PDA

View Full Version : Something to consider



BetterTogether
19-Nov-15, 22:09
Before you even consider what party you support or what sort of country you want yourself, your children and grandchildren to live in. Think of this when reading their manifestos and make careful considered decisions this is the reality.

http://debt-clock.org/

weeker2014
19-Nov-15, 22:12
SNP all the way. They are the best for our country.

BetterTogether
19-Nov-15, 23:16
SNP all the way. They are the best for our country.


In in your opinion, even though they claim to be the party of anti austerity who's policies would keep austerity going longer and add massively to the debt burden.

I like your thinking and deductive logic it really makes sense.

Mr Z
19-Nov-15, 23:24
Simple
Don't vote for the parties which have created the debt

weeker2014
20-Nov-15, 10:08
In in your opinion, even though they claim to be the party of anti austerity who's policies would keep austerity going longer and add massively to the debt burden.

I like your thinking and deductive logic it really makes sense.

Everything on here is our own opinion and in mine the SNP are by far the best. You may disagree but that will be your disappointment at the next election.

BetterTogether
20-Nov-15, 15:04
I can live with them winning another election by the time that terms finished they'll have trashed Scotland so badly only the most brain dead zombie will be prepared to follow them.

Oddquine
20-Nov-15, 16:54
In in your opinion, even though they claim to be the party of anti austerity who's policies would keep austerity going longer and add massively to the debt burden.

I like your thinking and deductive logic it really makes sense.

I admire your simple and single-minded SNP BAD rhetoric..it certainly convinces those who already think as you do (like dc1 whose latest hobby appears to be giving me bad rep :roll:).

Now, here's a question..............How much more massively can a country, which has no input into creating the UK debt, add to a debt burden created by Westminster? Kindly explain what relevance the UK debt burden has on who we vote for in the 2016 Scottish elections? The Scottish Government lives within its means, Westminster does not..and that will not change, whoever is in Government in Scotland.

Austerity is a political choice, not an economic necessity......in the same way as it is an individual's personal choice to stop using their credit card and make the minimum repayment until the debt is clear, or to cut other expenditure to repay some of the principal each month, or to pay the whole balance each month.......or alternatively, get another credit card and start creating more debt. Currently, Westminster, despite their austerity policies are on their second credit card......and this profligacy, on the likes of Cameron's personal air transport, Trident replacement, foreign "adventures", an expanding un-elected second chamber, HS2, tax breaks for the already wealthy etc etc means that Scotland's allocated spending, in turn has to increase, under devolution, as their population share of the debt produced by Westminster overspending , even when Scotland gets no real benefit and has no input to creating it.

I note with interest, that Westminster borrowing this month has exceeded targets; that Osborne pumps up to 215,000 of taxpayers' money annually into an MPs hardship fund currently sitting at 6.5 million (a hardship fund specially for MPs for the love of pete!); that Westminster is proposing to cut input to the Scottish Big Lottery Fund from the "independent" National Lottery, in order to subsidise its departmental cuts to arts and sports organisations, (but as art and sports responsibility is devolved to Scotland, that would mean Scottish charities being cut to subsidise an English only responsibility); that the House of Lords is now admitting what the SG and most of us have been saying for some time, and that the MSM is actually reporting, that the Scotland Bill making its way through Parliament is unworkable and detrimental to Scotland (and therefore the Union) as it stands.

Logically, if the UK National Debt is relevant to the Scottish elections, then how much of it is for the benefit of Scotland is relevant as well. Imo, Scotland has received little benefit from a National Debt doubled and then increased even more since 2010, because of the austerity policies of two governments who haven't quite got it that reducing income tax levels for the better off, reducing corporation tax, not plugging tax-loopholes and reducing the incomes and spending power of those at the bottom of the pile reduces the over-all tax take, which is meant to be what we are spending annually. It doesn't help that so much UK spending has been ring-fenced and is untouchable, even when it is not being spent to any good or useful purpose.

If they are ever going to meet their revised target of a Budget surplus(yes, you did read that right..a surplus), it is going to take a lot more austerity. It was meant to be happening in 2015/2016, but Buckley's chance of that, so to meet the latest target of a surplus by 2019/2020, in the being looked-at family silver sell-off to our friends and family to make profit, stakes is......enough public land to build 150,000 houses by 2020; Channel 4;the 30% stake in Urenco; Disposals around major rail stations; Ministry of Defence land;Companies House ;Land Registry ;Met Office ;Ordnance Survey ;Royal Mint......and going by the selling prices of other public assets in the past, I foresee a succession of losses which won't be helpful in that aim.

Isn't politics fun......for those at the top who won't be affected by anything they do....because they don't do anything which will detrimentally affect them. Be interesting to see if we pensioners get our fair share of the austerity cuts come the November statement, but I'm not holding my breath.

BetterTogether
20-Nov-15, 17:18
I'd like to know how you arrive at the conclusion that Scotland has no input into creating UK national debt are you still trying to claim that GERS figures are all wrong, or maybe the Fiscal Institues figures are all wrong, maybe even the decline in Oil revenues now so adversely affected it's actually costing money now, maybe you're still waving that discredited flag that the Barnett formula is all wrong and we actually contribute more than we receive. Tell me where to start on dismantling you're somewhat bizarre statement and I can quite gladly rummage up the figures for each area where your supposition can be roundly traduced to the nonsense it is. I mean I fully understand it's highly embarrassing to have one of the architects of the white paper come out and publicly state it was all based on best case scenarios and not realistic and even more difficult to point clearly to one single policy success for the SNP despite all the nationalistic flag waving fervour for Nicola Sturgeon and some of her apparently anti semantic MPs. You could flag wave over how wonderful they are by allowing refugees to be housed in empty council housing while simulataenously running a campaign stating 5000 Scottish children will be homeless this year. Or flouting their policy for free child care when there aren't sufficient places to actually allow this to happen. You may even get all excited about austerity when it's quite well written about from numerous sources that their very own policies would actually increase debt burden and prolong so called austerity.
Im quite happy to engage on any particular subject but this is about putting up hard statistical analysis to back up your figures and prove your point please feel free to provide facts and figures rather than just empty rhetoric. Maybe even a few graphs wouldn't go amiss for those who like to follow but not engage. Fill your boots give it your best shot but I do promise for every piece of Nationalistic Propoganda you care to produce there will be figures for erstwhile organisations that pick them apart and reduce them to the incorherrent jibberish they really are.