Jump to content

xbl

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    10,470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by xbl

  1. Why are you on the thread? Never seen it. Or the first one.
  2. Yep, look the other way, keep it quiet, don't ask question, just in case you're next. Embarrassment. Its a living demonstration of the cowardice of the Scotch, just like the idea of voting no next year. Cowardice and fear.
  3. It would be much appreciated! As for the rest of you, what a bunch of craven look the other way shitebags. I've seen many of you kick up a fuss when a poster you like is banned, even when the offence is crystal clear and explained by the mods. Now you have a poster who is of a very high standard banned for reasons unknown, and suddenly you do a good impression of the ceiling and floorboard inspection team? Shitebaggery of the highest order.
  4. Can you fill us on what is going on Keith? Do you know?
  5. Lots of blind eyes being turned here I see. What price principles?
  6. It isn't me doing that, its Alistair Darling, its David Cameron, its Ed Miliband. Its the people who talk about foreigners, immigration, the EU, and all that nasty stuff. All we do is carry it to its logical conclusion.
  7. Well how do the rest of us ensure we don't fall into the same trap? What exactly did Swampy do wrong? How can we also avoid being barred on a whim without any explanation. If the government disappears someone you know and denies all knowledge, would you just shrug and accept it? Or would you try and find out what is going on?
  8. Why? In case you get mysteriously disappeared because your face doesn't fit? What on earth is your post supposed to mean?
  9. One where you can be banned on a whim with no explanation. How are we meant to avoid a banning as well if we don't know what Swampy did wrong, twice now. Maybe I should stick to mocking mental illness, that seems to get a free pass on here. Its a nasty way to run a site. If I was a mod, I'd be embarrassed to comply with all of this, especially if they're telling the truth and Div is not telling them anything. Maybe they should stop playing along like good little footsoldiers and ask some questions.
  10. Unionism is tied up with fear and the politics of race. Look at how many times Unionists talk about foreigners, look at the way they want borders everywhere, look at their unwillingness to accept the point of view of others. Also, he champions racism? Are you not thinking of HB?
  11. What a nasty little site this is turning to into at the moment. I don't want to have a go at the mods, but its very hard to take them seriously or believe them when they plead ignorance. Is Div really not explaining anything to the mods? Who just accept it without question? Last time out, Swampy was banned with absolutely no explanation, and nobody could point out the post where he ran afoul of the rules (remember, thats what we had to do for DeeGas, identify the post). And now he's gone again? He's done nothing wrong. Threads being vanished and shown again, members being banned without explanation, the independence thread being shuffled off BANG on white paper launch hour, anti-Scottish posts and lies tolerated without question if it follows the Unionist cause, its really not a very pretty picture. Perhaps the mods should look at their own compliance with the whims of Div and start asking some questions?
  12. If we received all the revenues we generated, then in theory, yes. To give you another example, lets just say that the Scottish government wanted to encourage spending and revenue flow. Now if they were fully independent (or fully 100% fiscally devolved), they could use a big chunk of that to give everyone a tax cut. The theory then goes that because people have more money in their pocket, then they will spend more, and so the government would get their money back in other ways (vat, increased corporation tax, sales etc.), therefore paying the cost of that tax cut. However, lets just say that in 2015 under the Scotland Act, First Minister Lamont (I know, I know), implemented this imaginative and bold policy (I know, I know). Under the new rules, then the tax cut will simply get lopped off our block grant, giving us less money to spend, because we've cut tax. However, any increased revenue from this (vat, sales etc.) will flow straight to Westminster, and will NOT be reflected in our pocket money for the next year. This means there is zero motivation to do anything bold like this under devolution.
  13. Oh, he was the livi alias guy? I didn't think he was all that bad tbh! Indeed I wasn't, many of us never read that "club dece" or noticed it, so clearly he's only interesting for a very, very, very specific subset of the forum.
  14. No. Look at the image. Revenue generated by this policy does not go back to Scotland. Revenue generated by this policy goes to Westminster, and makes absolutely no difference to our budget for the next year. Tax raising has nothing to do with it. In simple terms, it goes like this. In London, or an independent Scotland it goes like this: £x used to pay for childcare policy childcare policy generates revenues of £y Revenues of £y go to treasury £y used to pay for next year of childcare, meaning government has to pay £x-y extra Right now, it would be different for us: £x used to pay for childcare policy childcare policy generates revenues of £y Revenues of £y go to Westminster treasury These revenues make NO difference to money received by Scottish government Therefore, we get no extra money, meaning government has to pay the full £x So using the varying tax powers changes nothing, all it means is that we have to pay more to give Westminster more money.
  15. I've never really noticed him either. I've seen him chat to PB a few times, but thats about it really.
  16. Let me help you: The pound. We will be in it, no doubt there. We are already in the EU. The subs can get to f**k. We will have a small army. This has been covered in all kinds of paper. We can provide concrete justification for our motives. Whether it is historic examples of London deliberately selling Scotland short, the neo-liberal state that seems to be creeping in, the racism and bigotry of the British government, energy prices, population issues, there are a million and one reasons to vote yes. There are very few reasons to vote no. You get a choice of fear (which seems to be your chosen option), racism, stupidity, or Alex Salmond (which is moronic).
  17. Ah, so you're a nationalist, that makes sense. On another note, its time for another begging plea from Carmichael: Scottish independence: ‘Business must speak up’ http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-business-must-speak-up-1-3221480 Funny, the Yes side never seem to have a problem getting businesses to support them...
  18. And what does a member of the law society know about law? He's clearly no HB.
  19. Are you anti EU? That might explain why you are voting no, perhaps you would prefer to be out of the EU?
  20. I make a terrible converter these days. A few years back, I was excellent at arguing my point reasonably and converting people, but as independence shifted from pipe dream to real hope, to potentially imminent, my views also shifted with it. I am very much more of an extremist than I was a few years back. I find myself reacting to the too wee too poor nonsense very negatively. I've only made one convert recently, and he asked me to keep my voice down when I was converting him because I was (and I quote) "inciting hatred" against the British Government. Im not good at this any more.
  21. Yet again, politics of race from the Unionists.
×
×
  • Create New...