Probably.
Yes, I knew that, Scot. 
No it wasn’t the SNP only got 45% of the vote.
I don’t take much interest in these things, but I did see a post a while back demonstrating the absolute falseness of that claim.
I have no idea. 
But what has that got to do with anything? You are just trying to avoid inconvenient truths by deflecting attention elsewhere, as usual. 
Thanks for that Scot, I was going to post the same.
As for a minimum income for anyone, not just the Scots, IMHO this only goes to prolong the Haves and Have Nots debate because, as incomes rise, so do day-to-day living expenses - if someone has more money in their pocket they spend more (and not necessarily on goods they actually need).
A likely story.
You can’t say that the NHS hasn’t received more funds under the conservatives when it has - Brexit or not, and the figure was actually £350 million written on the side of the bus, which was proved to be correct in the UK courts. The actual increase in the 2021 Conservative budget was around £6 billion.
The only party to actually cut the NHS budget was Labour .
And you can’t say it has when it hasn’t. Two can play at that game, Bread.
That’s a worthless assertion withoud providing documentary evidence of it veracity.
I don’t believe you; that is no doubt a figure arrived at by devious manipulation of statistics.
I neither know nor care if that is true, but knowing you, it probably isn’t.
Yes because the Scottish Parliament is voted in by the Scottish electorate and it is the Scottish Parliament that makes Scottish laws.
That does not mean just the SNP and I did not say the SNP, I said what you quoted: “their parliament”.
Donkeyman 
There have many countries which have trialled this idea, and for one reason or another (which I cannot find as yet) have decided to phase them out. When I posted this article, it was just out of interest - I too, am not entirely sure it can be sustained, but I applaud Scotland for at least trying. 13 countries have tried it and have reined it back in, so… Take from that what you will.
I am a wee bit sceptical. It would remove the incentive to go out and look for a job for some.
Would it, Scot? Or would it mean that people could find a decent job - not 3 part time ones with 9-15 hour a week zero hour contracts? I hope people would see it that way, as opposed to sitting on their backside being lazy besoms! 
Will it mean replacing or lowering all existing benefits and having a minimum income instead?
Not exactly no…it seems to be a package that includes childcare and housing benefits that will be paid directly to the relevant people. So this means that the people in receipt of this Universal Income just get to keep more of their own money…so its like having less to pay out, not that they have more coming in.
At least that’s what I’m taking from it. 
IIRC that was tried here in Sassenachland and some of the recipients didn’t pay their landlords the rent (leaving the landlords well out of pocket) and spent it on drugs, ciggies and booze.
1 Like
@pixie knuckles thanks for trying pixie , at least you came back with a reply !!
So it looks as if it is not feasible eh ??
Donkeyman! 
1 Like
The benefits would get paid direct to the landlord! We ain’t daft! 
Personally no, Donkeyman. Its a lovely idea but simply not sustainable in the long term. Until somebody comes forward with where the money is flowing in from, there are no countries who could do this forever. In my opinion, its veering on the edges of la-la land.
1 Like
This isn’t new, it’s been getting talked about for over a year now. I have a friend who is an SNP Councillor and I pick up lots of bits n pieces in conversation. By the other side of the coin I also find out what’s wheat and what’s shaft.
Buying votes…who wouldn’t vote for that