Next permanent Scotland manager

[BFTD]

9 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

For those who are gut sick of the Tories, the choices at the next General Election are: vote for the increasingly dysfunctional SNP and keep wishing and hoping for independence on the never never; vote Labour who are the only party who can realistically oust the Tories.

Then if Labour get in, SLab will be crowing about how they are back. Then it’s 2026.

"Then it's 2026" might be the most terrifying part of that.

[Granny Danger]

57 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Its quite surprising that the SNP fan boys cannot see just how far the party has fallen. Its people like GD and the others on here who are to blame now if we dont see independence, their acceptance of incompetence are to blame for the failure of the indy campaign. GD can try and pull out the ‘but who would you vote for?’ Tragic patter all he wants, but it was his party who fucked it for everyone. 

“Who would you vote for?” is so far removed from patter.  It is a serious question; calling it patter is simply deflection from having to answer.

[itzdrk]

29 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

Can you share the article from the FT? I'm not a subscriber.

Not that I'm distrusting but it's easy to pull something out with the context. Particularly when it's a partisan on twitter.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F17a1fffc-d820-49c5-a5a7-d588332dc10a

Don't click accept cookies. 

[Trogdor]

6 minutes ago, itzdrk said:

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F17a1fffc-d820-49c5-a5a7-d588332dc10a

Don't click accept cookies. 

Edit, I've just nuked chrome. So should be safe now.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Trogdor

[Trogdor]

35 minutes ago, renton said:

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F17a1fffc-d820-49c5-a5a7-d588332dc10a

Thanks for that, the bit about social spending and redistribution isn't a quote from Forbes but the FT's interpretation as I read it?

There's very little direct quotes from Forbes in that section on economic policy. Other sections seem to have more direct quotes.

I dont think she is going for trickle down economics. If thats her policy she wont last as long as Truss. That has been debunked as economic illiteracy.

Why is Forbes even speaking to the FT? Also, phrases like wealth creation, deregulation and competiveness have been tainted by successive tory wrong 'uns and are best avoided. 

[The_Kincardine]

10 hours ago, GTee said:

It's mind boggling that folk decide if Scotland should self govern based on a person in charge of the government of the day. It's massively missing the point. 

Given that the number of 'blood and soil' types - those who'd eat grass rather than live under the English yoke - is 30%+/- 5 of the electorate then you need to use the competence of the government of the day to sell your snake oil to the undecided.  At least Kate Forbes grasps this point.

Here's a recent working example of how Nationalists think Scotland should be governed:

 

[welshbairn]

32 minutes ago, ScotiaNostra said:

What are her actual poilices that come under trickle down economics? Its easy to use terms like that but be helpful for some evidence of the actual policies. If she hasnt been clear enough then thats a good question to ask her related to this claim of trickle down economics

She says she wants competitive taxation and is wary of divergence from the UK. Presumably that means reducing the tax burden for the wealthy in the hope that the economy benefits as a whole, ie. trickle down.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

23 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

“Who would you vote for?” is so far removed from patter.  It is a serious question; calling it patter is simply deflection from having to answer.

Its victim blaming. 

[itzdrk]

38 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

“Who would you vote for?” is so far removed from patter.  It is a serious question; calling it patter is simply deflection from having to answer.

So you would just vote for them regardless of anything?  

[Trogdor]

17 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

She says she wants competitive taxation and is wary of divergence from the UK. Presumably that means reducing the tax burden for the wealthy in the hope that the economy benefits as a whole, ie. trickle down.

I think she is wary of further divergence presumably meaning the current divergence is about as far as she'd go rather than rowing back?

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

I think she is wary of further divergence presumably meaning the current divergence is about as far as she'd go rather than rowing back?

I'd imagine that when Westminster likely drops the higher tax rates leading up to the GE, she would want to do the same. 

[Wee-Bey]

Let's not pretend that we'll be going from socialism to Thatcherism under Forbes please.

[Granny Danger]

13 minutes ago, itzdrk said:

So you would just vote for them regardless of anything?  

No.  I’m saying that come an election you either choose to vote for someone or you abstain.  If you abstain then you are influencing nothing.  If you vote then you are influencing the outcome.  You can choose to vote for what you believe is the least worst option.

[Granny Danger]

32 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Its victim blaming. 

Wow.  I’m sure there’s a support group out there for you.  Stay strong!

[Granny Danger]

4 minutes ago, Bodie said:

Let's not pretend that we'll be going from socialism to Thatcherism under Forbes please.

I’m sure you’d be devastated by a shift to the right.

[Wee-Bey]

9 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I’m sure you’d be devastated by a shift to the right.

I was on a picket line last Wednesday while you were sipping rioja having fucked off out the country after voting for Brexit.

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

Kate Forbes really might be the worst of the lot.  Trickle down economics doesn’t work.  It’s pretty abhorrent for the prospective leader of a left wing party to be coming out with nonsense like that.  May as well vote Starmer.  

The SNP is not a left wing party. 

[ScotiaNostra]

57 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

She says she wants competitive taxation and is wary of divergence from the UK. Presumably that means reducing the tax burden for the wealthy in the hope that the economy benefits as a whole, ie. trickle down.

it might be, she needs questioned on that more. In some areas Id expect her policy to be not so detailed but on Finance matters she should have no excuse not to be able to give detailed answers what that means

[MazzyStar]

2 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

 

However, the party was evidently so dysfunctional that the notion the leadership was an authoritarian force keeping everyone in line collapses under the slightest scrutiny, albeit that may not have been for lack of trying on Murrell's part. When you've had the likes of Cherry going off message and openly attacking Sturgeon to the extent she was consistently breaking the SNP's rules every other time she's spoken in public for about five years, it's clear that there was basically no control of their elected representatives. There's no way you can look at some of the discourse coming out of MPs and MSPs and conclude they were all being controlled by authoritarian office bearers.

 

I never claimed that there weren’t instances of members being critical, but by and large most did “stay in line” on things like the scotwind shambles for example. Even for the GRR most voted the way the leadership would have wanted.

Now, Kate Forbes is even criticising the SNPs record on a number of things during a leadership debate. I doubt very much that there would have been criticism as scathing in such a public manner before Sturgeon left. I certainly don’t remember any (other than from the likes of Cherry, who’s influence was fairly minimal).

Edited March 19, 2023 by MazzyStar

[vikingTON]

Divergence is absolutely a limitation on the SG's ability to set policy. Whether people like it or not, in a unitary UK state it is all too easy for top-rate taxpayers to decamp across the border. While it's not going to happen overnight, a gap of £2k per year in tax due is going to change the behaviour of a substantial number of people - and Scotland has a relatively tiny number of top-rate earners to begin with. 

To have full scope to set tax powers, you need independence first. That should be the line taken by any new leader of the SNP. This 'we can make a much fairer society now' idea is running headlong into a trap set within the devolution settlement. Diverging as a sovereign state and establishing different rights and opportunities for its citizens are both crucial to justifying a radically divergent tax policy. 

Edited March 19, 2023 by vikingTON