Jedi2

Might want to check out my posts in the actual football forums then. Or indeed my criticisms, questioning of Tory (and yes, even Labour) policy when it arises. Then there is the TV and film forum...

Only person lying is you.

Anyone questioning SNP policy, leadership or record in govt

2 questions for you... Is £28,000 a 'high earner'? Does someone making £28,000 pay more tax in Scotland than any other part of the UK?

I know.. £28,000 a year is a 'high earner' in Yousaf's Scotland...not 'lies' when factual. And the old 'sockpuppet' chat..again equating to anyone questioning SNP policy or the quality of their leadership

Noting of course that, when asked further up the thread...do they return it to Westminster, or carry it over, my reply was.. 'Neither' ..but nice try. Also nice to discover that the Humza is in fact, a financial wizard, who has the Scottish economy booming, local Councils awash with funding, and is steaming towards presumably 40 plus seats at the GE. Good Times.

So, essentially they keep it as a future 'reserve'. If they are managing the budget so well, why do they need the recent tax hikes? With the now 6 bands of taxation in Scotland, and increase for lower earners. In addition to these hikes at the same time they starve Councils of much needed revenue, when they were expecting a increase in CT of between 5 and 10%. Only reason for that is to keep middle income voters (who use fewer Council services) happy. Can't have it both ways...higher taxes, tightened Council budgets (and some heading for bankruptcy),and at the same time they are managing the economy we'll (as they underspend).

Neither.

The SNP who have consistently underspent their budget over the last few years? Including a record £2 billion. https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23164424.scottish-government-records-2bn-budget-underspend/ Can still 'afford' a Council Tax Freeze though, to leave local areas short of finance for basic services.

One of the myths the Tories have peddled successfully for decades is that Labour will always borrow more and increase the national debt and with it, potentially inflation. The facts show that Tory govts always have higher borrowing, the difference is more that they do so to fund tax cuts, mostly for the better off, while Labour (doesn't matter if its Blair or Starmer) will largely borrow to invest in public services. Labour govts of whatever stripe will always try what they can to keep public services particularly the NHS, Education and Social Care solvent. There will also be better funding for local Councils. Strip away the failure to abolish the H of L, the rhetoric about 'the city' and rowing back on Green Energy, and you will still find better public services which aren't being sold off to rich foreign investors on the cheap.

No question that reneging on replacing the H of L (in a first term), watering down the Green Energy pledge, not reinstating the cap on Bankers Bonuses, (only) aiming to nationalise rail, and not mail, water, and energy, cosying up to 'the city', is not good, to say the least. There is catious then there is this, though suspect they have had a look at books, and discovered that the mess the Tories have made of the economy is even worse than thought, and so have to dampen expectations around spending. All they are doing is opening the door to the Tory vote to creep back up in England, and make what should be a sure fire win, an election which could end up too close to call.

Thought the conditions played a large part in a scrappy affair. Motherwell certainly the better side from around the half hour mark until around the last 15 minutes or so, when we finally realised that we were outmuscled in the middle of the park, with only David Watson effectively in there to try and win the ball (not one of Polworth's strengths). Things improved when McKenzie and Stewart came on to add a bit more bite in the middle. Bair a handful all afternoon, and also thought Spittal was very good. Overall, a draw felt about right on the balance of the while game.

Exactly. It's pretty much 'criticise the SNP'-trolling, discuss Labour policy-trolling, suggest ways the SNP might do better-trolling/sock puppet, repeat any points about Labour policy, often just in answer to criticisms of them-trolling' That's before you get to 'remember when he was banned?...no me neither (never was)

Think this is a fair assessment

Aye, okay then.

'Now go away and reflect'...do you want to perhaps crank up your arrogance meter another few notches, or will that suffice for now? Also, you might want to check the fact that you imply that Scotland doesn't have sufficient 'powers' to make changes (ergo hardly a 'fib' or 'misrepresentation') You also say that Humza 'seems like a nice guy' (my post: The Humza is essentially a great guy)...Fib? Misrepresentation? Which? I have repeatedly said that Brexit should be challenged by (both) the SNP and Labour pursuing an EFTA route (initially) before moving to a 2nd Ref when the time is right..hardly suggesting that people just 'suck it up' Finally, why is it 'okay/admirable' to vote for/support a party you believe to be 'deeply flawed' but anyone voting for Labour (also deemed to be 'deeply flawed') is off their head

Think you have nailed it there.

Tedious sh*te is continually peddling the line that Humza is actually a great guy, who is on the cusp of leading Scotland to Independece, that the whole media is united to 'get' the SNP, and of course, that's its 'all Westminster's fault' as we essentially have no powers to make choices ourselves..pretty much a summary of most pro-SNP posts

So you are suggesting that I am, in fact, a Tory now? Gold

In terms of seats, that would be: SNP ~ 45 (-1 / -19) Labour ~ 43 (+1 / +21) Conservative ~21 (+1 / -11) Green ~ 10 (nc / +2) Lib Dem ~ 10 (nc / +6) RUK ~ 0 (-1 / nc) That would be some outcome...SNP could govern ad a minority or add the Greens again, still a minority.. would be difficult for them to get much through with that.

Worth remembering the Labour approach to the 1997 election: Ultra cautious-keep Tory spending plans for first 2 years, no income tax rises, abolish Clause IV on public ownership, talk up 'tough on crime', not reverse Tory trade union laws etc. And yet...despite accusations of being Tory lite then (as now) it turned out to be a govt which brought record investment to the NHS, Education and Social Services, introduced the Minimum wage, brought Devolution to Scotland and Wales, the GFA to N.Ireland, Sure Start, free nursery places, low inflation, positive approach to immigration, 3 million more in work. In other words improved the lives of an awful lot of people across the UK. (Obviously yes, a lot of the record was later tainted by Iraq). There are a lot of parallels between then and now..the caution and rowing back, the accusations of 'just the same', a deeply unpopular Tory govt....and then a Labour govt which, despite the 'caution', as said, made life better.

So, we are agreed that the SNP's current plan for Independence is basically a Tory economic dream. In answer to your question, is it 'ideological' for Labour to not reinstate the cap on bankers bonuses eg..no I don't think it is..I still reckon it is driven by 'don't scare the horses with regard to the right wing media. As far as the two child benefit cap..its not a policy I'm bothered about either way tbh..and am probably with @virginton on that one...so is it ideological to not remove it? No..again more down to not giving the Tories ammunition. And btw, I don't 'agree' with not giving the Tories ammunition..as said, I think Labour should be sticking with the Green Energy Plan as originally set out etc

Is it an 'ideological' choice for the SNP to propose slashing public spending in Scotland post Indy, sell off assets (in other words privatisation), all the while keeping taxes 'low'?

Is this party even still going? Might poll, what, 1% next time round.

@ScotiaNostra is absolutely spot on that the SNP need to change. You can't have a clown like Yousaf in charge (put there as the 'continuity' candidate), and as he says just limp along lurching from scandal to scandal in recent times, and just expect folk to continue voting for you, just because it's the 'only route' to Indy. Get a serious leader and a serious programme for govt and Indy again, post GE, and then make the prospect of Indy more attractive to soft 'No's' and 'Don't Knows'. Meanwhile, as said, I have been very disappointed in Labour's recent performance. However, it is also right that they need to make a serious move on Devolution as well post GE, and Sarwar should be in a position to capitalise. They still aren't 'just the same as the Tories' (although recent rhetoric..bankers bonuses et al) has to stop, and they need to be brave enough to stand by the 'good' policies, previously proposed. Both parties need to 'do better' although Labour are in better shape to do so at the moment.