LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

UK, undemocratic if you live in Scotland

Scotsman69 said:
when you repay us OUR oil and gas revenues Thatcher squandered in her 'elect me' Malvinas/Falklands war...

And please don't forget the millions we give you each year for London's heavily-subsidised public transport... and building Crossrail, HS1 and HS2. From none of which Scotland gains any benefit.

But if you really believe little England subsidises us, why on earth do you want us to be part of your disunited queendom?
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought the comment of "I can't wait to see the back of SNP Whiners" was perfectly clear. Obviously, the tales of how the SNP has run down the Scottish education system are true.

BTW who do you think pays for all these referenda, Not the five million scots, no it's the sixty-five million UK taxpayers. Still as an Edinburgh barman once said to me "Since when did a Scotsman refuse to take English money?"
My friends in Shetland and orkney tell me that if Scotland gets independence they will be demanding their own referendum. Seem they want to leave Scotland and join Norway. I can see their point, that's where nost of their heritage comes from. Question is, what will happen to your oil then?
 
Alas, DeYaKen conflates population with taxpayers

True, the UK population is around 65m. But since when do schoolchildren and others on no or low incomes pay taxes? The UK tax base is rather lower than 65m. But such blatant disregard for hard facts is characteristic of little Englanders.

Since successive UK Governments have (apparently deliberately) obscured financial relations between Scotland and England since 1707, it is very difficult to make a firm case about who pays for what. But an independent Scotland would certainly not waste its money on is the sham of maintaining an 'independent nuclear deterrent'. For which, if RUK were daft enough to want to keep it, they would have to find a new home. Where are the communities in Cumbria, Wales, and Kernow who are clammering replace the Clyde to become the biggest nuclear target in Europe?

DeYaKen said:
Oh, I thought the comment of "I can't wait to see the back of SNP Whiners" was perfectly clear. Obviously, the tales of how the SNP has run down the Scottish education system are true.

BTW who do you think pays for all these referenda, Not the five million scots, no it's the sixty-five million UK taxpayers. Still as an Edinburgh barman once said to me "Since when did a Scotsman refuse to take English money?"
My friends in Shetland and orkney tell me that if Scotland gets independence they will be demanding their own referendum. Seem they want to leave Scotland and join Norway. I can see their point, that's where nost of their heritage comes from. Question is, what will happen to your oil then?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Scotsman69 said:
True, the UK population is around 65m. But since when do schoolchildren and others on no or low incomes pay taxes? The UK tax base is rather lower than 65m. But such blatant disregard for hard facts is characteristic of little Englanders.

Since successive UK Governments have (apparently deliberately) obscured financial relations between Scotland and England since 1707, it is very difficult to make a firm case about who pays for what. But an independent Scotland would certainly not waste its money on is the sham of maintaining an 'independent nuclear deterrent'. For which, if RUK were daft enough to want to keep it, they would have to find a new home. Where are the communities in Cumbria, Wales, and Kernow who are clammering replace the Clyde to become the biggest nuclear target in Europe?
Click to expand...

Don't split hairs, it doesn't become you. The proportion of the population paying taxes is more or less the same in both countries so the population figures relate well to the taxpayers. Tell me, if we are Little Englanders what does that make the Scot Nats, The Even Littler Scotlanders? It is interesting that you shout for self-determination for Scotland but don't extend the same privilege to others. You decry the rights of the Falkland Islanders to self-determination and obviously feel the same way about the Shetland and Orkney islanders. Is it the fact that they are already separated by a band of water or are only Glaswegians and Scots living abroad entitled to self-determination.

Don't expect me to defend a weapon system that we can't use, but you are kidding yourself if you think it would be difficult to relocate it. Just look at the way the people of Copeland shifted from Labour to Conservative because of their support for the nuclear industry. When jobs are at stake small risks take a back seat.

You don't seem to understand the principles of nuclear war. Centres of population are the targets, not military installations. It's called Mutually Assured Destruction, You will kill all of ours but we'll kill all of yours. That's why there is always one at sea, to make sure you can always strike back. They even have systems in place which enable the submarine commander to fire should the whole chain of command be destroyed.

Post independence all of our military shipping will be cheaper since we won't have to prop up Clyde side ship builders. We can get them built on the open market, probably Korea or China.

I try not to confuse Scots with their politicians, you would do well to do the same with the English. Very few of us are losing sleep about whether the scots break the union. It won't affect us much and some will get jobs building and manning border control points. We take the view of "Oh well if you want to move out, do it quietly so as not to disturb the neighbours." Our politicians, on the other hand, want power over people, the more the better. Surprisingly enough the Scot Nats are just the same. it isn't principles or the welfare of the people they are interested in, it's power over people and all that goes with it. They want to be able to swagger down the aisle at the United Nations and tell themselves "Hey, this is it, we're in the big boys club now." You may choose not to believe that but before you dismiss it, take a look at Alex Salmond's history. Why did he join the Scot Nats? He didn't make the Labour Party shortlist for the constituency he was working in, so the next day he joined the Scot Nats. Principles didn't matter it was the chance of power that mattered.
 
Now now, laddie...

I don't split hairs pal, it's a singularly frustrating and useless process. I simply object to factually incorrect statements... like suggesting that there are 65m UK taxpayers. If I'm proven factually wrong, I have the humility to admit it, here or anywhere. But I'm maybe a bit more grown-up than you are? I really don't know.

Not just because you're from the only English folk I know who use the typically (Germanic-derived) Scots 'ken'... but because Newcastle is the only English city in which I have lived for a long period, and I loved it. St Nick's Cathedral even has a (typically Scots) crown steeple, the only one of which I know on an English kirk.

I have a lot of time for Geordies and their neighbours in Northumberland and Durham. And most other English folk I've ever known. I am proudly a socialist internationalist, a long way from being a 'little Scotlander'. (A term which you may have invented? Congratulations!)

You don't know my opinions re the Falkland islanders, or Orcadians and Shetlanders. I'm a democrat, and should any such islanders express the wish for political independence, I respect it. Which is why I respect the right of Greenlanders to remain outwith the EU, whilst the nation of which they remain legally a part, Denmark, is an EU member. Funny that Ms May couldn't have worked out a reverse deal with the EU regarding Scotland's continuing wish to be part of Europe, whilst little England doesn't? Had she had the political nous to do so, Ms Sturgeon would never have called for a second referendum on Scottish Independence. The trigger for which was that Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU, whilst England voted narrowly to leave it.

As someone who first entered politics in my teens, in the early sixties, when the Tories invited the USA to install a Polaris base at Holy Loch, on the Clyde, I have made it my business to seek to understand the politics, economics, and military use of nuclear weapons. (Btw, I'm an economist.) Which is why I can tell you with great certainty that the people of Cumbria have never expressed a wish to become a nuclear target. There is a huge difference between hosting a civil nuclear plant, and hosting a military base. And for the record, as a green environmentalist, I believe that the continued use of nuclear-generated electricity is essential, though I'd have much preferred if the UK still used UK-developed gas-cooled reactors, rather than the much more volatile US-developed water-cooled reactors... another Thatcher disaster for UK industry. (What happens when you heat water? It EXPANDS into steam. But water-cooled reactors are cheaper to build, and that's all US corporations care about.)

Take care pal. You write well, so you're probably a decent human being, as I hope I am.

DeYaKen said:
Don't split hairs, it doesn't become you. The proportion of the population paying taxes is more or less the same in both countries so the population figures relate well to the taxpayers. Tell me, if we are Little Englanders what does that make the Scot Nats, The Even Littler Scotlanders? It is interesting that you shout for self-determination for Scotland but don't extend the same privilege to others. You decry the rights of the Falkland Islanders to self-determination and obviously feel the same way about the Shetland and Orkney islanders. Is it the fact that they are already separated by a band of water or are only Glaswegians and Scots living abroad entitled to self-determination.

Don't expect me to defend a weapon system that we can't use, but you are kidding yourself if you think it would be difficult to relocate it. Just look at the way the people of Copeland shifted from Labour to Conservative because of their support for the nuclear industry. When jobs are at stake small risks take a back seat.

You don't seem to understand the principles of nuclear war. Centres of population are the targets, not military installations. It's called Mutually Assured Destruction, You will kill all of ours but we'll kill all of yours. That's why there is always one at sea, to make sure you can always strike back. They even have systems in place which enable the submarine commander to fire should the whole chain of command be destroyed.

Post independence all of our military shipping will be cheaper since we won't have to prop up Clyde side ship builders. We can get them built on the open market, probably Korea or China.

I try not to confuse Scots with their politicians, you would do well to do the same with the English. Very few of us are losing sleep about whether the scots break the union. It won't affect us much and some will get jobs building and manning border control points. We take the view of "Oh well if you want to move out, do it quietly so as not to disturb the neighbours." Our politicians, on the other hand, want power over people, the more the better. Surprisingly enough the Scot Nats are just the same. it isn't principles or the welfare of the people they are interested in, it's power over people and all that goes with it. They want to be able to swagger down the aisle at the United Nations and tell themselves "Hey, this is it, we're in the big boys club now." You may choose not to believe that but before you dismiss it, take a look at Alex Salmond's history. Why did he join the Scot Nats? He didn't make the Labour Party shortlist for the constituency he was working in, so the next day he joined the Scot Nats. Principles didn't matter it was the chance of power that mattered.
Click to expand...
 
Scotsman69 said:
You don't know my opinions re the Falkland islanders, or Orcadians and Shetlanders. I'm a democrat, and should any such islanders express the wish for political independence, I respect it.
Click to expand...

I merely took your comments about Maggie's pointless excursion into the South Atlantic. That was supposed to be about self-determination.

As someone who first entered politics in my teens, in the early sixties, when the Tories invited the USA to install a Polaris base at Holy Loch, on the Clyde, I have made it my business to seek to understand the politics, economics, and military use of nuclear weapons. (Btw, I'm an economist.)
Click to expand...

in that case, I can't understand why you think anyone would waste the element of surprise by launching a nuclear attack on a submarine base. The only point would be to prevent retaliation but they can't do that because the submarine that would strike back is already at sea and can be so for up to a year. Much more effective is to strike London, Birmingham, Newcatle and Glasgow. Just those four hits with a modern nuke and it's game over.

There is a huge difference between hosting a civil nuclear plant, and hosting a military base. And for the record, as a green environmentalist, I believe that the continued use of nuclear-generated electricity is essential, though I'd have much preferred if the UK still used UK-developed gas-cooled reactors, rather than the much more volatile US-developed water-cooled reactors... another Thatcher disaster for UK industry. (What happens when you heat water? It EXPANDS into steam. But water-cooled reactors are cheaper to build, and that's all US corporations care about.)
Click to expand...

Windscale put the people of Cumbria at greater risk than any submarine base. I can still remember the welsh farmers pouring milk down the drain due to Strontium 90 contamination caused by the reactor fire at Windscale in 1957. A fire similar to that in Chernobyl. So far the only safe nuclear power station is the CanDo system. Accidents like Three Mile Island, Windscale, Chernobyl and even Fukushima can't happen with them. When the heavy water used as coolant/heat transfer medium, stops flowing, there are insufficient free electrons to keep up the reaction. The control rods can be wound in and out by hand, because they are horizontal, and the fissile material can be changed without shutting down the reactor. They cost more to build but are cheaper to run.

Take care pal. You write well, so you're probably a decent human being, as I hope I am.
Click to expand...

Well, thank you for that, good to know that even an Engineer can be a decent human being. my nom de plume comes from my real name. Yes, I am the Handsome one according to the celts. we learned De ya ken John Peel at school.

Toodle pip old fruit.
 
Last edited:
None of that is relevant guys, the question is about democracy!
Is it democratic?
Regardless of your political leanings please.
 
Exescort said:
None of that is relevant guys, the question is about democracy!
Is it democratic?
Regardless of your political leanings please.
Click to expand...

That begs the question, What is Democracy?
If 38% of the voters can return a government with a majority of 140 in a 650 seat parliament, is that a democracy?
If a president is elected, despite his opponent gaining millions more votes, is that a democracy?
If a party with only 5% of the vote is able to dictate policy because the largest party needs their support to govern, is that a democracy.

The next question is "is democracy a good thing?"
it leads to shorttermism and gives the media an unhealthy amount of control. Why do you think most of the UK media were anti EU? Because they had no influence over it. To quote Rupert Murdoch "when I go to Westminster they ask what they can do for me. When I go to Brussels they tell me to go away."
 
This is Literotica.

The answer to 1 + 1 is SEX!

Or 1 + 2 = same answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gxnn
Japanese is thirsty for taking a nuclear bomb
2 3
Replies
55
Views
957
Britva415
Britva415
ChloeTzang
The UK is no longer out "Friend"
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
1K
Bray123
B
W
Why does anybody have anything against "Woke"?
2
Replies
33
Views
323
JohnEngelman
JohnEngelman
W
Never mind illegals -- why is it so hard to enter the U.S. legally?
2
Replies
34
Views
260
Wilson23
W
W
The impending death of Christianity in America
2 3
Replies
55
Views
505
Wilson23
W
Back
Top