Yes - that was my thoughts too. So Scotland is hardly likely to vote the Queen out. I don't know where I stand on the monarchy etc - given that they are there and bring in tourists I am inclined to keep them - a bit like London Zoo really.
I would feel sorry for the current inhabitants of Regents Park - but at least the ape pen would have to be extended
BB - I think we all regard politicians as lying cheating self serving people who will twist anything to suit their cause. I strongly resent being likened in any way to them. I state my opinions honestly and sometimes back them up with quotes I have found; I use statistics mostly to refute unsubstantiated claims by others - like the claim there are 220,000 children living in poverty in Scotland. The Scots of today do not even know what real poverty is - unless they use their mobiles to look at Africa.
This is an interesting argument Cologne - but one which I think could fit better on a separate thread. I will add my comments to it on a new "Pure Politics" thread
Real poverty is what I saw when I first lived in Venezuela, children living in a lorry tyre outside a shopping centre. Also when I lived in N Africa people running a whole family of US$50 a month, people can eat and have shelter in this country along with get an education. That they can't spend £60 a week on cigarettes, £70 a week on booze, and then feed and shelter is not the fault of a failed state but fault of a failed upbringing not by the education system but families with poor moral standards and value sets.
What I can add to the monarchy debate is that I am 100% sure we would exchange our head of state for yours. The Royal family is held in high regard here and as I said before many nationals still think that disposing of their King was a huge mistake. Yes he was a disaster, Yes he took from the poor to maintain his lifestyle, but he has been replaced by politicians who are just as bad and have become the new elite. The word elite comes from the French, and that has it's origins in ancient French. Today the meaning has changed, and relates to high performing companies, sportsman and Parisian based politicians etc. The top companies make money to aid the economy, the elite sportsman add to the feeling that despite everything wrong with the country we can at least rejoice in some success, but the politicians have made promises that they do not keep after they have fooled the people to vote for them. To have a head of state that is divorced from policy has an advantage. I wish along with many here that that existed in France.
Ah, here we go - the poverty comparison game, those poor are worse off than your poor. I too can quote examples - such as Aboriginal children who never had anything like a supermarket to live outside of, never mind a tyre to live in. But I'm afraid it simply doesn't wash - all poverty is relative to the conditions of whatever country it manifests itself in. If an organisation such as 'Save the Children' are concerned enough to involve themselves - and it's their 2013 contention that Scotland had 220,000 children in poverty - then that must surely indicate that poverty does indeed exist in this country. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that it is entirely acceptable within the society in which you live to have children whose first piece of sustenance for the day is the crumb of comfort from knowing that there are those in other countries are worse off than they are. Not sure what Maslow would have made of that attitude.
Are you suggesting that Scotland is in a worse position than many places in Europe BB? We have food banks in France and they are being called on more and more. The thought that poverty only exists in Scotland because of Westminster does not hold water. There has been an economic disaster throughout the developed world that started in the US and showed up the failings of many sectors of economies everywhere. The real question is how do you get these children out of these poor living conditions. AS said yesterday on a phone in that he could not promise to increase any benefits to the less well off. While he is floundering around trying to answer questions from people on phone ins, and he really was floundering, he cannot be regarded as serious to do much about the things that concern you.
So you'll be glad when everybody is brought down to a level of frustrated opportunity just to ensure there isn't differential in society. I do not and never will accept the lowest common denominator objective of all socialist governments. It is very acceptable to have a high differential based on how people seize their opportunities. First piece of sustenance should be put on the table by responsible parents using their benefits for what they're given for instead of self gratification.
No - I thought I made it quite clear that I'm aware there are countries where the problem exists. And I'll be quite clear in saying that I believe it is down to the government of any country to fix their problem. What's patently obvious is that Westminster have no desire to address the problem in England whereas the SG are trying to do so in Scotland. As for your comment regarding AS's inability to increase benefits, that shows that you pre-suppose all those to be in poverty to also be on benefits. And that is simply not the case.
I don't don't know where you got those words from as they certainly aren't mine, and neither do they reflect my thinking. As for your second sentence, I repeat my response to ofh - you are pre-supposing that all those in poverty are in receipt of benefits, and that simply is not the case.
For those of you who are so sure that Scotland's application to join the EU will be subject to the veto of certain other members, you may have to rethink that.... http://www.newsnetscotland.com/inde...ut-of-eu-says-leading-international-authority It would seem that there would be more difficulty in leaving than actually getting in.
When you can find similar news on places other than on that site, which only has yes news, then I will take notice. It is not a news site! According to our press, the only way for Scotland to get into the EU is by article 49 as too many countries will not agree to an entry via article 48.
The figures show that SCotland is not baled out by England the reverse is true hence a major reason for the establishments desire to hold on to Scotland. The SNP is already the devolved Government of Scotland with a complete range of policies. It is the Labour, Liberal and Tory parties that will new policies for an Independent Scotland. Yes you can argue that Scotland is even more elitist but that is precisely because of being in a Union that not only does nothing about the elitism but uses it to govern and make law. Scotland has also had its manufacturing base destroyed to a greater extent. My hope that an Independent Scotland can change all this is based on the way it votes in general elections, the smaller population which makes change easier, and the Scottish community whis is quite different to England. Once it is able to express itself I am confident Scotland will choose s different path to the rUK. Land reform plans are well advanced in SCotland hence the support for NO from the various Dukes & Earls.
I am sorry but you trot out the usual left wing poverty propaganda. No - poverty is NOT relative. Children have access to state benefits in this country - they are not living on the streets. Poverty is not having food for days on end and living in a cardboard shelter with no water and little clothing. Children who feel upset that they see others with more than them - a better mobile phone probably are not in poverty - they are just poor. Every time the media trots out those in so called pverty - have a look at their well manicured nails and recently done hairdos, their smoking and drinking habits and their use of i-pads, pods, puds etc. Yes I know they have not all got all of those but many have. Poverty is just used in this country as an emotive battering ram by the socialists - to define poverty as less than 60% of median incomes is plain stupid. Do not fall for it. Save the Children merely quote those official statistics. Ask anyone who actually works in charities for impoverished children around the world - as my Scottish sister in law does and she will put you right.
So you pick one article in a Yes friendly paper written by an academic in non EU Switzerland to form you opinion do you? Come on Bolton - you can do better than taht - I bet Spurf could find a dozen such "authoritative " opinions. For each there will be as many and more the other way. If Scotland is not part of a member state - and has voluntarily left it then they are out Full Stop. They might bargain their way back in but not as part of the UK so it means a new member state - and the EU has rules for admitting new member states. I cannot believe the straws you Yes campaigners will cling to in order to ditch England. You want independence. Good. Have it. But if you really want it accept that it comes without an EU membership or membership of a currency union unless post a Yes vote that can be negotiated. You are trying to pull the wool over your fellow countrymen's eyes - it is shameful
I happen to believe that they will probably get both a negotiated entry into the EU and some form of currency union with sterling though it will be without any lender of last resort basis and therefore submit "independent" Scotland to fiscal policy set by westminster but it will be ok for Salmonds ego. The fact is that this is opinion only and the same goes for when any of the so called experts state these opinions. Come on Bolton... Levrat in his article uses the "imagine" word oh so regularly indicating that much of the article is "imagination", not so authoritative then eh....???
