scotland needs to grow its working population and immigration is one of the ways in which we can do that. Also Scotland has skill shortages which targeted immigration can help us to fill in the short term. In the long term immigration needs could be tailored to our particular needs depending on Scotland's priorities.

[squidge]

Brief summary is most are sanctioned for not doing enough to find work. They claim they can't use the internet don't own a computer or a phone or didn't realise they had to send out x number of applications per week. Now taking it the majority if those where young I find it incredulous that they don't have access to phones haven't a clue how to use the internet and can't use or have access to a computer. Most of the answers sound like the typical ones you get from youngsters they expect you to believe they are thick as two short planks and aren't capable of doing anything. The just play dumb routine . These would be the same ones who probably waltz out of the centres laughing about how they mugged off the people inside with excuses. Sorry but most of its tosh no wonder they are being sanctioned if they expect people to believe those excuses.

Way to let your prejudices shine through chook!

So you didnt see the evidence that advisers are finding

people are not being notified of changes to their jobseeking responsibilities and are then being sanctioned for failing to meet the responsibilities which they didnt know about
People are being sanctioned for not attending appointments when they hadnt been notified of an appointment
People are not being told they are being sanctioned - the first they know about it is when they dont get a payment
People are not being advised that they can appeal or ask for a mandatory reconsideration

but all these things are acceptable to you i guess

[Chook a demus]

Way to let your prejudices shine through chook! So you didnt see the evidence that advisers are finding people are not being notified of changes to their jobseeking responsibilities and are then being sanctioned for failing to meet the responsibilities which they didnt know aboutPeople are being sanctioned for not attending appointments when they hadnt been notified of an appointmentPeople are not being told they are being sanctioned - the first they know about it is when they dont get a payment People are not being advised that they can appeal or ask for a mandatory reconsideration but all these things are acceptable to you i guess
Not allowing my prejudices to shine through at all but I did take time to read the article...94% of bureau advisers believe there has been an increase etc ...anecdotal not factual
I can believe anything I like it doesn't make it factually correct.
60% stated do not usually or never receive notification prior to sanctions ...that's assuming the claimants are being honest and not spinning a wee yarn again anecdotal not factual.
What the report shows it that a lot of people working for CAS are told tales of failing to attend meetings and fulfil their basic requirements and are listened to and believed.
What the report does not do is test as to whether these tales are factually correct.
According to the report 36% said they had never used to internet and a further 11% hardly ever used it.
So according to this out of the unemployed people who are being sanctioned a staggering 47% either have no knowledge or limited knowledge of the internet! then consider the age demographic and it doesn't add up.

Some claimed to not have phones other claimed not to have access to computers then the other chestnut library free computers where always busy so they couldn't use them either.
Some claimed they hadn't received the messages that had been sent to them even the DWP had records of them being sent, amazing in this group the have an alarmingly high rate of not receiving emails and texts compared to the rest of the population.
Some receive short notice for meetings ....but as they are unemployed whys that such a big issue unless they are busy doing other things.
Others being handed letters not turning up for appointments then claiming they never had the letters.
Others claim that sending 6 or 7 job applications a week was thought to be enough .
What you have is a list of excuses which if you're soft enough to actually believe them makes you sound terribly gullible.

When read through in its totality the report is a lazy whingers excuse sheet for couldn't be bothered.

Yes there will be a few with learning difficulties and health issues which you could be able to excuse but the majority of excuses are laughable and that's being kind about it.

[orkneycadian]

Orkneycadian I'm not sure what you are asking me. Are you asking me what will help people put money aside for a rainy day? The work that the SG have done so far on supporting those on low incomes and paying the living wage; increasing modern apprenticeships, and the various programmes to help people into work where the SG is having much more success that the Westminster programme. In an independent Scotland, we will be able to use the full range of economic levers to build on these things. What does that mean? It means we can choose a better welfare system that concentrates on putting people into work not catching them out with sanctions, it means more apprenticeships, increases in wages and skills. It means having the opportunity to develop tax systems and pension systems which reward savers and not penalise them like rheghead showed is happening in his post about pension changes. Fundamentally Orkneycadian, it means making decisions which benefit business and people and give people more money in their pockets so that they can afford to save. An independent Scotland gives us the opportunity to grow our economy and spend our money in the way we choose to on priorities for Scotland. We are not able to do that fully, just now.

Hmmm, no change then. So we will still have people looking to the state to support them because they have blown all their money on swally, fags and cuddies.

[squidge]

And more information about the way we treat those who are on benefits following on from a previous article I linked to http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/05/even-the-sight-of-a-cv-would-give-me-an-anxiety-attack-guardian-readers-on-benefit-sanctions

[Heisenberg]

Where did I say there were no jobs? just as well there's plenty of jobs to go round then.

[rob murray]

And more information about the way we treat those who are on benefits following on from a previous article I linked to http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/05/even-the-sight-of-a-cv-would-give-me-an-anxiety-attack-guardian-readers-on-benefit-sanctions

Horrifying, absolutley shocking : what a bunch of bar stewards the eton elite are, anyone who actually supports this sanctions nonsense is a pure 100% dyed in the wool fascist : still its cheaper than herding people into work houses though

[squidge]

And you know Rob, none of the Westminster Parties have any intention or offer any opportunity for changing it. You KNOW the answer sigh

[Heisenberg]

And you know Rob, none of the Westminster Parties have any intention or offer any opportunity for changing it. You KNOW the answer sighI don't squidge, so please share.

[erniesspeedshop]

Wasn't Mrs Thatcher criticised (by Nationalists) for using the oil money to pay benefits?