UK Politics Thread XIII: The Brexit Ship Departs

[The New California Republic]

Literally everyone can see it. It's right there. You deleted the last part of his post, where I replied "news to me", then deleted the rest of my reply, to make it look like I was saying "news to me" to something totally different.

No it really didn't. I truncated the post for brevity while preserving the meaning of the post, which is entirely OK. If you didn't make it clear which parts of Huskar's post you were replying to then that's entirely on you.

It is truly pathetic that you are unable to engage in actual political discussion and are here doing things like that just to try to make people look foolish so you can enjoy having a go.

The cause of this farce was your reticence towards providing a source. This was all entirely your own doing.

[The Nihilistic view]

Sturgeon set to survive any confidence vote after Greens signal support

Greens could be Sturgeons saving grace.

Why would any other party support her?

[The New California Republic]

Sturgeon set to survive any confidence vote after Greens signal support

Greens could be Sturgeons saving grace.

Why would any other party support her?

Tbh it's surprising that the Greens even give her the time of day, as a cornerstone of SNP economic proposals for independence was North Sea oil...

[Ainland]

Original Exchange

Mate when you make a claim put down a source to back it up, simple as. Dont call people lazy because they ask for a source, i dont have to do jack shit either because i didnt make the claim.

Also yes you clearly are debating the matter with NCR.

News to me. He has managed to say a lot without even expressing a view on the matter. I have no idea where he stands on the issue of foreign aid, or indeed asylum seekers. We could be in total agreement for all I know. Interesting approach to "debate".

The New California Republic's Version

Mate when you make a claim put down a source to back it up, simple as. Dont call people lazy because they ask for a source, i dont have to do jack shit either because i didnt make the claim.

News to me.

It's truly pathetic that this is the sort of stuff you're here for, rather than actually engaging in the discussion. You've said absolutely nothing about the issues of foreign aid or asylum seekers, whilst spending time detailing the discussion doing childish stuff like this to try to make someone look foolish so you then have a go about it. It's embarrassing.

[Dresderstan]

Why would any other party support her?

Tbh it's surprising that the Greens even give her the time of day, as a cornerstone of SNP economic proposals for independence was North Sea oil...

Clearly the Greens are more than willing to sacrifice their entire point of existence for the SNP and independence.

[The New California Republic]

It's truly pathetic that this is the sort of stuff you're here for, rather than actually engaging in the discussion. You've said absolutely nothing about the issues of foreign aid or asylum seekers, whilst spending time detailing the discussion doing childish stuff like this to try to make someone look foolish so you then have a go about it. It's embarrassing.

To reiterate:

No it really didn't. I truncated the post for brevity while preserving the meaning of the post, which is entirely OK. If you didn't make it clear which parts of Huskar's post you were replying to then that's entirely on you.

[The New California Republic]

Tbh it's surprising that the Greens even give her the time of day, as a cornerstone of SNP economic proposals for independence was North Sea oil...

Clearly the Greens are more than willing to sacrifice their entire point of existence for the SNP and independence.

it makes me wonder what the Greens would actually do in the event of independence, when the SNP starts revelling in the black gold: would they say something or would they just give some token objections and carry on as normal?

[Dresderstan]

Clearly the Greens are more than willing to sacrifice their entire point of existence for the SNP and independence.

it makes me wonder what the Greens would actually do in the event of independence, when the SNP starts revelling in the black gold: would they say something or would they just give some token objections and carry on as normal?

That's the key thing and frankly it should be seen as a bit hypocritical for the Greens when one thinks about it. I'd be shocked if any of the unionists tried to attack the Greens for it, but alas they won't.

[The New California Republic]

it makes me wonder what the Greens would actually do in the event of independence, when the SNP starts revelling in the black gold: would they say something or would they just give some token objections and carry on as normal?

That's the key thing and frankly it should be seen as a bit hypocritical for the Greens when one thinks about it. I'd be shocked if any of the unionists tried to attack the Greens for it, but alas they won't.

It seems largely a marriage of convenience, as the Greens know they will have a greater voice at the table if they throw in their lot with one of the strongest parties in Scotland. Because of the oil issue I doubt the marriage would survive independence unless, as I mentioned, the Greens resort to not saying anything about it. I think if the Greens did start making a lot of noise about it then the SNP would sooner throw the Greens under the bus, than willingly give up the oil revenue.

[Celritannia]

Source please.

And I'm not sure why you are focusing on the "island nation" thing in particular as if it has some special significance...

God was kind enough to give us the channel because whilst he created the French he felt bad that he put them next to us. That's why being an island nation is divinely ordained to be a special.

That does not explain the number of invaders from the ice age which separated the islands of Great Britain and Ireland, and up to, well, the Battle of Culloden.

[The Blaatschapen]

That's the key thing and frankly it should be seen as a bit hypocritical for the Greens when one thinks about it. I'd be shocked if any of the unionists tried to attack the Greens for it, but alas they won't.

It seems largely a marriage of convenience, as the Greens know they will have a greater voice at the table if they throw in their lot with one of the strongest parties in Scotland. Because of the oil issue I doubt the marriage would survive independence unless, as I mentioned, the Greens resort to not saying anything about it. I think if the Greens did start making a lot of noise about it then the SNP would sooner throw the Greens under the bus, than willingly give up the oil revenue.

A post-independence Scotland will anyway see a different political landscape. Independence is a unionizing force, and I'd wager that in such a case the SNP splits up in different factions, or at the very least, will see a significant amount of voter loss towards other parties.

[The Blaatschapen]

Source please.

And I'm not sure why you are focusing on the "island nation" thing in particular as if it has some special significance...

God was kind enough to give us the channel because whilst he created the French he felt bad that he put them next to us. That's why being an island nation is divinely ordained to be a special.

That wasn't god.

That was global warming.

Wait... now I get the climate change denialists... they just want to see god in action

[Vassenor]

It's truly pathetic that this is the sort of stuff you're here for, rather than actually engaging in the discussion. You've said absolutely nothing about the issues of foreign aid or asylum seekers, whilst spending time detailing the discussion doing childish stuff like this to try to make someone look foolish so you then have a go about it. It's embarrassing.

Oh please. Your definition of engaging in the discussion is when other people make the narrowly defined arguments you want them to make. The second anyone steps outside of that and starts looking at the bigger picture they're suddenly not engaging properly and that means you win somehow.

[The New California Republic]

It seems largely a marriage of convenience, as the Greens know they will have a greater voice at the table if they throw in their lot with one of the strongest parties in Scotland. Because of the oil issue I doubt the marriage would survive independence unless, as I mentioned, the Greens resort to not saying anything about it. I think if the Greens did start making a lot of noise about it then the SNP would sooner throw the Greens under the bus, than willingly give up the oil revenue.

A post-independence Scotland will anyway see a different political landscape. Independence is a unionizing force, and I'd wager that in such a case the SNP splits up in different factions, or at the very least, will see a significant amount of voter loss towards other parties.

Labour was always very strong for decades before their voters started to bleed off towards the SNP, so in such an event Labour would likely experience a massive resurgence as the SNP starts to tear itself apart from within.

[Ainland]

It's truly pathetic that this is the sort of stuff you're here for, rather than actually engaging in the discussion. You've said absolutely nothing about the issues of foreign aid or asylum seekers, whilst spending time detailing the discussion doing childish stuff like this to try to make someone look foolish so you then have a go about it. It's embarrassing.

Oh please. Your definition of engaging in the discussion is when other people make the narrowly defined arguments you want them to make. The second anyone steps outside of that and starts looking at the bigger picture they're suddenly not engaging properly and that means you win somehow.

Is this because you claimed that NHS pay has been cut by 10% in real terms since 2010, then I demonstrated in detail how this is not true, and now you're spitting your dummy out? I mean that was a pretty clear "win", if that's how you want to phrase it. But that was you who made a specific, narrow claim. I'm more than happy to discuss the 'bigger picture', I'm here for it. In fact it's the bigger picture why I, reluctantly, do not oppose the government on the 1% NHS pay recommendatio.

[The Blaatschapen]

A post-independence Scotland will anyway see a different political landscape. Independence is a unionizing force, and I'd wager that in such a case the SNP splits up in different factions, or at the very least, will see a significant amount of voter loss towards other parties.

Labour was always very strong for decades before their voters started to bleed off towards the SNP, so in such an event Labour would likely experience a massive resurgence as the SNP starts to tear itself apart from within.

Very likely. But it depends a bit on which way the SNP itself would go, they might become the social democratic party in the system. And then merge with Labour.

Though traditionally, merging parties is more for the liberals inside the UK . But not sure if such a tradition applies anymore then.

[The New California Republic]

Labour was always very strong for decades before their voters started to bleed off towards the SNP, so in such an event Labour would likely experience a massive resurgence as the SNP starts to tear itself apart from within.

Very likely. But it depends a bit on which way the SNP itself would go, they might become the social democratic party in the system. And then merge with Labour.

Though traditionally, merging parties is more for the liberals inside the UK . But not sure if such a tradition applies anymore then.

Yes. The centre-left/left wing parties in the UK seem to like keeping themselves to themselves for the most part, which is in sharp contrast to the European tradition in the likes of France and Germany where mergers and affiliations like that are fairly common place, such as the likes of the Socialist group in France consisting of PS, MRC, PPM, and DVG; and in Germany Die Linke from PDS and WASG, and before that the SED from the KPD and SPD.

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

A post-independence Scotland will anyway see a different political landscape. Independence is a unionizing force, and I'd wager that in such a case the SNP splits up in different factions, or at the very least, will see a significant amount of voter loss towards other parties.

Labour was always very strong for decades before their voters started to bleed off towards the SNP, so in such an event Labour would likely experience a massive resurgence as the SNP starts to tear itself apart from within.

Especially with Scottish Labour making noises towards to being open to a future indy ref 2 in recent times.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Labour was always very strong for decades before their voters started to bleed off towards the SNP, so in such an event Labour would likely experience a massive resurgence as the SNP starts to tear itself apart from within.

Especially with Scottish Labour making noises towards to being open to a future indy ref 2 in recent times.

I thought the new leader Sarwar was against that though? Was it not the woman he was up against who was open to it?

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

Especially with Scottish Labour making noises towards to being open to a future indy ref 2 in recent times.

I thought the new leader Sarwar was against that though? Was it not the woman he was up against who was open to it?

That's very silly if he is.

[The Huskar Social Union]

I thought the new leader Sarwar was against that though? Was it not the woman he was up against who was open to it?

That's very silly if he is.

He said Independence is not a priority for Scots outside of a twitter bubble

He seems to be against backing a referendum and thinks the Ordinary Scottish voter doesnt care about the issue.

[Kavagrad]

That's very silly if he is.

He said Independence is not a priority for Scots outside of a twitter bubble

He seems to be against backing a referendum and thinks the Ordinary Scottish voter doesnt care about the issue.

SNP majority in May, then.

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

That's very silly if he is.

He said Independence is not a priority for Scots outside of a twitter bubble

He seems to be against backing a referendum and thinks the Ordinary Scottish voter doesnt care about the issue.

It's certainly a bold tactic.

[The Free Joy State]

UK Aid office discussing cuts of more than 50%

Some of the poorest and most conflict-ridden countries in the world will have their UK aid programmes cut by more than half, according to a leaked report of discussions held in the last three weeks among Foreign Office officials.
The cuts include slashing the aid programme to Somalia by 60% and to South Sudan by 59%. The planned cut for Syria is reported at 67% and for Libya it is 63%. Nigeria’s aid programme would be cut by 58%.
The bare percentages include cuts of 50% in the west Balkans, and 60% in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UK funding in the Sahel is listed as falling from £340m to £23m. The numbers marked “official sensitive”, passed to the investigative website openDemocracy, are the first wider glimpse of the scale of aid cuts being contemplated after ministers’ decision to cut aid spending this year from the legal target of 0.7% of gross national income to 0.5%. The UK aid programme over two years is being cut from £15bn to £10bn. The scale of the cuts to individual aid programmes seems plausible after the government this week announced it was reducing aid to war-torn and famine-threatened Yemen by 59%. The UK contribution to what is probably the UK’s most high-profile aid programme is being reduced to “at least” £87m this year, down from £164m pledged last year

Cutting our aid budget -- to the most-vulnerable nations that can least take the cuts, costing lives and damaging our nation's attempt to fight extremism in the process -- shows this government's actions as short-sighted and inward-looking.

"Global Britain". Don't make me laugh.

That's very silly if he is.

He said Independence is not a priority for Scots outside of a twitter bubble

He seems to be against backing a referendum and thinks the Ordinary Scottish voter doesnt care about the issue.

While I hope Scotland does stay part of the UK, the polls would seem to indicate otherwise.

If that is his approach, it might be a risky one come election time.

[Vassenor]

So I think Another Angry Voice kind of sums up the MHS pay situation pretty well.

There's been an infuriating wave of stupidity today in regards to nurses' pay. People whining and crying 'why are nurses getting a pay RISE and I'm not?".

First, increasing nurses' by 1% when the government is openly pursuing an inflation rate of 2% means that in real terms nurses are being handed yet another real terms pay CUT.

It doesn't matter how many Tories and right-wing hacks pretend that it's a real terms pay rise, their own figures, that they released with the budget, admit that it's a real terms pay cut.

Then there's the fact that things in the economy are interrelated.

If nurses, and the millions of other public sector workers are hit with another round of pay cuts, that doesn't mean there's more money available for private sector workers, it actually means there's less, because they have less to spend, which creates less economic demand, and shrinks the economy.

Another way in which Tory public sector pay cuts drive down private sector wages is through the normalisation of low wages. If the government is paying little more than £20,000 to qualified nurses, police, firefighters, then exploitative corporate bosses know they can get away with paying even less to their workforce, with the intention of extracting as much profit as possible for themselves.

Do people really think that it's some kind of coincidence that the 11-year long Tory assault on public sector wages has coincided with the longest period of wage stagnation in history, for the entire UK workforce.

It just makes me sick to see the venality and downright stupidity of these people crying that nurses are getting a pay RISE, when they're actually getting a real terms pay CUT.

They're so fixed in their bubbles of Thatcherite individualist selfishness that they've failed to learn that it's radically right-wing economic policies like austerity, and greedy parasitical corporate bosses who drive down all of our wages and living conditions.

And they'll never learn it, because whenever the subject of wages comes up, their primary reaction is always "me, me, me ... what about me?", and never any kind of consideration of why things are the way they are.

Sadly this venal and ignorant "me, me me" mentality is the consequence of the divided, selfish, insular, individualist society that Margaret Thatcher and her acolytes wanted to turn Britain into.

But of course this is clearly just political points scoring and we all need to stop criticising the government so that we can be United.