So if the govt decided to flatten your house for a new road/airport and said tough you are going to be compulsory purchased, you wouldnt complain?
This is a Stalinist move.
What are you blethering about? That can happen in England now with compulsory purchase orders so hardly Stalinist or does that just apply when talking about the SNP?
But this has absolutely nothing to do with things like roads/airports. I would love to know want could be done with this stolen land that would be allowed without stealing it?
...anyone care to enlighten the masses with the historic details of the Highland Clearances...I assume they are part of the history syllabus in Scottish schools...my own recollection from a that of a school in North London many, many, many years ago is somewhat dimmed....
But this has absolutely nothing to do with things like roads/airports. I would love to know want could be done with this stolen land that would be allowed without stealing it?
it would be a community buy out . It would not be stealing
The south-west option would involve building a full-length 3,500 metre runway and other facilities over the village of Stanwell Moor in Surrey and would require the demolition of 850 homes.
Somewhat more inconvenienced than an absentee landlord.
Govts take measures for the national good all the time.
it would be a community buy out . It would not be stealing
Whatever it is, still doesn't change the fact that nothing can be done with the land that would be allowed at present. What would the purpose be, of "buying" the land for it just to sit there?
Whatever it is, still doesn't change the fact that nothing can be done with the land that would be allowed at present. What would the purpose be, of "buying" the land for it just to sit there?
I assume every Scot will be given shares in the new community owned sheep rearing and grouse shooting enterprises...or alternatively offered a few acres each so they all go back to crofting ;-)
I assume every Scot will be given shares in the new community owned sheep rearing and grouse shooting enterprises...or alternatively offered a few acres each so they all go back to crofting ;-)
That would not be buying land in order to INCREASE the economy. It would be simply taking over existing businesses.
Whatever it is, still doesn't change the fact that nothing can be done with the land that would be allowed at present. What would the purpose be, of "buying" the land for it just to sit there?
The land would be used for the betterment of the local community.
Precisely why I said they would issue shares in the businesses on the land which would
be newly owned by the community...instead of in private hands.
But if anyone in the community wanted the land they could simply buy the land themselves. Land's no different from any other commodity, if you want it you buy it, if you don't want it you don't buy it. Just because someone else owns a lot of something doesn't give the State the right to steal it.
Does anyone seriously think you going to be able to improve a business by taking it out of the hands of someone who has been running it for the last however many years and then giving it to a bunch of people who have never managed that business before? Would you do that with a hospital?
But if anyone in the community wanted the land they could simply buy the land themselves. Land's no different from any other commodity, if you want it you buy it, if you don't want it you don't buy it. Just because someone else owns a lot of something doesn't give the State the right to steal it.
Does anyone seriously think you going to be able to improve a business by taking it out of the hands of someone who has been running it for the last however many years and then giving it to a bunch of people who have never managed that business before? Would you do that with a hospital?
Comments
What are you blethering about? That can happen in England now with compulsory purchase orders so hardly Stalinist or does that just apply when talking about the SNP?
Bugger me! First she's Mugabe, now she's Stalin. Wee Nicola's no' half got some folks crapping their pants.
I wonder how this land was acquired in the first place all those years ago.[/QUOTE]
It was bought and paid for by his Grandparents - who then did work to improve the property and the running of the Estate.
You just wait and see. There will be some mug will compare her with Thatcher!
Pol Pot next
Maybe even Little Jimmy Krankie
http://order-order.com/2014/11/14/whats-with-scottish-politicians-and-looking-like-the-krankies/#_@/jfbZ-Ha9MknKPA
Is it the school holidays? Instead of posting rubbish why not defend your post about it being Stalinist to use compulsory purchase?
it would be a community buy out . It would not be stealing
What, like eliminating villages around Heathrow?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/10186230/Heathrow-third-runway-best-solution.html
The south-west option would involve building a full-length 3,500 metre runway and other facilities over the village of Stanwell Moor in Surrey and would require the demolition of 850 homes.
Somewhat more inconvenienced than an absentee landlord.
Govts take measures for the national good all the time.
I assume every Scot will be given shares in the new community owned sheep rearing and grouse shooting enterprises...or alternatively offered a few acres each so they all go back to crofting ;-)
The land would be used for the betterment of the local community.
http://www.communitylandscotland.org.uk/
You have to love DS.
It would be to destroy existing businesses.
By making them all unemployed.
Precisely why I said they would issue shares in the businesses on the land which would
be newly owned by the community...instead of in private hands.
Noooo...they would just become "community owned" and all the stalkers and beaters would be employed by Rab C Nesbitt instead of Lord Snooty ;-)
But if anyone in the community wanted the land they could simply buy the land themselves. Land's no different from any other commodity, if you want it you buy it, if you don't want it you don't buy it. Just because someone else owns a lot of something doesn't give the State the right to steal it.
Does anyone seriously think you going to be able to improve a business by taking it out of the hands of someone who has been running it for the last however many years and then giving it to a bunch of people who have never managed that business before? Would you do that with a hospital?
Don't disagree with a word you are saying.
Read my original exchange with nomad2king.