The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

21 minutes ago, LJS said:

Where does your 23% come from? I certainly can't see it in the article I linked to.

that 23% is from some polling published at some point this year, that was widely reported. I forget whose research it was.

 

[Comfy Bean]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yeah, but what you've missed is that >50% of the support for indy comes from the nutters.

Yip. You have not tried to stigmatise people who think Scotland should be an independent country -  no siree.

[Comfy Bean]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

that 23% is from some polling published at some point this year, that was widely reported. I forget whose research it was.

 

73.4% of statistics are made up. Someone said that somewhere at some point but I can`t remember 

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

73.4% of statistics are made up. Someone said that somewhere at some point but I can`t remember 

 

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

You have made this point several times now over the past few days. Hopefully everyone apart from your good self has read the various replies and fully understands that this has nothing to do with hating anyone. I accept that you will have your own reasons just as I have mine 

This post above came a few hours after I had stated that I did not hate England or London in response to one of your other posts around this and I said I didn`t understand why me saying I didn`t hate England made you feel uncomfortable. Anywayz.....what I wanted to add was that you could perhaps reflect on what you have said now across several recent posts.

Do you think it could be seen as being... even a wee bit...arrogant when you state that Scots want to leave the UK because they hate England ?

After all these posts you can only conclude it`s about hatred says way more about you than it does of any other poster on either side of our discussion....in my opinion 

I keep asking you to state your reasons, but you won't.

O#m then left to draw my own conclusions, and as the best evidence says that none of the 'better Scoptland' that was the start of the dream is achiveable, hatred of 'the other' (bog standard nationalism, you are supporting a nationalist party, after all - and plenty of this can be seen from its supporters) and grasping an empty flag are the only things I can see that remain.

Feel free to wise me up by stating your good reasons.

But if the 'good reasons' you state are the same empty dreams, I end up back at the same conclusion.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Yip. You have not tried to stigmatise people who think Scotland should be an independent country -  no siree.

care to tell me how their belief that they'd be richer *just* via separation is well-founded?

You've read GERS. Do you think it's a lie at you by the SNP and the Scottish Govt?

Either GERS is a lie, or those who choose to disbelieve it are nutters. Take your pick.

[LJS]

13 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I keep asking you to state your reasons, but you won't.

O#m then left to draw my own conclusions, and as the best evidence says that none of the 'better Scoptland' that was the start of the dream is achiveable, hatred of 'the other' (bog standard nationalism, you are supporting a nationalist party, after all - and plenty of this can be seen from its supporters) and grasping an empty flag are the only things I can see that remain.

Feel free to wise me up by stating your good reasons.

But if the 'good reasons' you state are the same empty dreams, I end up back at the same conclusion.

So because me & comfy refuse your ulitimatum to reveal our reasons for supporting Indy (which we have both done at length on many many occasions) its ok to accuse of hating the English.

I don't even hate you neil, let alone all your compatriots.

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

care to tell me how their belief that they'd be richer *just* via separation is well-founded?

Who has claimed this?

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You've read GERS. Do you think it's a lie at you by the SNP and the Scottish Govt?

No, neither do I think it tells us what the financial position fo an indpendent Scotland at an unnamed date in the future will be.

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Either GERS is a lie, or those who choose to disbelieve it are nutters. Take your pick.

 It's not a lie - it is an estimate , If someone refuses to believe that an estimate of Scotland's current financial position proves that an independent Scotland at some point in the future will inevitably be poorer, you are perfectly entitled to dispute that & claim they ar misguided. Calling them "nutters" seems (to me) to be going a little too far.

[Comfy Bean]

On 3/19/2016 at 8:31 AM, eFestivals said:

The only problem with that interview is that mostly the interviewers let the politician off the hook rather than hold them to account. Just compare the velvet gloves that Marr used on Sturgeon recently.

Andrew Neil had a grasp of the facts, and put her against the ropes. Sturgeon spent the interview trying obfuscate the facts with irrelevances (how is Norway's oil fund relevant to the questions asked? It's not. Etc, etc, etc).

I applaud Andrew Neil for doing his job properly. I wish that all journalists were like this.

 

I agree with your first paragraph here Neil. Politicians get away with just making the statement they want to make and staying on message etc way too often during interviews on the box these days. They rarely answer the question put to them.

I disagree though about Andrew Neil. Honestly surprised to read your last paragraph - above.

Neil is clearly backed up by a team of excellent researchers. He is on the beeb`s flagship Sunday morning politics show so we should expect no less. I am not referring to his interview with NS here. I think he is a bully who likes the sound of his own voice. He`s turned in to some US tv type guy chasing ratings and rarely uses the wit or intelligence that he undoubtedly has. He still does a good job on that Thursday night thing where he doesn`t " play " the same role. No idea whether the bbc has lost audience share to that Monaghan fella on the dark side as they normally get good guests if you can put up with the adverts.

As I said earlier, your right in that he needs to keep them on track with the answers but week after week now I find myself frustrated that he doesn`t let them get to their answer he just keeps firing his questions at them and shows no interest in the answer or - god forbid - developing it with a follow up question to tease more out of them. You quite often catch him reading his next question while the person is giving him their answer and then he just fires what he has just read straight at them just as it was getting interesting. I don`t think he comes over as being politically biased as he seems to have his favourites within different parties. I would suggest they are normally old pals and are men. Here`s my take on an average week :

AN : Good morning xx welcome to my show. We see this week that ( reads some figure handed to him by researcher a ) whats your party going to do about it ?

XX : ( while AN reads his notes ) Morning Andrew, yes it was disappointing to see...

AN : Wait a minute....(checks quote handed to him by researcher b ) last year you said and I quote ".... "

XX : Yes I did but I was referring to

AN : Hold on a minute. You don`t have the answer do you ?

XX : Well Andrew, if youd let me

AN : Laughs and gives a smug look to the camera ( one a certain Mr Salmond would be proud of ) " Thats all we`ve go time for this week folks "

AN then gets carried back to his dressing room chewing on a fat cigar and preparing to get the make up sand blasted off his face, screaming at researcher f to get him those bloody ratings. This researcher will probably be a female and will be driving him to the club later.

I get more annoyed when he does it with a politician I don`t agree with as you often don`t get the chance now to even hear what they have to say as he constantly interrupts them. I think it`s time he was restricted to the Thursday show. He is a parody of his former self.....in my opinion of course.

[Comfy Bean]

26 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I keep asking you to state your reasons, but you won't.

O#m then left to draw my own conclusions, and as the best evidence says that none of the 'better Scoptland' that was the start of the dream is achiveable, hatred of 'the other' (bog standard nationalism, you are supporting a nationalist party, after all - and plenty of this can be seen from its supporters) and grasping an empty flag are the only things I can see that remain.

Feel free to wise me up by stating your good reasons.

But if the 'good reasons' you state are the same empty dreams, I end up back at the same conclusion.

I think you know what I was getting at but nice deflection 

Your own view is that I want to leave the UK as I hate England. I am pointing out to you, in a helpful sense, that this could be seen as a little arrogant. I`m assuming you don`t actually regard England as the UK here 

You win  I`m not spelling out to you again that I have no axe to grind with England or the good folks of England. Hate plays no part in this.........for me and clearly not for any other poster on here from either side. For reasons only you will know, you continually try to make it about that.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

So because me & comfy refuse your ulitimatum to reveal our reasons for supporting Indy (which we have both done at length on many many occasions) its ok to accuse of hating the English.

the reasons you've both previously given have evaporated in a puff of vacuous smoke.

I've said the only things things I can see remaining as beneficial are a hatred of the English or grasping an empty flag. I've also said you're welcome to wise me up if that's wrong.

There's no accusation there.

As ever, grievance outdoes any attempt at understanding.

 

1 minute ago, LJS said:

I don't even hate you neil, let alone all your compatriots.

Who has claimed this?

Plenty of SNP supporters have expressed their hatred of the English. Even you have spoken of it.

But as ever, at an opportune moment, the facts are forgotten to take offence instead.

Still, it's a good way of you further avoiding giving some reasons.

 

1 minute ago, LJS said:

No, neither do I think it tells us what the financial position fo an indpendent Scotland at an unnamed date in the future will be.

The poll wasn't about future positions.

It was about the instantaneous effect of becoming independent.

 

1 minute ago, LJS said:

 It's not a lie - it is an estimate , If someone refuses to believe that an estimate of Scotland's current financial position proves that an independent Scotland at some point in the future will inevitably be poorer, you are perfectly entitled to dispute that & claim they ar misguided. Calling them "nutters" seems (to me) to be going a little too far.

I keep pointing out how misguided you are, but you refuse to accept any of the facts of the real world.

You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China. You say that trhe Scottish deficit can be supported at the current rates forever with no effect on Scotland.

You say an awful lot, but nothing grounded. Just big big hopes based on nothing at all.

You once said you'd vote 'no' if Scotland would suffer economic depression as a result. GERS makes it clear it can't be avoided, so now you throw off your previous words and claim other reasons ... that you won't say.

 

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

the reasons you've both previously given have evaporated in a puff of vacuous smoke.

No they haven't

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I've said the only things things I can see remaining as beneficial are a hatred of the English or grasping an empty flag. I've also said you're welcome to wise me up if that's wrong.

you are wrong

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

There's no accusation there.

As ever, grievance outdoes any attempt at understanding.

You would know - your grievance against the SNP is colossal.

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

 

Plenty of SNP supporters have expressed their hatred of the English.

& some people in England have expressed their hatred if Scots  - So what?

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

Even you have spoken of it.

Not in your terms I haven't. 

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

But as ever, at an opportune moment, the facts are forgotten to take offence instead.

Still, it's a good way of you further avoiding giving some reasons.

I have given my reasons. 

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

 

The poll wasn't about future positions.

It was about the instantaneous effect of becoming independent.

You seem to have a remarkable recollection of this poll - its a surprise you can't provide a link. 

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

 

I keep pointing out how misguided you are, but you refuse to accept any of the facts of the real world.

No, I refuse to agree with you. that is a different thing.

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China.

No I don't.

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

You say that trhe Scottish deficit can be supported at the current rates forever with no effect on Scotland.

No I don't.

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

You say an awful lot, but nothing grounded. Just big big hopes based on nothing at all.

really?

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

You once said you'd vote 'no' if Scotland would suffer economic depression as a result. GERS makes it clear it can't be avoided,

No it doesn't

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

so now you throw off your previous words and claim other reasons ... that you won't say.

 

My reasons have not changed - Scotland's amazing financial wealth has never ever been my reason.

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Neil is clearly backed up by a team of excellent researchers.

Sturgeon has fewer resources to call on than Andrew Neil?

 

9 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

As I said earlier, your right in that he needs to keep them on track with the answers but week after week now I find myself frustrated that he doesn`t let them get to their answer he just keeps firing his questions at them

Sturgeon's "answers" were about Norway's oil fund which is utterly irrelevant, how Scotland now is like the UK in 2010 when there's nothing at all that's similar apart from they shared a deficit number, and how income levels are similar (but didn't want to talk about how spending isn't).

She gave bollocks evasive answers, and he tried  (tho failed) to get relevant ones from her.

Even the guff she spouted about how "we'll grow the economy" was bollocks, given that she doesn't have a clue how she'll do it, that the growth rates required are impossible for developed economy, that the on-shore economy is shrinking not growing (the opposite of her lying claims), and that Scotland will be in a recession caused by the disappearance of £15Bn a year.

 

9 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

and shows no interest in the answer or - god forbid - developing it with a follow up question to tease more out of them.

Why would anyone want to tease bullshit out of anyone?

 

16 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I get more annoyed when he does it with a politician I don`t agree with as you often don`t get the chance now to even hear what they have to say as he constantly interrupts them. I think it`s time he was restricted to the Thursday show. He is a parody of his former self.....in my opinion of course.

I'm not claiming AN as a great interviewer, but I'm not going to knock him for trying to hold politicians to account when so few other interviewers do. We need more like that, not fewer.

 

 

 

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I think you know what I was getting at but nice deflection 

Your own view is that I want to leave the UK as I hate England. I am pointing out to you, in a helpful sense, that this could be seen as a little arrogant. I`m assuming you don`t actually regard England as the UK here 

You win  I`m not spelling out to you again that I have no axe to grind with England or the good folks of England. Hate plays no part in this.........for me and clearly not for any other poster on here from either side. For reasons only you will know, you continually try to make it about that.

So just say what benefits indy will (IYO) bring you.

It's not fucking hard, but you'd rather post lies about what I've said and create false grievance.

And then you claim there's no hatred from you.

[Comfy Bean]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

So just say what benefits indy will (IYO) bring you.

It's not fucking hard, but you'd rather post lies about what I've said and create false grievance.

And then you claim there's no hatred from you.

Lies ? What you on about ?

I`ve quoted what you said around wanting to leave the UK has I hate England. It`s nonsense of course but you`ve said it a good few times.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Lies ? What you on about ?

I`ve quoted what you said around wanting to leave the UK has I hate England. It`s nonsense of course but you`ve said it a good few times.

No where have I said "comfy hates England".

I've said that the only remain9ing reasons I can see is hatred of England and grasping an empty flag.

When your ability to read is so fucking poor, is it any wonder than you brushed off well-founded comment about the state of Scotland's finances as lies and scaremongering? Stupid gets stupid.

[Comfy Bean]

15 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China.

 

Quote please.

I`m surprised at your view on Andrew Neil but it`s all about opinions 

I hope he is replaced soon and will only repeat that I don`t think he is politically biased but he will have personal axes to grind and some old pals. That`s fair enough but I think the programme would be better without him now.

I agree that we don`t want him replaced by someone who just panders to the politicians.

[Comfy Bean]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

No where have I said "comfy hates England".

I've said that the only remain9ing reasons I can see is hatred of England and grasping an empty flag.

When your ability to read is so fucking poor, is it any wonder than you brushed off well-founded comment about the state of Scotland's finances as lies and scaremongering? Stupid gets stupid.

Your right, it`s nothing to do with hatred of England. Glad we cleared that up 

Not even sure what an empty flag is but it`s nothing to do with that either.

This is getting silly now, or stupid as you would say 

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Quote please.

If Scotland is to grow its economy to make up the deficit, growth at a faster rate than China is required.

That's simply a recognition of the size of Scoptland's deficit, and what action would be needed to adress it in the sort of timeframe (10 or 15 years) that you've talked about.

Salmond's own estimate for Scotland's greater growth potential was that it would take 120 years to make up the shorfall. He included it in the white paper - but even that is hugely speculative.

There's data to support a tiny bit (far too little, just to be clear) of extra (greater than rUK) growth in an iScotland, but that data isn't good for a prediction over such a long timescale, and so can really only be thought of as a wild hope. It might come good, but it's not something to firmly and intelligently base your choice over (just as the oil wasn't).

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Your right, it`s nothing to do with hatred of England. Glad we cleared that up 

Not even sure what an empty flag is but it`s nothing to do with that either.

This is getting silly now, or stupid as you would say 

Yep, it's very silly. You say you have good reasons but won't say them.

Which suggests that even you know they're not good reasons.

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

If Scotland is to grow its economy to make up the deficit, growth at a faster rate than China is required.

That's simply a recognition of the size of Scoptland's deficit, and what action would be needed to adress it in the sort of timeframe (10 or 15 years) that you've talked about.

Salmond's own estimate for Scotland's greater growth potential was that it would take 120 years to make up the shorfall. He included it in the white paper - but even that is hugely speculative.

There's data to support a tiny bit (far too little, just to be clear) of extra (greater than rUK) growth in an iScotland, but that data isn't good for a prediction over such a long timescale, and so can really only be thought of as a wild hope. It might come good, but it's not something to firmly and intelligently base your choice over (just as the oil wasn't).

Even if every word of this is true - it does not support your claim that  "You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China. "

 

Your claim is a lie, Neil.

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, LJS said:

Even if every word of this is true - it does not support your claim that  "You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China. "

Your claim is a lie, Neil.

So Sturgeon or you have never said that the deficit isn't relevant because iScotland could grow its economy so it wouldn't have to make cuts?

PMSL.

Either the deficit will cripple iScotland via necessary and unavoidable cuts, or iScotland will grow its economy faster than China.

The smart people know which of those is the only realistic solution.

Edited March 20, 2016 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

Oh and I never said Andrew Neil had less researchers than nicola sturgeon. 

I made it clear, twice, that I was not referring to his interview with ns but more his style these days and specifically his constant interruptions. I think he thinks the show is all about him.

As you were.... 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

As you were.... 

rooted in reality. It's how I always am.

[LJS]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So Sturgeon or you have never said that the deficit isn't relevant because iScotland could grow its economy so it wouldn't have to make cuts?

PMSL.

Either the deficit will cripple iScotland via necessary and unavoidable cuts, or iScotland will grow its economy faster than China.

The smart people know which of those is the only realistic solution.

irrelevant. What you said was  "You say Scotland can grow its economy faster than China."

I don't & never have. I have said Scotland can grow its economy. I have presented some evidence that smaller countries are more successful in growing their economies. Other than that I haven't said much that resembles your claims.

[LJS]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

rooted in reality. It's how I always am.

from the Brisol English Dictionalry

Quote

 

reality (noun)

 1: making up things that other people haven't said.

2: replying to points that no one has made.

 

 

Edited March 20, 2016 by LJS