Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am sorry but Westminster is satin compared to EU being like a mischievous little schoolboy in comparison.

I keep hearing people scoffing why do you want independence but want to join the EU as you won't be independent. Sorry but that is total and utter garbage. The UK may or may not be leaving the EU. Now excuse me but I haven't seen the addition to our calendars of a new national holiday called UK Independence Day on the day we voted Leave. The UK was and still is an independent country in the EU as would Scotland be. During their time in the EU we have seen the UK government CHOOSE not to join the EURO, CHOOSE to wage an illegal war on Iraq without backing of the EU and now being allowed to leave the EU. All sounds like choices only an independent country could make.

Those of you who hate the SNP think of the alternatives if you will. The Tories? The party of looking after the Home Counties and lining their own pockets and have a large swathe of it with pockets of UKIP AND BNP-esque politicians who have a total disregard for Scotland and always will. We have seen that much with scummy treatment of Scottish MP's suggesting, openly on microphone they fuck off or commit suicide. Now onto Labour - another party that has no interest in Scotland other than to get enough seats here to unlock the door at No 10. Look how pathetic they were when in power in Holyrood before the SNP - like night and say compared to the SNP.

Also lest we forget we saw the Tories and Labour in their true colours. Across the board the whole of Scotland in all areas backed remain and their Tory and Labour MP's supposedly representing them actually voted to back the Scotland Act in Holyrood but once back amongst their masters in Westminster their tune changed and they betrayed Scots by backing bills to push through Brexit.

People should keep their eyes on the end game here - independence. Independence for Scotland is what it says and is the end goal. Back independence and Scotland benefits for the future and you then get the chance to vote for whatever party/government you want unlike now where we take what England votes for.

A post-independent Scotland's political landscape will change immensely in any case. The SNP will have to morph into something else and may even split into different new parties. The Tories and Labour will need to re-invent itself and restructure - they will be like toddlers learning to walk and fend for themselves without their parents looking after them from Westminster. How well they'd do depends on how quickly and how well they adapt and leave Westminster behind and their ability to embrace a bright new future.

Either way Scotland independent is the big goal. In the EU or out of the EU I'd take that if independence was achieved.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I am sorry but Westminster is satin compared to EU being like a mischievous little schoolboy in comparison.

I keep hearing people scoffing why do you want independence but want to join the EU as you won't be independent. Sorry but that is total and utter garbage. The UK may or may not be leaving the EU. Now excuse me but I haven't seen the addition to our calendars of a new national holiday called UK Independence Day on the day we voted Leave. The UK was and still is an independent country in the EU as would Scotland be. During their time in the EU we have seen the UK government CHOOSE not to join the EURO, CHOOSE to wage an illegal war on Iraq without backing of the EU and now being allowed to leave the EU. All sounds like choices only an independent country could make.

Those of you who hate the SNP think of the alternatives if you will. The Tories? The party of looking after the Home Counties and lining their own pockets and have a large swathe of it with pockets of UKIP AND BNP-esque politicians who have a total disregard for Scotland and always will. We have seen that much with scummy treatment of Scottish MP's suggesting, openly on microphone they fuck off or commit suicide. Now onto Labour - another party that has no interest in Scotland other than to get enough seats here to unlock the door at No 10. Look how pathetic they were when in power in Holyrood before the SNP - like night and say compared to the SNP.

Also lest we forget we saw the Tories and Labour in their true colours. Across the board the whole of Scotland in all areas backed remain and their Tory and Labour MP's supposedly representing them actually voted to back the Scotland Act in Holyrood but once back amongst their masters in Westminster their tune changed and they betrayed Scots by backing bills to push through Brexit.

People should keep their eyes on the end game here - independence. Independence for Scotland is what it says and is the end goal. Back independence and Scotland benefits for the future and you then get the chance to vote for whatever party/government you want unlike now where we take what England votes for.

A post-independent Scotland's political landscape will change immensely in any case. The SNP will have to morph into something else and may even split into different new parties. The Tories and Labour will need to re-invent itself and restructure - they will be like toddlers learning to walk and fend for themselves without their parents looking after them from Westminster. How well they'd do depends on how quickly and how well they adapt and leave Westminster behind and their ability to embrace a bright new future.

Either way Scotland independent is the big goal. In the EU or out of the EU I'd take that if independence was achieved.

5 years ago I’d have believed every word of that, I’ve probably said and written very similar things. 

Don’t watch documentaries on YouTube on the federal reserve, the rothchilds / rocketfellers and basically any other government controlled issue, leaves you a cynical possible nut case .... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ParisInAKilt said:

5 years ago I’d have believed every word of that, I’ve probably said and written very similar things. 

Don’t watch documentaries on YouTube on the federal reserve, the rothchilds / rocketfellers and basically any other government controlled issue, leaves you a cynical possible nut case .... ;)

Counter-balance it by watching or reading all the material in seedy Westminster dealings. Project Windrush, ignoring pleas from residents of Grenfell Tower who forecast the disaster, the blatant brushing under the carpet of paedophile ring in Westminster, going to an illegal war in Iraq, the blatant lies and false promises of Bitter Together etc etc etc.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Counter-balance it by watching or reading all the material in seedy Westminster dealings. Project Windrush, ignoring pleas from residents of Grenfell Tower who forecast the disaster, the blatant brushing under the carpet of paedophile ring in Westminster, going to an illegal war in Iraq, the blatant lies and false promises of Bitter Together etc etc etc.

Absolutely. As I’ve said I’m no fan of Westminster and it’s levels of corruption. But I don’t see an independent Scotland getting into bed with the EU ending well. 

We should be looking to reduce government involvement in our lives, not increasing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Absolutely. As I’ve said I’m no fan of Westminster and it’s levels of corruption. But I don’t see an independent Scotland getting into bed with the EU ending well. 

We should be looking to reduce government involvement in our lives, not increasing it. 

First and foremost lets think independence. What if's are not worth worrying about just now as it distracts from the end goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

5 years ago I’d have believed every word of that, I’ve probably said and written very similar things. 

Don’t watch documentaries on YouTube on the federal reserve, the rothchilds / rocketfellers and basically any other government controlled issue, leaves you a cynical possible nut case .... ;)

Ah, the Rothchilds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, aaid said:

Ah, the Rothchilds.

That's what bothers me about all this stuff, name names.

When i speak of say the office of special plans, you know it was set up by Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz specifically. Then you can go to the senate hearings and pick out the bit talking about it. like this

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I agree. I dont think the sugar tax is bad either , even if it was a Westminster policy. My daughter drank far too much Lucozade and after the sugar tax rise they reduced the sugar. She hated it and stopped drinking it.  There must be more examples of that. She now drinks more water. Anything that reduces the amount of sugar people take has to be positive for health.   

And I really cant see the problem with lowering the drink driving limit either. 

My whole point in this is I personally don’t like being dictated to regarding how I live my life. The drink driving level being changed has been proven not to save any more lives but will still prevent me enjoying a pint with a meal or enjoying a pint in a beer garden in the countryside on a nice summer day. 

The sugar tax will also prove to be no deterrent in obesity as it is inactivity in children that are making them obese. Our parents are still alive and that is all through max salt and Sugar levels in our food and drinks, don’t you think they should be dead before 90. 

2 for 1 deals on beer, wine etc are not necessary if drank in moderation, but we need to save the few who have no control or support. 

If governments were to open gyms, all weather football parks, swimming pools etc to the public FOC then families could all excercise together possibly reducing the obesity crisis. Instead we invest in artwork beside motorways, lighting bridges and buildings etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The White Ceelo said:

My whole point in this is I personally don’t like being dictated to regarding how I live my life. The drink driving level being changed has been proven not to save any more lives but will still prevent me enjoying a pint with a meal or enjoying a pint in a beer garden in the countryside on a nice summer day. 

The sugar tax will also prove to be no deterrent in obesity as it is inactivity in children that are making them obese. Our parents are still alive and that is all through max salt and Sugar levels in our food and drinks, don’t you think they should be dead before 90. 

2 for 1 deals on beer, wine etc are not necessary if drank in moderation, but we need to save the few who have no control or support. 

If governments were to open gyms, all weather football parks, swimming pools etc to the public FOC then families could all excercise together possibly reducing the obesity crisis. Instead we invest in artwork beside motorways, lighting bridges and buildings etc.

The Scottish government are open to gyms and getting fit initiatives, it took me less than ten seconds to find something online about it. Both the previous labour government introduced active schools and then the SNP introduced healthy living

Nobody is dictating to you, you are still allowed to enjoy a drink, you just have to pay a little more for it. If you must have one pint with a meal, get someone else to drive, get a taxi or use public transport. Its not difficult. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The White Ceelo said:

My whole point in this is I personally don’t like being dictated to regarding how I live my life. The drink driving level being changed has been proven not to save any more lives but will still prevent me enjoying a pint with a meal or enjoying a pint in a beer garden in the countryside on a nice summer day. 

The sugar tax will also prove to be no deterrent in obesity as it is inactivity in children that are making them obese. Our parents are still alive and that is all through max salt and Sugar levels in our food and drinks, don’t you think they should be dead before 90. 

2 for 1 deals on beer, wine etc are not necessary if drank in moderation, but we need to save the few who have no control or support. 

If governments were to open gyms, all weather football parks, swimming pools etc to the public FOC then families could all excercise together possibly reducing the obesity crisis. Instead we invest in artwork beside motorways, lighting bridges and buildings etc.

Did drink driving related deaths not fall to lowest ever recorded? I may be wrong 🤔

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Did drink driving related deaths not fall to lowest ever recorded? I may be wrong 🤔

I would be interested in where you might have got that idea from.

If we are talking about the study released by Glasgow University in December then they said 

"The lowering of the legal blood alcohol limit for drivers in Scotland has had no impact on the number of road traffic accidents"

But IMO that study was so fundamentally flawed that I wouldn't take too much from it at all. 

What I found interesting was that as soon as that study was released, some folk thought that because reducing the level from 80 to 50 had made no difference, then the next step should be to reduce the limit even further. 

Bonkers Logic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The White Ceelo said:

My whole point in this is I personally don’t like being dictated to regarding how I live my life. The drink driving level being changed has been proven not to save any more lives but will still prevent me enjoying a pint with a meal or enjoying a pint in a beer garden in the countryside on a nice summer day. 

The sugar tax will also prove to be no deterrent in obesity as it is inactivity in children that are making them obese. Our parents are still alive and that is all through max salt and Sugar levels in our food and drinks, don’t you think they should be dead before 90. 

2 for 1 deals on beer, wine etc are not necessary if drank in moderation, but we need to save the few who have no control or support. 

If governments were to open gyms, all weather football parks, swimming pools etc to the public FOC then families could all excercise together possibly reducing the obesity crisis. Instead we invest in artwork beside motorways, lighting bridges and buildings etc.

Over and above what Vanderark has stated I would suggest  that saying the sugar tax will be no deterrent in obesity  is rather naive . There are various factors that create obesity, not just inactivity. Excess of sugar is one of them. Nor is obesity the only detrimental side effect  of sugar, excess sugar causes numerous health problems.

And using the parents analogy means nothing. My dad died 67 and my 2 closest friends mum died in their 50’s, nowhere near 90. Its like saying its ok to smoke cos some folk buck the trend healthwise.  

With regards to the drink drive limits, it has been proven that the risk of having an accident rises in direct relation to the amount of alcohol comsumed. With that in mind why take the risk just to have a pint ?This comes from someone who drinks more than they should, I am not some party pooper who wants to spoil everyones fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Over and above what Vanderark has stated I would suggest  that saying the sugar tax will be no deterrent in obesity  is rather naive . There are various factors that create obesity, not just inactivity. Excess of sugar is one of them. Nor is obesity the only detrimental side effect  of sugar, excess sugar causes numerous health problems.

And using the parents analogy means nothing. My dad died 67 and my 2 closest friends mum died in their 50’s, nowhere near 90. Its like saying its ok to smoke cos some folk buck the trend healthwise.  

With regards to the drink drive limits, it has been proven that the risk of having an accident rises in direct relation to the amount of alcohol comsumed. With that in mind why take the risk just to have a pint ?This comes from someone who drinks more than they should, I am not some party pooper who wants to spoil everyones fun. 

Fair enough but my whole beef is my ability to choose how I live my life is being diluted by do gooders to protect the few and not the majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Over and above what Vanderark has stated I would suggest  that saying the sugar tax will be no deterrent in obesity  is rather naive . There are various factors that create obesity, not just inactivity. Excess of sugar is one of them. Nor is obesity the only detrimental side effect  of sugar, excess sugar causes numerous health problems.

And using the parents analogy means nothing. My dad died 67 and my 2 closest friends mum died in their 50’s, nowhere near 90. Its like saying its ok to smoke cos some folk buck the trend healthwise.  

With regards to the drink drive limits, it has been proven that the risk of having an accident rises in direct relation to the amount of alcohol comsumed. With that in mind why take the risk just to have a pint ?This comes from someone who drinks more than they should, I am not some party pooper who wants to spoil everyones fun. 

I get the impression he just wants to have a moan about the SNP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the government intervening in your life usually prevents exploitation.  It's just unsaid and taken for granted in legislation.

If you're rich and exploiting the system, it's better to foster the idea of a less cumbersome system.

There should be more intervention to stem the rising inequality in pay.  Won't happen but I can't think of any reason to go the other way and roll back anything.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Orraloon said:

I would be interested in where you might have got that idea from.

If we are talking about the study released by Glasgow University in December then they said 

"The lowering of the legal blood alcohol limit for drivers in Scotland has had no impact on the number of road traffic accidents"

But IMO that study was so fundamentally flawed that I wouldn't take too much from it at all. 

What I found interesting was that as soon as that study was released, some folk thought that because reducing the level from 80 to 50 had made no difference, then the next step should be to reduce the limit even further. 

Bonkers Logic.

 

I cant find the article however i will keep looking, i may have linked the declining deaths on scotlands roads since the legislation was introduced, 

 

https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/decrease-in-number-of-people-killed-on-scotland-s-roads/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I cant find the article however i will keep looking, i may have linked the declining deaths on scotlands roads since the legislation was introduced, 

 

https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/decrease-in-number-of-people-killed-on-scotland-s-roads/

Not disputing, but was it not an article on reduced deaths due to average speed cameras on the A90?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dare say reducing the speed limit by increments would result in incrementally less deaths every year on average.

so fucking what? Following this logic we should have zero speed limit and lock ourselves in our house wrapped in cotton wool. 

It is this gradual encroachment all using good intentions to pave that road...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, aaid said:

Ah, the Rothchilds.

The reason you got beat in 2014 was in significant part due to your inability to explain how Scotland’s currency and money supply would work post YES. Who would own our central bank and how would it work. My guess is you will go into our last indyref doing exactly the same. Because you are too (insert here).

Edited by thplinth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, thplinth said:

The reason you got beat in 2014 was in significant part due to your inability to explain how Scotland’s currency and money supply would work post YES. Who would own our central bank and how would it work. My guess is you will go into our last indyref doing exactly the same. Because you are too (insert here).

What about losing your pension?

The vow?

Near to federalism?

etc. etc. etc.

The monetary issue wasn’t a concern when the polls were showing YES at 52% a couple of weeks before the referendum, then all the promises and scaremongering were ramped up.

There was more than just the monetary one and I wouldn’t say it was as significant as fear of the unknown or any of the above. 

Edited by antidote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, antidote said:

What about losing your pension?

The vow?

Near to federalism?

etc. etc. etc.

The monetary issue wasn’t a concern when the polls were showing YES at 52% a couple of weeks before the referendum, then all the promises and scaremongering were ramped up.

There was more than just the monetary one and I wouldn’t say it was as significant as fear of the unknown or any of the above. 

There was more but that single issue fucked you more than all the others combined. You still can’t get anywhere near answering it as a party. There is a reason for that, it is a no win argument. But you can’t even articulate that argument. Instead it is just ignored like it was first time around. Where is your plan? Even if shrouded in secrecy due to what if’s... you should still be able to explain it. I think you do because you are lacking the talent to come up with something credible. You are currency cowards.

Edited by thplinth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, thplinth said:

I dare say reducing the speed limit by increments would result in incrementally less deaths every year on average.

so fucking what? Following this logic we should have zero speed limit and lock ourselves in our house wrapped in cotton wool. 

It is this gradual encroachment all using good intentions to pave that road...

Having lost two of my closest childhood friends through a speeding driver, personally its great to see the road traffic deaths at near all time lows, is that not a positive? Who gives a shit if its through more speed cameras or more stringent drink driving legislation, bear in mind road death are skyrocketing down south   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The White Ceelo said:

Fair enough but my whole beef is my ability to choose how I live my life is being diluted by do gooders to protect the few and not the majority.

And thats fair enough too,  I agree that  governments can have too much control over the basic way people live their life and they should be called out for it.,

 I just personally  dont think the drink driving limit being reduced and the sugar tax are the best examples of this.  We are a nation of fat lazy bassas , its the many not the few, and anything that can be done to improve it , within reason, has to be applauded.

For me the drink driving reduction is a no brainer, if someone close to me was to be hurt badly, or worse still killed  in a car accident , I feel I would get a small degree of comfort knowing the liable driver had made a terrible mistake but was at least sober , than someone who had been drinking, even one pint.

I would hate to be thinking, ‘’ would this perhaps not have happened if they had had no alcohol ? ‘’

Perhaps it would have but why take the chance. 

I realise i probably sound like a pious do gooder, I dont  mean to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Having lost two of my closest childhood friends through a speeding driver, personally its great to see the road traffic deaths at near all time lows, is that not a positive? Who gives a shit if its through more speed cameras or more stringent drink driving legislation, bear in mind road death are skyrocketing down south   

Appeal to emotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...