Jump to content

Scottish Independence


xbl

Recommended Posts

Aye you can almost feel the Adlib/HB express heading this way...

He can be safe in the knowledge that he will probably have them both absolutely apoplectic and frothing at the mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 16.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I laughed til I had a tear in my eye at some of the gutrot put forward by HB and Adlib - show this to your children about the perils of spending too much time on the internet "learning about the world" and not enough actually going out and, you know, engaging in old fashioned speaking to actual people.

The above photo is the best bit. This is supposed to "represent" poverty in the UAE. Go on HB, make us laugh. What's the poverty here? Oh, I see, you saw a black man in the street and a Pakistani man "in pyjamas" (not, of course, the normal national dress of Pakistani workers) and thought they must be slaves.

Ha ha ha, ya daft racist.

God, I love steps. Steps demonstrate wealth and power. Gan on yersel steps.

This was supposed to demonstrate the contrast of the beauty of Glasgow and your third point was "we have steps".

Kneel down world and marvel.

You are a cretin.

The point of H_B's posts was to show how ridiculous and false the comparators were. He was not suggesting that Glasgow only has beautiful steps or that Abu Dhabi or Dubai contain only poverty.

Ah, I see what you've done there. You've said "the Middle East" and the likes of "Qatar" are the same. What you haven't done is actually any homework. For example, how much oil does Dubai have? Not much is the answer, a little bit of gas but Dubai operates as a free market economy based on trade, comparing Scotland's oil income to Dubai is like boasting that Antarctica gets more snow than Miami.

Actually, I think you'll find I've said neither the words "Middle East" nor "Qatar" because I have not been referring to either of them in my points. Nor indeed have I commented on how much oil either Dubai nor Abu Dhabi have. I have, by contrast, pointed out that the poor in the UAE have, for the most part, not benefited from the oil they do have, and that most of that wealth, insofar as it exists, has gone to elites, and far more so than it has done in the UK. So this is irrelevant.

So, a family is worse off than Easterhouse? No, as the workers of Dubai (and Middle East) come without their wives and children. Also, they get housing/ utilities etc paid. Their wage - around 2,000dhs a month (330 quid) is literally to pay for them and their food. Now, tell me a family in Easterhouse with one member working 20 hours a week on minimum wage is better off?

What?

If people who work in Dubai don't come with their families, I'm going to tentatively suggest that their family's housing and utilities aren't paid. They still have to pay for a place for their family to live, eat and work. Even allowing for £330 a month, I'm going tentatively to suggest this is not as good a set-up as a "family" in Easterhouse who if they have a part-time worker will be eligible for housing benefit, council tax benefit, working families tax credit, child benefit, JSA for those who aren't working, ESA or Incapacity Benefit for those who have obstacles to work and more, circumstance dependent.

All of this is somewhat besides the point, however. because the poorest in Dubai aren't working in oil. The poorest in Dubai aren't getting £330 per month plus digs and utilities. These are completely non-comparable people which is precisely why the original picture is a distortion. If you want to compare the situation of an oil worker in Dubai to that of one in Aberdeen, feel free. I suggest that that probably won't help your case either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking about the Labour kid from the video

The wee scouse ginger Labour mutant deserves abuse.

And what about the Labour councillor who admitted failing a college HND course right after being introduced as an "expert economist" :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are a cretin.

The point of H_B's posts was to show how ridiculous and false the comparators were. He was not suggesting that Glasgow only has beautiful steps or that Abu Dhabi or Dubai contain only poverty.

Well he failed there then. The point of the original post was to show how our oil wealth was squandered. So what does H_B do? He posts pictures of buildings built before we found oil. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wee scouse ginger Labour mutant deserves abuse.

And what about the Labour councillor who admitted failing a college HND course right after being introduced as an "expert economist" :lol:

Was the college course in Economics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he failed there then. The point of the original post was to show how our oil wealth was squandered. So what does H_B do? He posts pictures of buildings built before we found oil. :lol:

But we have no more squandered our oil than Abu Dhabi or Dubai with respect to poverty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we have no more squandered our oil than Abu Dhabi or Dubai with respect to poverty.

When did Abu Dhabi or Dubai buy these things then?

post-39650-0-21578300-1395360006_thumb.j

At least the Emirates spent their money on infrastructure and buildings, not the ability to destroy them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did Abu Dhabi or Dubai buy these things then?

attachicon.gifTrident-nuclear-submarine-006.jpg

At least the Emirates spent their money on infrastructure and buildings, not the ability to destroy them.

Infrastructure and buildings overwhelmingly for the benefit of their elite and Western multi-millionaires to have a timeshare. We did invest in intrastructure and buildings too. Aberdeen and its surrounding area has been transformed by the oil wealth of the last few decades. Tens of thousands of new homes built in and to the West of the city. We've seen the maintenance of a welfare state that is still much more generous than anything you'd get in the UAE.

For all you throw Trident into the mix, consider this: the UAE spends 6.9% of its GDP on defence. The UK spends 2.5% of its GDP on defence. If anyone's spending money on developing the ability to destroy stuff, I think we can safely say it's the UAE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Infrastructure and buildings overwhelmingly for the benefit of their elite and Western multi-millionaires to have a timeshare. We did invest in intrastructure and buildings too. Aberdeen and its surrounding area has been transformed by the oil wealth of the last few decades. Tens of thousands of new homes built in and to the West of the city. We've seen the maintenance of a welfare state that is still much more generous than anything you'd get in the UAE.

For all you throw Trident into the mix, consider this: the UAE spends 6.9% of its GDP on defence. The UK spends 2.5% of its GDP on defence. If anyone's spending money on developing the ability to destroy stuff, I think we can safely say it's the UAE.

UAE GDP = 360.2 billion USD

UK GDP = 2.435 trillion USD

**shakes head in disbelief** Ad Lib pretends that 6.9% of 360 billion is greater than 2.5% of 2.4 trillion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UAE GDP = 360.2 billion USD

UK GDP = 2.435 trillion USD

**shakes head in disbelief** Ad Lib pretends that 6.9% of 360 billion is greater than 2.5% of 2.4 trillion.

Sterling work. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laughed til I had a tear in my eye at some of the gutrot put forward by HB and Adlib - show this to your children about the perils of spending too much time on the internet "learning about the world" and not enough actually going out and, you know, engaging in old fashioned speaking to actual people.

The above photo is the best bit. This is supposed to "represent" poverty in the UAE. Go on HB, make us laugh. What's the poverty here? Oh, I see, you saw a black man in the street and a Pakistani man "in pyjamas" (not, of course, the normal national dress of Pakistani workers) and thought they must be slaves.

Ha ha ha, ya daft racist.

God, I love steps. Steps demonstrate wealth and power. Gan on yersel steps.

This was supposed to demonstrate the contrast of the beauty of Glasgow and your third point was "we have steps".

Kneel down world and marvel.

Ah, I see what you've done there. You've said "the Middle East" and the likes of "Qatar" are the same. What you haven't done is actually any homework. For example, how much oil does Dubai have? Not much is the answer, a little bit of gas but Dubai operates as a free market economy based on trade, comparing Scotland's oil income to Dubai is like boasting that Antarctica gets more snow than Miami.

So, a family is worse off than Easterhouse? No, as the workers of Dubai (and Middle East) come without their wives and children. Also, they get housing/ utilities etc paid. Their wage - around 2,000dhs a month (330 quid) is literally to pay for them and their food. Now, tell me a family in Easterhouse with one member working 20 hours a week on minimum wage is better off?

Hilarious.

Put the thesaurus away Champ, you're talking balls.

Oh look, it's the victim blaming scumbag who defends the UAE for jailing rape victims for the heinous crime of being raped.

I don't think we'll be taking any advice from you champ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least the Emirates spent their money on infrastructure and buildings, not the ability to destroy them.

For all you throw Trident into the mix, consider this: the UAE spends 6.9% of its GDP on defence. The UK spends 2.5% of its GDP on defence. If anyone's spending money on developing the ability to destroy stuff, I think we can safely say it's the UAE.

UAE GDP = 360.2 billion USD

UK GDP = 2.435 trillion USD

**shakes head in disbelief** Ad Lib pretends that 6.9% of 360 billion is greater than 2.5% of 2.4 trillion.

Are you just wilfully missing the point? No-one would dispute that in absolute terms the UK spends more than the UAE on defence.

The fact is, as was correctly pointed out, that the Emirates spend a far greater proportion of their money on defence than the UK. Military spending per head in the Emirates is around the highest in the world (if not the highest). It was you who originally stated that the Emirates weren't spending money on growing their capability to 'destroy buildings' - this clearly isn't the case. Trying to create a straw man argument by 'shaking your head in disbelief' at something Ad Lib never even said, is just ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you just wilfully missing the point? No-one would dispute that in absolute terms the UK spends more than the UAE on defence.

The fact is, as was correctly pointed out, that the Emirates spend a far greater proportion of their money on defence than the UK. Military spending per head in the Emirates is around the highest in the world (if not the highest). It was you who originally stated that the Emirates weren't spending money on growing their capability to 'destroy buildings' - this clearly isn't the case. Trying to create a straw man argument by 'shaking your head in disbelief' at something Ad Lib never even said, is just ridiculous.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't have put it better myself.

One thing worth pointing out is that the defence budget of the UK has never traditionally included the cost of Trident - this has always come from a different budget, at least until 2010 - but I'm not sure how far they ever got with making that come out of the main defence budget, or whether it was quietly dropped. Not that it would take you up to the 6% that the UAE spends, but it has always been higher than the 2.5% currently spent, and that for the money you spend, Trident gives you a wee bit more bang for your buck than anything in the UAE inventory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...