Quote Originally Posted by Deeranged View Post
Read the actual title of the article to get an idea of where the paper's alleigances lie (quote) '...Exactly how much money does Scotland contribute to England... ?'

That's right it asks how much Scotland contributes to jolly old England, not to the UK although in fairness this abbaration is corrected in the article text..

Then within the text we read (quote again)

'Does Scotland take more than its fair share of UK public spending'?

It is difficult to say whether Scotland gets an unfairly high proportion of UK public spending'.

It's 'difficult to say', In the year carefully choisen by Islay it seems Scotland might well have received more however Islay's made a bit of a boo boo because his 'research' is, as usual, half assed at best because the article also says

'In 2013, Professor Brian Ashcroft at the University of Strathclyde studied experimental figures from the Scottish Government and found that extra spending per capita on Scotland was almost exactly cancelled out by extra tax revenue between 1980/81 and 2011/2012'.

So in these years there's been a break even - but Islay does like to mention this one year when Scotland might, or might not, have been given more than it contributed by its English masters - don't you Islay?
‘English masters’ ����������

Never understood why it’s only nationalists who have ‘masters’.

Think it must be self esteem issues.