Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[ChairmanPoo]

The way the EU's going as of late I'd not mind staying out, tbh

[Sheb]

So you'd oppose greater European integration then. Also, I don't see why the "UK" level of government would be less legitimate that a "Scot" level of government. After all, Edinburgh for exemple would still not elect "its" parliament, having its wishes trumped by that down "rest-of-scotland" imperialists.

[GreatJustice]

So when is a geographical area considered too small for self determination? Scotland? Inverness? Dunbarton? Farmer Jim, his wife, two sons, and dog?

[Leafsnail]

I kindof oppose "greater European integration" in principle, but I actually regard most of the laws people complain about the EU forcing on us as good things.  Such as basic rights for those accused of crimes, which a lot of people in this country would clearly rather do away with.

[Owlbread]

So when is a geographical area considered too small for self determination? Scotland? Inverness? Dunbarton? Farmer Jim, his wife, two sons, and dog?

Anything within reason, to be honest. Individual human beings already have some kind of "self determination" outlined under the declaration of human rights. If there was a movement calling for Inverness to be independent I wouldn't oppose it. Thing is though - there is no such movement. Right now, we're talking about Scotland - generally regarded as a nation that is going to have a referendum.

So you'd oppose greater European integration then. Also, I don't see why the "UK" level of government would be less legitimate that a "Scot" level of government. After all, Edinburgh for exemple would still not elect "its" parliament, having its wishes trumped by that down "rest-of-scotland" imperialists.

I would oppose European federalism, yes. Not necessarily a European Union that doesn't govern the macro-economic policies of the Mitgliedstaaten or their foreign policies. I have already explained though that, in my vision of an independent Scotland at least, we should have devolution within Scotland to give regions like Edinburgh (the Lothians) regional autonomy. Scotland is in danger of becoming a very centralised state post independence, although it wouldn't be any worse than it is now to be honest.

I'm just going by the precedent here - we're discussing Scotland's independence, Scottish rights to self determination and so on. You can do that whole "slippery slope" fallacy thing all you want but it doesn't really change things.

[Gervassen]

So when is a geographical area considered too small for self determination? Scotland? Inverness? Dunbarton? Farmer Jim, his wife, two sons, and dog?

You are being awfully presumptuous. How do you claim to know for certain that the dog even wants to be in that family?

[kaijyuu]

The gut flora has a right to rise up against it's doggy master in which it resides!

[RedKing]

The gut flora has a right to rise up against it's doggy master in which it resides!

Lies! Some of those flora are foreign immigrants acquired when the dog ate some poop!

DOG GUT FOR GUT FLORA NOW
OUT WITH FOREIGN PARASITES

[Durin Stronginthearm]

If Luton decided they wanted to be independent, in my opinion they should have that possibility.

*Durin is inordinately pleased at his crappy hometown getting a mention on B12*

I've found my place in the world - Glorious Leader of the People's Republic of South Bedfordshire.

[Wastedlabor]

Durin's avatar makes me wary of such leadership proposal.

"What, half the town has vaporized in a fuel explosion? Just a minor setback!"

[MonkeyHead]

Durin's avatar makes me wary of such leadership proposal.

"What, half the town has vaporized in a fuel explosion? Just a minor setback!"

To be honest, if half of Luton was exploded, you would be hard pressed to notice.

[Reelya]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-welfare-bill-a-government-of-millionaires-just-made-the-poor-poorer--and-laughed-as-they-did-it-8443619.html

They cheered, they guffawed, they mocked. Picture the scene, and don't forget it as the next two and a half years of Cameron's Britain drag on: a smug pack of over-paid Tory MPs – some worth millions – sniggering as they prepared to slash the incomes of Britain's already struggling poor. Labour's Lisa Nandy and Ian Mearns pleaded with them in the Chamber, vainly, to stop laughing. Not since 1931 has a Government attempted to deliberately, consciously reduce the incomes of the poor. Oh, the hilarity.
[...]
The substance of their argument is this: you have been mugged and therefore your less deserving neighbour should be mugged too. They said it to private sector workers about their counterparts in the public sector, attempting to stir up envy at their supposedly over-generous “gold plated” pensions and pay settlements. Now the Tories attempt to exploit the resentment of public sector workers languishing under a de facto pay cut they have imposed themselves. Where is the justice if we do not pick-pocket your neighbour, too, with this benefits cap? There is a Yiddish expression - “chutzpah” - for such unapologetic shamelessness.
[...]
The baying of the Tories is loud enough; the voices of those affected have been all but airbrushed out of existence by the political establishment and a supine or sometimes criminally complicit media. Save The Children recently revealed a world that most of the commentariat don't even know – or want to know - exists: of parents choosing between heating their homes and feeding their kids; or skipping their meals to make sure their sons and daughters are nourished. Such is the conspiracy to deprive the electorate of the truth about the Government's onslaught on the welfare state that many don't even know they are about to be hit. With the Resolution Foundation projecting a 15 per cent decline in income for low earning families by 2020, they'll know soon enough. Research by the TUC last week showed that the more people know about the realities of the welfare state – about fraud, who gets benefits and how much they are really worth – the less likely they are to support Tory attacks. Here is the potential undoing of this vicious campaign.

[lordcooper]

Got a less horrifically biased link where I can just read the facts?

Don't hurt me, I'm a lefty too!

[Reelya]

Yeah, I'll go find those articles where millionaires laughing out loud on camera whilst slashing payments to the poorest citizens is a *good* thing.

[lordcooper]

I asked for a link to unbiased facts, not a link to information presented emotionally from the opposite perspective.

Emotively driven reporting is a scourge that needs to be stopped.  Being given plain facts is always preferable to having them interspersed with subjective opinions with little or no distinction between the two.  See: The Daily Mail, Fox News.