|
|
They threw the bodies in a septic tank, which ironically enough, was probably built by the last group of Westerners that came through to help out. I have to give a great deal of credit to those willing to put up with this sort of thing - I'd just let the disease rip if it were up to me. I hate to be cold like that but I'm at a point in my life where I'm tired of getting stiff armed by the people I'm trying to help. Could be because I have teenage daughters.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: Could be because I have teenage daughters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: Could be because I have teenage daughters.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Sad... 
|
|
|
|
|
Just read that. TIA, I guess, although I can honestly say I don´t know anyone who´s not confused about this one.
|
|
|
|
|
Not too hard to understand, when you consider all their previous experience of "help" from "mature" nations.
I don't trust western governments, so just imagine how they feel.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Its not good. We have to find a way to satisfy them as part of the Union.
How about this for an idea:
I suggest giving the Scottish govt a proportionate share of the oil revenue and let them spend it rather than the central UK govt. Of course much of the money would head south of the border anyway so I don't foresee a big change in doing this.
Scotland would of course have to contribute directly to national funds, such as defense and so on.
Thoughts people?
|
|
|
|
|
and 55% are not. The angry ones will just have to get over it. Perhaps a nice cup of Irn Bru and a deep fried mars bar will do the trick...
|
|
|
|
|
democracy doesn't mean 'shaft the minority' though and that's whats happening. Some solution has to be found.
|
|
|
|
|
The Scots need only carefully record what was promised by London.
Three years from now when they've received NONE of it then do a re-vote.
|
|
|
|
|
The solution is to stop calling it a democracy.
It is just a matter of "how much" do we spend to achieve the desired outcome. There has been more fearmongering than relevant discussions.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: democracy doesn't mean 'shaft the minority' though and that's whats happening. Some solution has to be found.
It doesn't mean ignore the majority either. This looks like one of those cases where "you can't have your cake and eat it too". Either Scotland is independent or its not.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: It doesn't mean ignore the majority either
It takes an informed public to form an informed opinion.
Without that, it is merely a popularity-contest where the biggest investor wins.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Its not about independence, keeping the pound and the Queen is hardly independence, its about oil money.
So some compromise has to be reached to satisfy both sides.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: So some compromise has to be reached to satisfy both sides.
It rarely works that way. More often a successful compromise means both sides are equally disappointed.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
Well, a compromise can mean all parties go away reasonably happy.
In this instance my proposition would satisfy all the Scots, They get the bulk of the oil money and stay in the union.
OK, the English and Welsh might feel hard done by, but in recompense, all the existing subsidies and preferences that go to Scotland cease, and Scotland must then pay its fair share directly of all costs incurred by the union, so things like defence and so on.
But think of it this way. Say 50 bn a year cones in in oil revenue. Does it really matter if that money is dispensed by London or Edinburgh? It is still going into the same economic group of people. No?
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: democracy doesn't mean 'shaft the minority' though and that's whats happening. Some solution has to be found.
Why? Every time we have a Labour government the minority gets shafted. It's about time the Scots got over this, and accepted that they are an integral part of the United Kingdom. That means a fair share of the wealth and the taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
Where are they being shafted? It was a democratic vote. The No vote won. End of story.
Munchies_Matt wrote: Some solution has to be found.
Only for the West Lothian problem. The scots get sh*t loads in subsidies and financial help as it is. Be better to dissolve Scotland, Wales, England, etc. and just be one country. It's all artificial anyway. It's not like they speak a different language...
|
|
|
|
|
mark merrens wrote: Where are they being shafted? It was a democratic vote. The No vote won. End of story.
They're being shafted because they're being deceived.
They get told there is a new car behind door #1.
They get told there is a new boat behind door #2.
They vote, thinking they get a choice between a car and a boat, but regardless of the choice they get a pie in the face and never get a car or a boat.
This happens all of the time in the USA.
We get a whole slew of new representatives that were elected to do A,B,C but then they go off and do X,Y,Z and use fat kick backs to keep the lie machine running. Democracy is absolutely dependent upon the truth and not only is the truth NEVER told anymore but I doubt we'd recognize it if we saw it. It is impossible to elect a 'representative' if they all lie and then insulate themselves from blowback by buying votes. Lies turn any system to horse sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you have this wrong. It was straight yes or no on do you want to Scotland to part company with England. I would imagine the choice was emotional for many people and the various stupid arguments put forward by both sides were of no consequence.
Over and above that: what else would you suggest other than a free vote? How could it be decided? Perhaps a tossing the caber competition or a game of tiddlywinks or goat sacrifices? At some point you have to accept that the voting is over, move on. You may not like the result so work harder to swing it next time.
And the losing side will always feel deceived or that the winning side was deceived or that some poor bastard was deceived and it was probably me.
And we're all being shafted, all the time, by everyone else. That's life. Get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a very pig headed attitude that will only generate anger and resentment in the 45%.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: That's a very pig headed attitude that will only generate anger and resentment in the 45%.
How ridiculous. It was a democratic vote. Someone will be pissed off whoever one so go away and stop being a troll.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a very pig headed attitude that will only generate anger and resentment in the 45%. 
Try this angle. Democracy is not about one group getting their way over others, but about all groups having their opinion heard and factored into a compromise suitable to all. Doesn't that work better?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
