Originally posted by baracustastic
jaden: care to explain?
for one...its the westminster elections so the most the SNP could get is about 10 seats...they currently hold 8...and need swings of between 15 and 30 % to get any more
secondly...they wouldn't have a clue what to do if they were in power...only a handful of their own party now think that independence is a viable option...why?...we have already sold off our 2 best assets to foreign companies....Oil and Water...so the argument that we could take back the oil fields and use them for the Scottish economy is a falacy...the best we could do is charge them rent...if they were to plan this then the westminster governement would simply change the border lines for Scottish and English waters before they lost power
independence from Britain is a bad idea...independence from Europe however is a great idea because more of them are a bunch of lazy leeching parasites...and i mean whole countries...not just the people in the European parliment....look at spain for example...they have a 4 hour siesta everyday cause its "to hot to work"...they get a £30 billion subsidy from the EU...strangely enough the net amount that the UK pays in to the EU
thirdly the SNP think that more immigration into Scotland is the answer to the falling population...as opposed to doing things to keep the people from leaving in the first place
thirdly...they will tax you more than Labour already to...a pretty immense feat given that we already pay and average of 70% more council tax than we did when labour came into power and for the last 3 years have earned less in real terms than the previous year...
There are 59 seats to win. Granted Labour are sure too win most of them but the SNP are only concerned with what's good for Scotland. Vastly different from what's good for Britain, which is what everyone else is bothered with.
The plan is to copy Norway; put the rent from the oil into an investment fund. 10 years down the line the money earned in interest is more than the oil income. At the moment Scotland donates £5,000,000,000 more than it receives from Westminster every year.
True the SNP cannot gain independence through Westminster, however Scotland needs a louder voice in LOndon to get us a larger wedge of cash to spend.
Re the power cluelessness thing. How do we know they're scoobied till we find out?
Also, what would happen is:
SNP win Scottish elections in 2007, they have a referrendum for independence, the public say YES. Time spent removing ourselves from a union that took over 100 ears to form would take a whiley. Write a constitution for the nation. Another referrendum on whether to get rid of the royals...............low and behold it's 2011 and election time again. SNP fragments now that independence has been achieved and a new set of partys contet election.
The only tax paid to the EU is 1% VAT.
Immigration is the SHORT TERM answer. They know the real challenge is keeping talent here.
I have no objection to being taxed as long as it is based on income rather than expenditure, a la Labour stealth taxes and Maggie "hell-beast" Thatcher's 100% VAT rise. Or even worse the bloody poll tax! We can't expect quality public services if we are not prepared to pay for them.
The only party not focused on middle England is the SNP. Seeing as I'm not middle England it's SNP for me.
Am I right in thinking that the LIberals are trying to appeal to the young with their "no tuition fees" gambit?
I think it's absolutely rediculous that other people would have to put the youth through University. People already think (incorrectly) that students are a leech on society, if grants come in and higher taxes pay for it, it'll only make that horrible stereotypical image of a student that bit more real. I don't want to put someone elses kid through University. What about people who don't even have kids? Why should they foot the bill?
And their arguemnet is that with tuition fees, it means some kids cant go to Uni, even though they are qualified - bullshit. I carried a job on top of Uni. It's easy juggling the two. Making the yearly tuition fees isn't hard. Not only that, but you get student loans, and if you have less than favourable circumstances, you are given more!
The system works. It may mean kids are in debt, but at least it makes them get off their backside and get a job, juggle the hassles of the real world while at uni, and learn to be more responsible with money. Giving students a free ride through Uni would make Uni seem like a cop out. I'm totally against this. Students should accept the responsibility and pay for themselves I think. I hate the idea of me having to pay for my tuition fees now, saving my parents having to pay my way, only for them to be made to pay for someone elses kid to go through Uni with tax.
It's just a cold hearted and transparent, and desperate attempt for popularity on behalf of the liberals. So I hear.
I wouldn't trust the Tories as far as I could throw em.
So, Labour it is, for me.
UK students have always been ridiculously vocal about tuition fees. In fact what they pay is relatively minute by higer education standards. They don't know how lucky they are.
Students just tend to moan in general. Come to think of it, so does everyone.
I am a Tory voter by default but they have just been so appallingly crap lately that I have bugger all confidence, and little disposition to put a vote in for them.
IMO those seeking education should not have to pay for it. I do not expect the government to subsidise students' living costs through grants, but I do think that there should not be tuition fees in any form.
In the long run it is better for the nation to ENCOURAGE people to complete a degree. Those with a degree earn, on average, more than those without a degree. Thus they pay more tax than those without a degree and will more than pay for their degree over their life.
Ush: New Labour is near enough Tory anyway.