When will indyref2 happen?

[sophia]

3 minutes ago, Blinky said:

This is part of the reason why the Nats can’t expand their independence support. Insular and hostile attitudes generally get you nowhere in politics, and calling everyone that disagrees with you names is unlikely to gain you any support. 

I actually agree and I don't think that you are a dribbling simpleton.

However, I'm not sure where to place you, so you'd help me ever so much if you'd place yourself on a 1 to 10 scale, of moderation and intelligence.

Say 1 is Kathleen Leslie and 10 is Nelson Mandela, where would you place yourself?

[git-intae-thum]

Why has Glenanover changed their user name

[sophia]

23 minutes ago, Blinky said:

 

I would not place myself on any scales

I identify as a Right-Centre democratic Conservative. I am a mild Brexiteer and a strong Unionist.

HAHA.

 

I'd like to get to know you better.

Tell me though, what irks you about the anti democratic conservatives?

[Aufc]

I've answered this before. Scotland within the UK isn't a basket case. We perform just as well as 11 of the 14 regions the UK is divided into, in one of the richest economies in the world.  And through the Barnett Formula, which is very generous to Scotland, we benefit from the surplus being generated by London, the South East and the East of England. 
Look, everyone on here regardless of political bias appears to accept the financial strength of London. As part of the Union we get to share in their prosperity. It's only the nationalists who appear to think we'd be better off financially if we cut off that supply of money. 
To try to give a simple analogy it's a bit like having a Great Aunt who has won Euromillions and has agreed to pay your mortgage for you every month. Telling her to stick her cash might make you feel better but it certainly isn't going to help you balance the books. The same is true in Scotland. The excess money we get and spend through the Barnett Formula is worth around about 90% of the entire Scottish NHS budget for a year. Splitting from the UK might give some in Scotland a bit more pride about ourselves, but it's not going to pay the bills to help continue to fund our current lifestyle - so the question you really should be asking is if Scotland was to become Independent what would you like to see the country give up to balance the books?
Now just to be clear that analogy doesn't cover the pitfalls of separation either. Things like the economic viability of running a hard border between ourselves and England - as the EU would insist. Or the countries viability to continue to fund state pensions as our working population continues to get older and our citizens live longer. Or the economic damage that would be done by putting a trade barrier between us and our biggest customer base. Or the loss of investment that would occur due to the continued political instability in Scotland as our new - presumably socialist government - tries to set new tax levels and new business laws. 
The positive economic case for staying in the UK is that we continue to get our largest bills paid for us by sharing in the wealth and prosperity of one of the richest cities in the world, and being part of one of the richest economies in the world. The status quo might not sound like an exciting new dawn, but why piss away 300 years of tremendous success for a desperate whimsical and xenophobic punt with all our childrens financial futures? And why do so when the Nationalists can't give one positive economic argument for separation? 

Genuinely didnt even read that

[Aufc]

Good to you're change in heart. Fair play m8

I have said this before. My view is that i am very lucky with my career (still relatively young but already earn well above the average wage and will only increase) so whatever happens my family and i will get by. If independence helps people less fortunate improve their standard of living then it is a no brainer for me (and should be for others in same situation)

[sophia]

2 minutes ago, Aufc said:

I have said this before. My view is that i am very lucky with my career (still relatively young but already earn well above the average wage and will only increase) so whatever happens my family and i will get by. If independence helps people less fortunate improve their standard of living then it is a no brainer for me (and should be for others in same situation)

 

Apart from the words "relatively young" I associate myself and concur with the above remarks.

Lesley Riddoch bangs on about rural Scotland and she's not wrong.

I'd like to think that a modern Scotland would transform the huge swathes of our country given over to Victorian lairdism and their sterile shooting estates into the shining jewels that they are.

[The_Kincardine]

55 minutes ago, sophia said:

I'd like to think that a modern Scotland would transform the huge swathes of our country given over to Victorian lairdism and their sterile shooting estates into the shining jewels that they are.

I know three of Deeside's estates pretty well having lived 'up there' for 5 years and having a previous ex wife (brought up in a comparable estate in Sweden) carrying out land-usage and opportunity management* studies for two of them.

The general view is that they manage the land well.  They are good landlords.  They maximise tourist income whenever possible.  They look to diversify away from core farming if there are opportunities.  They would like to increase housing stock but are often hampered by local authorities' 'county plans' which takes in to account not only access to core services such as health, education and infrastructure but who also have a desire to maintain 'local character'.

They generally are good at woodland management though there is a certain criticism that they could do more to encourage the use of community biofuel schemes though this is only possible when you have, say, a large fuel consumer (such as a school) with attendant local housing.

The idiocy of your post is in mentioning, "sterile shooting estates" as the last thing they are is sterile.  I can only take away from your post of ignorance that you've never been out shooting and certainly ken the square root of heehaw on the subject.

Edited January 24, 2020 by The_Kincardine

[sophia]

5 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

I know three of Deeside's estates pretty well having lived 'up there' for 5 years and having a previous ex wife (brought up in a comparable estate in Sweden) carrying out land-usage and opportunity management* studies for two of them.

The general view is that they manage the land well.  They are good landlords.  They maximise tourist income whenever possible.  They look to diversify away from core farming if there are opportunities.  They would like to increase housing stock but are often hampered by local authorities' 'county plans' which takes in to account not only access to core services such as health, education and infrastructure but who also have a desire to maintain 'local character'.

They generally are good at woodland management though there is a certain criticism that they could do more to encourage the use of community biofuel schemes though this is only possible when you have, say, a large fuel consumer (such as a school) with attendant local housing.

The idiocy of your post is in mentioning, "sterile shooting estates" as the last thing they are is sterile.  I can only take away from your post of ignorance that you've never been out shooting and certainly ken the square root of heehaw on the subject.

You know nothing about me but I will let you know that I have close up knowledge of the paucity of thought of highland inherited wealth.

Why would I ever want to shoot something for sport?

Why would we want to invest in sterilising so much of our land for so little?

chin-chin

[ICTJohnboy]

Shooting wildlife on Scottish estates is an obscenity. 

[The_Kincardine]

9 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

Shooting wildlife on Scottish estates is an obscenity. 

Eh?  Are they allowed to raise and kill beef, lamb and pork or is killing those beasts also an obscenity?  Because that accounts, weight for weight, at least 99% of the slaughter on most sporting estates.

[sophia]

2 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Eh?  Are they allowed to raise and kill beef, lamb and pork or is killing those beasts also an obscenity?  Because that accounts, weight for weight, at least 99% of the slaughter on most sporting estates.

We all know that estates use sheep to shear the land and for each ewe the lairds are paid royally with subsidies beyond their dreams.

The environmental damage done, especially in the teeth of climate change is very significant indeed.

chin-chin

[The_Kincardine]

16 minutes ago, sophia said:

We all know that estates use sheep to shear the land and for each ewe the lairds are paid royally with subsidies beyond their dreams.

This is utter nonsense.  Sheep farming is marginally profitable and is only done on land that can't be used for anything else.

[jakedee]

Not true I'm afraid, round me, the sheep are cleared from the hillside on a friday so there's no "collateral damage" on the w/ end shoot.

This is utter nonsense.  Sheep farming is marginally profitable and is only done on land that can't be used for anything else.

[sophia]

3 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

This is utter nonsense.  Sheep farming is marginally profitable and is only done on land that can't be used for anything else.

You are out of time and ill informed.

Best stewardship of our land has moved on and your anecdotal and quite frankly creepy obsession with your ex partner's subjective opinions. 

Don't feel vulnerable though, those that have inherited, despite the easy money they get from renting renewables, also have some growing room.

chin-chin

[The_Kincardine]

2 minutes ago, sophia said:

growing room.

What's a growing room?

[sophia]

8 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

What's a growing room?

Ach, it was just a wee play on words that hints at a different land use and your capacity to learn.

chin-chin

[ICTJohnboy]

32 minutes ago, Blinky said:

As a vegan, I disagree with all killing of animals. Anyone who opposes trophy hunting and takes the moral high ground, but still eats meat or dairy is an absolute hypocrite.

 

I eat meat and dairy but I do feel very guilty about it.

[Malky3]

14 hours ago, AUFC90 said:

Scotland leaving the UK will cause England damage than the UK would leaving the EU. Even to a dribbling simpleton such as yourself that should seem pretty obvious.

Please Scotland, please don't leave us, family of nations etc etc, saltires on downing st because they were do desperate to keep "subsidising" us Scots.

Why are you driven to do "damage" with your vote? 

Personally I like to use my vote to elect or to vote for the option that I believe will create more opportunities and more wealth. Yet here you seem to be indicating that you like to use your vote to distroy opportunities and to hit us all in the pocket. 

 

[Malky3]

13 hours ago, Stinky Bone said:

But a "mild" brexiter??  Sir, does that even exist? 

 

Of course it does. Same as I was a mild remainer. 

 

 

[Malky3]

13 hours ago, Aufc said:

Genuinely didnt even read that

 

You asked the question and didn't read the response. That's on you I'm afraid.