Bamba-Daft, Mon 11 May 00:39

DBP, Sat 9 May 09:50

So a good strong majority in favour of independence then 👍

No? Do you know what majority means?

DBP, Sat 16 May 00:11

Bamba-Daft, Mon 11 May 00:39

DBP, Sat 9 May 09:50

So a good strong majority in favour of independence then 👍

No? Do you know what majority means?

Bamba - Please correct me where I’m wrong…

Majority meaning: “The greater number or part; a number more than half of the total.”

Election results:
- Independence supporting parties (snp and greens): 73
- union supporting parties (Labour, reform, Lib Dem’s and tories: 56

Perhaps you don’t know what representative democracy means?

jake89, Wed 20 May 20:42

The more wasted on HS2 the better as Scotland gets more pocket money the more England spends. I`m pretty sure it`s around 5x more than they said it would cost already. Absolute idiots at the helm.

red-star-par, Thu 21 May 20:08

HS2 is an utter shambles, there`s no benefit to Scotland at all but we are subsidising little england as usual. But, let`s not talk about that, look, look, the ferries.

It`s a pity that the people in england know that as much as they would like an independent england, that collectively, as a nation, they are too wee, too stupid, too lazy, too reliant on us, to ever go it alone

sadindiefreak, Thu 21 May 22:35

red-star-par, Thu 21 May 20:08

HS2 is an utter shambles, there`s no benefit to Scotland at all but we are subsidising little england as usual. But, let`s not talk about that, look, look, the ferries.

It`s a pity that the people in england know that as much as they would like an independent england, that collectively, as a nation, they are too wee, too stupid, too lazy, too reliant on us, to ever go it alone

We are absolutely not financing HS2. Because it is categorised as an England only rail project so we receive consequentials.
Arguing that we are paying for it damages the cause of Scottish Independence because its a lie.

A much better arguement is Crossrail, which cost £18.8 billion. This was categorised as a London-specific transport project which did mean we financed it through taxation but did not receive consequentials.
This is a very important point as it is now pushed by Westminster to try and categorise projects in a way that avoids the need to pay consequentials.

The fact they are deliberately doing that is a much better arguement for independence.

DBP, Wed 20 May 09:37

I’d like to see the unionists have to give a detailed forecast of what they’ll do in the event of a ‘no’ vote on independence, and what the economy will look like in the short and medium term

They won’t, and that’s for the same reason the yes side can’t.
A) because any economic plan is made by an individual party, and who’s to say the we’ll all vote for the SNP’s vision of the future of for Scotland in the first Scottish general election
B) the unionists can’t agree what that would be, because they’ve all got there own view of how to run an economy - so if current voting trends continue - it would be farage that should paint the economic forecast of the union
C) world events generally impact all plans, so you can set strategic objectives and how they translate into proposed policies and changes - but along comes war, crisis, pandemics, etc and they have to adapt
D) the unionists wouldn’t agree to it because let’s be honest, the UK economy is no better and England isn’t exactly the land of milk and honey

NMCmassive, Tue 26 May 11:29

By the way, I’m not here to convince anyone the UK is doing well or that Brexit has been a success or anything else. What I am saying though is that even for how poor the UK has done in the last 20 years, the SNP still can’t come up with a credible alternative.

But rather than addressing it, they’ll just blame Westminster and let the money train role on. The only ones benefiting are the SNP.