Less of a price than if we continue down the same path.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
Printable View
Less of a price than if we continue down the same path.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Put it another way then. Just how bad do things have to become before you consider it a risk worth taking?Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
Living under the most morally and financially corrupt UK government, ever, with nothing to indicate it won't be rinse and repeat well into the future it's frightening there are those that walk amongst us seem content with this.
The only growth industries in the UK are food banks and those trying to mitigate poverty. Sad.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cp...m130722014.jpg
Yousaf a bigger catalyst for SNP's declining popularity than finances scandal according to Curtice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
MP Angus MacNeil expelled by SNP after chief whip row - BBC News
By standing as an independent at the next election does it not pose an issue for the SNP in terms of the vote being split, especially if (as the analysis here claims) the Labour candidate is popular locally?
Probably but there is nothing can be done about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where are the details of this analysis?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
What he actually says is that Yousaf is not as popular as Sturgeon was. I don't think anyone would dispute that. He also goes on to say that support for independence remains stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
It's always interesting to see how people can twist stories to suit their own agenda. And I include myself in that.
https://bylines.scot/politics/what-r...-in-the-polls/Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Doesn’t make great reading for Yousaf. He is going to have to start defining himself pretty soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. When Yousaf first came in I had a suspicion that he would be the fall guy. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see him replaced following the general election. Hopefully by Flynn.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
He’s only the fall guy if he lets himself be that. So far he has acted to get rid of unpopular policies but he needs to now say what it is that he wants to achieve as FM. He needs to chart a course pretty soon or else others will try do it for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
As for Flynn, I think it’s almost certain he will be leader at some point. Very impressive so far. And ambitious. If Yousaf falls then there is a ready made replacement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
I think there was always likely to be a ‘who follows Fergie’ type scenario, whether by happenstance or by design.
NS wielded a lot of power within the party, controlled a lot of the narrative, and is seen as a dominant figure in the SNP (none of that is meant to come across as a dig at her btw). As usually happens when a powerful person steps down/departs, the power vacuum needs time to reset and be filled, and the next in line is rarely as dominant due to various competing parties seeking to step up/forward, and it can often be even longer than the next again person. It’s been seen at Man Utd a few times, and will quite possibly happen at Man City and Liverpool when Pep and Klopp move on. The people who worked under the previous leader in any environment often either seek more power/position/advancement for themselves, or don’t have the same loyalty to the new person.
I’d actually say it’s to NS’s credit that she came after a powerful individual in AS, and still had as much power across the party. As contrast, I don’t think Cameron, Theresa May, Boris, Truss or Sunak (as the various PMs during her tenure) have ever had anything like the party loyalty/toeing the line that Sturgeon did.
That's a very good point. Yousaf has exceptionally large boots to fill and I don't see him being up to the task. But I don't think circumstances have helped him much either, which is why I suspect that he was brought in as a stop gap until things move on. Then a new leader can be brought in with a cleaner slate.Quote:
Originally Posted by McD
Polls showed support for snp was plummeting in the last 5 months of NS, membership numbers too it turned out.
Yousaf came in saying I'm the continuity candidate. In any other business the person who picked the continuity candidate in a failing business would get the sack correctly. This was a vote so people got what they wanted continuity. Snps have Polls continued to fall and the middle ground the only show in town haven't been won back
No one is happy with it. It's just different visions as to the resolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
You can't know that. What is a price worth paying?Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
I know the current path is going to get progressively worse by design. So it stands to reason that there's going to come a point where the price of independence clearly won't be as bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
When I look around at other independent small nations in our region of the world then I see no risk long term. I will probably not survive to see the long term benefits that independence will bring but I'd like to see Scotland's young folks given the opportunity to take advantage of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
Living under the control of a government that has to prioritise other regions of the UK to ensure it gets reelected or even elected in the first place cannot be the way forward for Scotland or the Scottish people, certainly not when there is the chance of an alternative.
But I'll assume your answer to my question was yes.
Do people believe that we're being engineered to be worse off. We're things better as we go back the decades. Medium and mean income has doubled in 30 years. The mean and medium disposable income is up 1.5x in 30 years. The average hours worked by uk public is down 10% in 10 years. The most important poverty has went from 49% in 1993 to 21% now
Things are brutal for many now, we've had a pandemic that was brutal and many things have stagnated. But is there an exceptionalism nowadays or nostalgia. How great was the mid 90s when 41% were in poverty?
I mean you might be right. Maybe Scotland would be better off in time. The objective evidence is that it would be quite a struggle to get there. Not because of any inherant failing, but change like setting up a new country would be convulsive. Having had Brexit, Covid and Ukraine, would anyone argue that there wouldn't be at least short term impacts? The nearest to an analysis by the SNP was the Growth commission report. Oddly, it's not easy to find it as the Growth Commission site no longer exists. At the time there was a lot of criticism from left nationalists that it suggested a 10 year period of austerity. TBF the Commission denied this. Here's an analysis by the IFS https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland...iness-44506458 https://ifs.org.uk/articles/weak-pub...ndent-scotlandQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
Added to that is the process for joining the EU. We'd have to meet the Copenhagen criteria. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-c...-criteria.html
None of that says that Scotland couldn't be better off in the long term, but it does suggest an extended period of pain with no certainty as to the outcome. Would that pain be worth it? Maybe - maybe not.
Add to that the pent up expectations post independence and it could be a pretty combustable mix. Even among independence supporters here, their vision ranges from a Scotland that is not 'neo Liberal' to a low tax business friendly economy. It can't be both, so that's further tension to play out.
So while the prevailing view here appears to be that people voting no bottled it or were lied to, I suspect for most people it was a much more considered position on whether the risks were worth it.
I want independence. If not for me, for my children or my children's children.
Independence is normal.
We have to get away from being governed by people we don't vote for. It's not democratic, it's not natural, it's not healthy and it's not economically in our interest.
Agree with the the first two disagree with the third. We vote as part for the uk we voted for that to continue 9 years ago. Some states in America constantly voted Democrats but get Republicans for example but they are still part of it. Think I read in the last 15 elections 4 were decided by Scotland votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
I would prefer us not to be a part of Westminster but we are just now.
Exactly. The Murrells' stranglehold was far from healthy and they were lying about the membership figures as far back as the accounts published in 2021 when numbers were actually 30k down on those officially stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Ok, but the current constitutional arrangements are normal too. And in a democracy you will always have a swathe of people who didn't get who they voted for.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
No they're not. Which is why the UK Government is consistently guilty of human right violations and breaking international laws. There is nothing normal about where the UK finds itself now.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
They really are. Please show me where the current constitutional arrangements are not normal.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
I doubt that is true?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The UK Government over stepping the mark on devolution to undermine the devolved government. Manipulating the court system to interpret laws differently to force more favourable outcomes. Using the manipulated court system to bypass the lords and international law agreements. We're very much under a fascist dictatorship in the UK, it's not even in question. The reality just hasn't sunk in yet for a lot of people. 13 years of gas-lighting has prevented people from seeing what is right in front of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by archie
Right...Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee