Scottish Budget 2019

[Jeff Venom]

It's magnificent that Gaelic gets yoons in such an utter state. Imagine having such ingrained self-hatred that you want your own country's culture obliterated because you're thick enough to think Gaelic=SNP [emoji38]

Absolute fuds.

Proud Scots though.
If Labour rolled out a Gaelic on every major road in the country campaign the tune would change rather quickly.

[Crùbag]

1 hour ago, speedframe said:

1 hour ago, Crùbag said:

Ask the parties - Tory, Labour and LibDem - who signed the legislation at WM and Holyrood that ScotGov now follow.
Where are these areas btw?
I and my kids speak Gaelic everyday. I pay taxes too. Can't remember a 'Gaels don't pay tax' exception.

Serious question, is there any Gaelic speakers in Scotland who can't read English?

Is there?

What's your point? Why should Gaelic speakers be forced to use English? Just because they're a minority? What other minorities should be forced to toe the majority line? Dangerous road to go down.

As to reading 'English' - how many of Scotland's placenames are English? What do they mean?

I'm on the western edge of Edinburgh and there are loads of Gaelic placenames around here. Myself and kids can understand them despite the 'useless' and meaningless phonetic rendering. What do Dalry, Ardmillan, Corstorphine, Echline and more mean in English? I can't find them in my Oxford dictionary?

More pertinent - what is the linguistic definition of 'useful'?

[Crùbag]

1 hour ago, speedframe said:

7 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

Places such as ....?
 

Forfar for a start, what's the point ?

No Gaelic speakers in Forfar? Are you sure? Do you have evidence?

 

What's this then?

https://www.facebook.com/events/273559786382682/

 

Edited December 11, 2018 by Crùbag

[Crùbag]

8 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

Bit spiky m9, I'm all for Gaelic everything

Biorach you mean...

Just get tired having to justify the fckn language you speak, or one of them. Just because some thick Yoons think we speak funny... though no-one speaks it....

[NotThePars]

Wholeheartedly support further expansion of spending on gaelic even if it’s only out of spite and trolling.

[18May1991]

What’s a ‘Yoon’?

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

What’s a ‘Yoon’?

Unionist

Yoonunist

I had to Google it earlier.

[I'm Brian]

8 minutes ago, 18May1991 said:

What’s a ‘Yoon’?

They come in all sorts of shapes, sizes and dress. Generally shouty and angry people

 

An avid supporter of the union

 

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

 

Shamelessly stolen from somewhere on linkedin….It does somewhat mirror the whole tax in Scotland vs England but as long as things like taxpayer funded University and prescriptions carry on then there is at least some visible value.  I've voted SNP previously on the basis of the free university (none of my kids are old enough to go yet but I went and it was free (hell, I got a grant as well) and I'd be disappointed to see free further education come to an end).

[Granny Danger]

Someone should lay off the drink.

 

[renton]

9 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

 

Shamelessly stolen from somewhere on linkedin….It does somewhat mirror the whole tax in Scotland vs England but as long as things like taxpayer funded University and prescriptions carry on then there is at least some visible value.  I've voted SNP previously on the basis of the free university (none of my kids are old enough to go yet but I went and it was free (hell, I got a grant as well) and I'd be disappointed to see free further education come to an end).

If no explanation was needed or possible, why the f**k did the denizen of Linkedin that you quote go to such lengths to try and explain it?

[JamieThomas]

That story would only remotely be connected to fucking reality if the tenth man gave an eleventh man £5 to manufacture a scheme to avoid paying £50 of the £59.

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

Just now, JamieThomas said:

That story would only remotely be connected to fucking reality if the tenth man gave an eleventh man £5 to manufacture a scheme to avoid paying £50 of the £59.

yet he would still be paying more than 7 people.

[JamieThomas]

6 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

yet he would still be paying more than 7 people.

And taking a petted lip and fucking off to the Caymans for the sake of £9.

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

3 minutes ago, JamieThomas said:

And taking a petted lip and fucking off to the Caymans for the sake of £9.

it's not a real life story - it's an analogy.

[JamieThomas]

10 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

it's not a real life story - it's an analogy.

It's a load of shite by a fuckwit Tory, m8.

[renton]

11 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

it's not a real life story - it's an analogy.

It's still a stupid analogy.

 

[Moses Supposes]

4 hours ago, 18May1991 said:

What’s a ‘Yoon’?

It's Gaelic for unionist, or something.

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

14 minutes ago, JamieThomas said:

It's a load of shite by a fuckwit Tory, m8.

red dotted for calling me m8.

[Jeff Venom]

There's yer Moses, Duke, and new kyd all "new" members at the end of Oct/start of Nov, all posting the same stuff, in the same style, on the same forum.