Scotland

Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Endovelico wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:It will be interesting to see the results of the Scottish vote by region.

Will the parts of Scotland that border England vote yes or no more than the remote regions?

If the goal is independence, why should Scotland remain as one nation instead of several?
Ask the Scots. It's all a matter of identity. If they feel they are one people, then they are one people and should be one nation and have one (sovereign) state. Logic has nothing to do with it...
I never meant to imply logic has anything to do with it. Identity is often tied to emotion, property, location, etc.

It will be interesting to watch the shifting definition of "we." Depending upon how the vote goes, will we start hearing about how the 60% are pressing the 40%, the Eastern Scots oppressing the Western Scots, the urban Scots oppressing the rural Scots, etc.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Scotland

Post by Typhoon »

The Grauniad | Scottish referendum explained for non-Brits

For all the hand wringing and prophecies of problems, I don't think a separation would have much of an impact

re: Czechoslovakia -> Czech Republic + Slovakia
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Scotland

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Typhoon wrote:The Grauniad | Scottish referendum explained for non-Brits

For all the hand wringing and prophecies of problems, I don't think a separation would have much of an impact

re: Czechoslovakia -> Czech Republic + Slovakia
A different take from http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229419
Here's an interesting take on the whole "Scotland" breakaway issue, and it directly bears on the United States as well.

We often hear that a state "can't" secede successfully, for the simple reason that the Federal Government controls too much of the economy and that if, say Texas, was to say "**** you" the result would be the immediate collapse of the Texan-cum-nation economy.

Not so fast, kemosabe.

There is a downside to massive debt accumulation by a sovereign and so-called "modern finance", and it is the rise of derivatives at gross multiples of the debt outstanding.

"Gross" means 10x, 100x, even 1000x the underlying actual amount of debt out. And all of these derivatives have trigger events at which point they become payable.

Said "credit events" virtually always include a "reorganization" clause, which includes secession or partition of the underlying political entity.

So who's got the hammer? It's not the Federal Government and most-importantly it does not matter whether or not the Federal Government recognizes the secession or whether they try to show up with guns and put it down.

No, rather it is the States that have said hammer, just as Scotland has said hammer.

The reason the UK is freaking out is because if Scotland secedes all of the derivatives on UK sovereign debt trigger, and while that may not sound all that awful since they haven't defaulted (yet) the protection evaporates and that triggering means that holders of said derivatives can force delivery on the derivative contract!

This also means that should any US State, or collection of States, decide to do the same thing the US Government's ability to deficit spend is likely to instantly end irrespective of whatever threats are made to send in the tanks.

This is not the 1800s and all the bleating about indivisible political unions is in fact about the drunken, addicted fashion that our nation (and England) have been intentionally destroying currency value via deficit spending.

Secession, whether ultimately put down by force of arms or not, instantly ends the ability to do that and that is more-frightening to these politicians than Satan himself appearing in the Capitol Rotunda.

It is well beyond the point where someone needs to call the US Federal Govermment's bluff -- the question is which state(s) have the balls to do it?
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

If I Had a Hammer..... Tempted to Go a Thoring....

Post by monster_gardener »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Typhoon wrote:The Grauniad | Scottish referendum explained for non-Brits

For all the hand wringing and prophecies of problems, I don't think a separation would have much of an impact

re: Czechoslovakia -> Czech Republic + Slovakia
A different take from http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229419
Here's an interesting take on the whole "Scotland" breakaway issue, and it directly bears on the United States as well.

We often hear that a state "can't" secede successfully, for the simple reason that the Federal Government controls too much of the economy and that if, say Texas, was to say "**** you" the result would be the immediate collapse of the Texan-cum-nation economy.

Not so fast, kemosabe.

There is a downside to massive debt accumulation by a sovereign and so-called "modern finance", and it is the rise of derivatives at gross multiples of the debt outstanding.

"Gross" means 10x, 100x, even 1000x the underlying actual amount of debt out. And all of these derivatives have trigger events at which point they become payable.

Said "credit events" virtually always include a "reorganization" clause, which includes secession or partition of the underlying political entity.

So who's got the hammer? It's not the Federal Government and most-importantly it does not matter whether or not the Federal Government recognizes the secession or whether they try to show up with guns and put it down.

No, rather it is the States that have said hammer, just as Scotland has said hammer.

The reason the UK is freaking out is because if Scotland secedes all of the derivatives on UK sovereign debt trigger, and while that may not sound all that awful since they haven't defaulted (yet) the protection evaporates and that triggering means that holders of said derivatives can force delivery on the derivative contract!

This also means that should any US State, or collection of States, decide to do the same thing the US Government's ability to deficit spend is likely to instantly end irrespective of whatever threats are made to send in the tanks.

This is not the 1800s and all the bleating about indivisible political unions is in fact about the drunken, addicted fashion that our nation (and England) have been intentionally destroying currency value via deficit spending.

Secession, whether ultimately put down by force of arms or not, instantly ends the ability to do that and that is more-frightening to these politicians than Satan himself appearing in the Capitol Rotunda.

It is well beyond the point where someone needs to call the US Federal Govermment's bluff -- the question is which state(s) have the balls to do it?
Thank You VERY MUCH for your VERY Interesting Post, Nonc Hilaire....
No, rather it is the States that have said hammer, just as Scotland has said hammer.
If I were not a conservative who fears opening Gates to Chaos and Likes things more or less as they are*, I might well be tempted to grab my hammer and go a Thoring ;) :twisted: ......

Perhaps Thor's Favorite Song ;)

VaWl2lA7968

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaWl2lA7968

Except that Thor does have a Hammer.... ;)

*Plus Space Exploration with Sustainable Colonies...
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Endovelico »

The People spoke, and there is not much more one can say. A great opportunity was missed to start changing Europe from a Continent dominated by a few more powerful states to a Continent of many nations equal in rights and power, so that union could be achieved among equals. The Scots got cold feet, as I feared, and will remain a subject people commanded by their betters... Shame... Let's hope the Catalans will fare better!
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Parodite »

Endovelico wrote:The People spoke, and there is not much more one can say. A great opportunity was missed to start changing Europe from a Continent dominated by a few more powerful states to a Continent of many nations equal in rights and power, so that union could be achieved among equals. The Scots got cold feet, as I feared, and will remain a subject people commanded by their betters... Shame... Let's hope the Catalans will fare better!
There is so union among equals in a democracy.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Torchwood
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:01 am

Re: Scotland

Post by Torchwood »

Final numbers 45% Yes 55% No, on an amazing 86% turnout.

Relieved to wake up this morning and find that Scotland, a country I love, is not leaving us. Thank you Scots for voting in unprecedented numbers, and deciding to stick with us, however tricky it gets at times.

Scotland updates its Facebook page

There were some paradoxical results. Stirling, the site of Scotland's biggest battles against England (Bannockburn, William Wallace at Stirling Bridge), and with SNP MPs/MSPs at Edinburgh and Westminster, had one of the biggest "No" majorities. On the other hand the UK's third largest city doesn't want to be in the UK, and many of us would be relieved to see it go, but we are stuck with it. But then Scotland has a big East (wealthier)/West (poorer) divide.

With more powers offered to Scotland, within the UK, we now have to address the constitution for the UK as a whole.
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Interesting times. with much more to come.

The next decade could be the 1960s on steroids.

I applaud the UK for offering the opportunity to the Scots to vote openly.

I can't imagine DC ever doing the same for any state in the USA.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Scotland

Post by Typhoon »

One news report claimed that it was demographics: the older generation, "pensioners", voted mostly in favour of "No".
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Typhoon wrote:One news report claimed that it was demographics: the older generation, "pensioners", voted mostly in favour of "No".
If true, not at all surprising. If you are getting more from the Union, than you are giving, you would be a fool to abolish the union.

Much like a teenager who complains about his parents at the dinner table, right up until Dad points to the door and says "That door ain't locked from the inside! You can leave anytime you want!"

The rest of the meal is eaten in silence.........
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Endovelico wrote:The People spoke, and there is not much more one can say. A great opportunity was missed to start changing Europe from a Continent dominated by a few more powerful states to a Continent of many nations equal in rights and power, so that union could be achieved among equals. The Scots got cold feet, as I feared, and will remain a subject people commanded by their betters... Shame... Let's hope the Catalans will fare better!
IMSMO, this is the fascinating aspect of the concept of "we."

55% of the voters in Scotland decide life as part of the UK is better than life as a separate country, and an observer in Portugal comes to the conclusion that "a great opportunity was missed" because "they got cold feet."

Happens over here all the time also. NYers think WIers... who think CAers... who think COers..... etc. just don't get it. None of the observers have access to the same experience as the voters, yet the observers are certain the voters are wrong.

People......
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Scotland

Post by Typhoon »

fLpmswBKVN4

I can deal with all of the above, even Methodists,

the only people that worry me are those that claim to know what is best for me and expect me to act according to their beliefs.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Doc »

Typhoon wrote:fLpmswBKVN4

I can deal with all of the above, even Methodists,

the only people that worry me are those that claim to know what is best for me and expect me to act according to their beliefs.
ISIS knows what is best for all of us. "The only good (Fill in the blank)is a dead (fill in the blank)"

They might as well be aliens.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Scotland

Post by Typhoon »

Doc wrote:
Typhoon wrote:fLpmswBKVN4

I can deal with all of the above, even Methodists,

the only people that worry me are those that claim to know what is best for me and expect me to act according to their beliefs.
ISIS knows what is best for all of us. "The only good (Fill in the blank)is a dead (fill in the blank)"

They might as well be aliens.
In terms of human history, ISIS* is the norm, rather than the exception.

One does not have to travel all the way to the Muddled East, each country has it's share of self-appointed ideological altruists,
the worst ones, such as ISIS, willing to kill to enforce their beliefs.

Anyways, this is "The Scottish Thread".

*When I hear "Isis", I think of the ancient Egyptian goddess of health, marriage, and love.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Endovelico »

Simple Minded wrote:
Endovelico wrote:The People spoke, and there is not much more one can say. A great opportunity was missed to start changing Europe from a Continent dominated by a few more powerful states to a Continent of many nations equal in rights and power, so that union could be achieved among equals. The Scots got cold feet, as I feared, and will remain a subject people commanded by their betters... Shame... Let's hope the Catalans will fare better!
IMSMO, this is the fascinating aspect of the concept of "we."

55% of the voters in Scotland decide life as part of the UK is better than life as a separate country, and an observer in Portugal comes to the conclusion that "a great opportunity was missed" because "they got cold feet."

Happens over here all the time also. NYers think WIers... who think CAers... who think COers..... etc. just don't get it. None of the observers have access to the same experience as the voters, yet the observers are certain the voters are wrong.

People......
Are you implying that the majority is always right?... And I have been thinking all these years that the majority was entitled to decide, but without any assurances that their decision was the best one... In short, I respect the Scots' decision, but I'm entitled to think that it might not have been the best decision for both Scotland and Europe. And that's because I am European that I feel entitled to having an opinion and voicing it... All right with you?...
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Doc »

Endovelico wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:
Endovelico wrote:The People spoke, and there is not much more one can say. A great opportunity was missed to start changing Europe from a Continent dominated by a few more powerful states to a Continent of many nations equal in rights and power, so that union could be achieved among equals. The Scots got cold feet, as I feared, and will remain a subject people commanded by their betters... Shame... Let's hope the Catalans will fare better!
IMSMO, this is the fascinating aspect of the concept of "we."

55% of the voters in Scotland decide life as part of the UK is better than life as a separate country, and an observer in Portugal comes to the conclusion that "a great opportunity was missed" because "they got cold feet."

Happens over here all the time also. NYers think WIers... who think CAers... who think COers..... etc. just don't get it. None of the observers have access to the same experience as the voters, yet the observers are certain the voters are wrong.

People......
Are you implying that the majority is always right?... And I have been thinking all these years that the majority was entitled to decide, but without any assurances that their decision was the best one... In short, I respect the Scots' decision, but I'm entitled to think that it might not have been the best decision for both Scotland and Europe. And that's because I am European that I feel entitled to having an opinion and voicing it... All right with you?...
Personally I am deeply disappointed. Had the "yes" vote won out we would be given not only a great opportunity to see another failed socialist state but imagine being able to go see a real clan based Scottish society??

Aye aye what nostalgia for the war of the wee one eyed woman ued have.

http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/skye/clans.shtml
Clan warfare - the MacDonalds and the MacLeods on Skye

Skye came to be dominated by two great clans, the MacDonalds and the MacLeods, and the rivalry between the two led to bloodshed and violence across the island for several centuries.

Leod, the founder of Clan MacLeod (clan simply means children), was one of the sons of King Olav the Black, the last of the King of Man and the Western Isles who was defeated by Somerled. The MacLeod seat was at Dunvegan from a very early date, though important branches of the MacLeods were based on the Isles of Harris, Lewis and Raasay. Leod died on 1280 and is buried on Iona and his son Tormod became the first MacLeod (or son of Leod).

The MacDonalds trace their ancestry to Somerled himself. Somerled's second son was called Ranald and Ranald’s son Donald became the founder of what would become the main Clan Donald, perhaps the oldest and one of the largest of all the Scottish clans, and the original Lords of the Isles. For many years, the Clan seat was at Duntulm Castle in Trotternish, but later was at Armadale Castle (walk) in Sleat. The clan also held the castles of Dunscaith (walk) and Knock, also in Sleat.

In 1480, John MacDonald was challenged for the chieftainship of Clan Donald by his bastard son, Angus Og MacDonald. At the Battle of Bloody Bay, William Dubh MacLeod was taken prisoner by Angus Og while supporting John MacDonald but he was severely wounded and died on en route to Dunvegan. After the battle, the MacDonalds (now led by Angus Og) raided northern Skye in revenge for MacLeods part in supporting John. This began years of skirmishes and unrest.

At one stage the MacLeods succesfully captured Dunscaith and went on to seige Knock Castle before withdrawing back north. At another battle in Harta Corrie (off Glen Sligachan) hundreds were slaughtered and the bodies stacked up around what is known known as the Bloody Stone.

The most notorious of all incidents between the two clans led to the Battle of the Spoiling of the Dyke in 1578. The MacLeods had raided the MacDonald-held Isle of Eigg a couple of years previously, and massacred hundreds of MacDonalds in the cave that was used as the place of worship. In revenge, the MacDonalds or Uist landed on Skye and barred the doors of Trumpan Church (walk) in Waternish, when it was full of worshippers. They set it alight, and no-one escaped – except one girl who though fatally wounded managed to sound the alarm. The MacLeod chief then set off for Ardmore Bay and almost every MacDonald was killed in the ensuing battle. The corpses were dragged into a turf dyke, giving the battle its name.

Later that century it seemed the rivalry could be mended when Margaret, son of Rory Mor MacLeod wed to Donald Gorm Mor MacDonald. At that time, it was the custom in the Highlands for a marriage to have a trial period of one year, a tradition known as ‘hand-fasting’. If the partnership worked the marriage would become formal, but if not it could be terminated. History doesn’t record how it happened, but Margaret lost an eye during the year at Duntulm. She also bore no children, and when the year was up, Donald cast her out on a one-eyed horse, led by a one-eyed man and accompanied by a one-eyed dog. Not surprisingly, Rory Mor MacLeod was outraged, and a new war began between the clans – The War of the One-Eyed woman. This culminated in 1601 in a battle in Coire na Creiche (the corrie of the spoils), when both clans suffered heavy losses. It was the last battle fought between the two clans.

Skye remained a violent place, however. Another tale tells of Hugh MacDonald, a rival to his uncle Chief Donald Gorm, and lived at Caisteal Uisdean (walk) a few miles south of Duntulm. He hatched a plot to kill Donald, but mixed up the letter inviting Donald to Caisteal Uisdean with another which was intended for his hired assassin. Donald got word of the plot and had Hugh imprisoned at Duntulm. He fed him only salt beef through a hole in the roof, and did not allow him any water.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Scotland

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

So there really was a Ranald MacDonald. The being fed salt beef through a hole in the building must be a fable, though. Would a MacDonald do something like that?
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Endovelico wrote:
Are you implying that the majority is always right?...
:) I am not implying anything of the sort. I am baffled that you would infer that from my post. :?

Endovelico wrote:

And I have been thinking all these years that the majority was entitled to decide, but without any assurances that their decision was the best one... In short, I respect the Scots' decision, but I'm entitled to think that it might not have been the best decision for both Scotland and Europe. And that's because I am European that I feel entitled to having an opinion and voicing it... All right with you?...
Again your inference baffles me. :? But no sweat, "we" are cool! 8-)

"The greatest right is the right to be wrong!" As long as "they" never gain so much power as to prevent "us" from exercising that right, and as long as "we" respect the "others" enough to extend that same courtesy to "them," life is good!

But events are never as interesting as the pre-event marketing or the current interpretations.

Not to be a wise ass, but I am curious. Do you now feel (or think) that the group you might have referred to as "we" in Scotland is now smaller than you might have thought (or felt) prior to the election? If so, what do you think is different now?

Has your opinion of the (majority) Scottish concept of freedom or oppression changed?

thanks in advance! :)
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by manolo »

Folks,

This is what decided the Scottish referendum:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J39bBV7CBJk

Alex.
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Endovelico »

Simple Minded wrote:
Endovelico wrote:
Are you implying that the majority is always right?...
:) I am not implying anything of the sort. I am baffled that you would infer that from my post. :?

Endovelico wrote:

And I have been thinking all these years that the majority was entitled to decide, but without any assurances that their decision was the best one... In short, I respect the Scots' decision, but I'm entitled to think that it might not have been the best decision for both Scotland and Europe. And that's because I am European that I feel entitled to having an opinion and voicing it... All right with you?...
Again your inference baffles me. :? But no sweat, "we" are cool! 8-)

"The greatest right is the right to be wrong!" As long as "they" never gain so much power as to prevent "us" from exercising that right, and as long as "we" respect the "others" enough to extend that same courtesy to "them," life is good!

But events are never as interesting as the pre-event marketing or the current interpretations.

Not to be a wise ass, but I am curious. Do you now feel (or think) that the group you might have referred to as "we" in Scotland is now smaller than you might have thought (or felt) prior to the election? If so, what do you think is different now?

Has your opinion of the (majority) Scottish concept of freedom or oppression changed?

thanks in advance! :)
This may give you an idea of what happened and why:

Image

The past voted to remain in the UK, the future wanted to leave. The old forced the young into a situation they hadn't wanted. The old will die soon, and the young will be stuck with dependence... Of course, there may be another referendum, once the old folks are mostly gone...
noddy
Posts: 11326
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by noddy »

who is going to tell endo that the current crop of youngens will get old and likewise become risk averse and attached to government safety nets.

i love how all the english haters come out of the closet for this one.
ultracrepidarian
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Scotland

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Typhoon wrote:One news report claimed that it was demographics: the older generation, "pensioners", voted mostly in favour of "No".
Just defeating the union in a different way.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Scotland

Post by Endovelico »

noddy wrote:who is going to tell endo that the current crop of youngens will get old and likewise become risk averse and attached to government safety nets.

i love how all the english haters come out of the closet for this one.
Present day older people lived through WWII and the UK means to them more than it may be expected from younger Scots as they get older. I'm not an English hater. I just believe in the right of nations to be independent. As Scots were until 300 years ago, when the Scottish Parliament voted for an union most people didn't want (historical fact).
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

Endovelico wrote:
This may give you an idea of what happened and why:

Image

The past voted to remain in the UK, the future wanted to leave. The old forced the young into a situation they hadn't wanted. The old will die soon, and the young will be stuck with dependence... Of course, there may be another referendum, once the old folks are mostly gone...
Excellent information Endo. Thanks.

According to this information, the vote went exactly how one would expect and predict. There are the intangible aspects of identity, then there are the more immediate benefits of cashable checks.

"The state is the great fiction by which everyone can live at the expense of someone else." Bastiat

In recent decades, passing on the expenses of the present to those too young to vote seems to be a dominant aspect of "Western" voting culture. Over here in Merika, I know more than a few Generation Xers, who after complaining for years of the financial burden left to them by the Baby Boomers, all voted to saddle the next generation with the unfunded liabilities of Obamacare.

Subjugation for me is unfair oppression, subjugation for thee doesn't hurt so much..... lets call it compassion.

Perhaps the young voters should focus on reducing the benefits of belonging to the State before mounting another effort at independance.

There are the intangible aspects of identity, then there are the more immediate benefits of checks.
Last edited by Simple Minded on Sat Sep 20, 2014 2:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Simple Minded

Re: Scotland

Post by Simple Minded »

noddy wrote:who is going to tell endo that the current crop of youngens will get old and likewise become risk averse and attached to government safety nets.

i love how all the english haters come out of the closet for this one.
Much like a teenager who complains about his parents at the dinner table, right up until Dad points to the door and says "That door ain't locked from the inside! You can leave anytime you want!"

The rest of the meal is eaten in silence.........

while the teenager thinks to himself....... if it wasn't for them paying for this food, these clothes, this shelter, my cell phone, my car, my car insurance..... and my college fund going away.......
I'd be outttttaaa here so fast it would make their head spin! Then they'd be sorry!


While the father thinks "Man, life will be good again when that little bastard is FINALLY outta my house!"
Post Reply